All Episodes
Previous Next
April 14, 2020 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:01:47
The Case Against China - AMA with Stefan Molyneux and Paul Cottrell
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, this is Stefan Molyneux from Free Domain.
I hope you're doing well.
Thank you so much for dropping by.
I really do appreciate it.
And thank you, of course, so much to everybody who came, the thousands and thousands of people who came to watch the premiere of my latest presentation, The Case Against China.
I really, really appreciate that.
And, of course, it is with great pleasure That I use the resources that you provide to me to be able to create these kinds of presentations.
So, thank you.
Thank you so much for all of that.
And, of course, if you do want to help out, I know these are troubled times, so please don't feel obligated.
But if you do want to come by to freedomain.com forward slash donate to help out, I would really appreciate that.
And I'm just going to go in here and make sure that I have...
The questions that are showing up, and we are also going to add in Dr.
Paul Cottrell, who was very kind to help me with some of the more technical sides of the presentation.
Paul, thank you so much, and of course, thanks for taking the time tonight.
Hi. It was a great presentation.
Thank you very much for having me.
I appreciate that.
I'm pretty sure all the great parts had something to do with you, but I can read them pretty well.
So I appreciate that.
And this is here, of course, for the Ask Me Anything.
And so I am more than happy to get your comments, get your questions.
This is the cool thing about this kind of work, that we can get people in to this kind of stuff.
So, well, I guess the first question is from Dan.
The questions are down below, Paul.
Steph, great presentation.
Three exclamation marks. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
How bad do you think this will become?
Well, I will toss that to my right.
No, to my left. Paul, what do you think?
How bad is this going to become?
Well, I think it's important to parse it for what's going on at the world level and at the United States level.
We're currently at over 1.9 million people that have confirmed COVID-19 disease.
And we have worldwide over 119,000 deaths.
Now, in the United States, we have over 581,000 COVID-19 cases and over 23,000 deaths.
New York City alone, just New York City, that's the five boroughs, is 7,349 deaths.
So we're talking about something that is very severe here.
And I published on my site four different scenarios.
We talked on a previous recording on the worst case scenario, which it could be that if there was three waves, that it could be very large numbers in terms of deaths, over 6.9 million because of the comorbidity issue in the United States.
But that's over a 20-month period.
And that's assuming that it gains function with other receptors, which...
It might. There's some data saying that it is.
So the best scenario is around 250,000 deaths in the United States, assuming about a two-wave theory instead of a three-wave theory, lasting around eight to ten months or so.
So that's, you know, there's this cone of probability when anyone has done any type of Simulation.
It's all about what you put into the simulation, what your parameters are, and you get this cone of probability.
So we're looking at anywhere from 250,000 deaths in the United States to 6.9 million deaths.
Well, there's, I mean, obviously, those are alarming numbers.
The one thing that I find kind of confusing, Paul, perhaps you can step me through this because it drives me a little crazy, is everyone says, you know, well, we've flattened the curve, man.
The numbers are going down.
Well, of course it is!
Because everything stopped, which can't continue.
It's so frustrating to me.
Like, it's like, let's say there's some Chinese mafia, and I haven't paid them their, I don't know, shipment of festering bats or something like that.
And they stick my head in a barrel of water.
And for the first 30 seconds, I'm like, hey, man, I guess I have gills.
I'm still alive.
But shutting everything down to dealing with pandemic is like holding your breath when you're underwater.
It's not a sustainable situation.
And so this preemptive cheering for something that can't possibly continue, which is pretty much the only reason it hasn't spread like wildfire, seems to me a bit on the premature side, but I'm certainly happy to be talked out of all of that.
Here's the problem with the way humans think.
We think very linearly.
So we don't think really non-linearly.
It's hard for individuals to think non-linearly.
So in terms of worst-case scenarios, we always extrapolate way over the reality.
And in terms of best-case scenarios, we extrapolate, unfortunately, way too optimistically.
And we are seeing...
Green shoots, if we want to use the term that Bernanke used in terms of finance, green shoots are some optimism in terms of flattening the curve in New York City.
We have lower ICU situations.
We have lower ventilation hookups.
We have lower new hospitalizations.
These are all great signs.
Total hospitalizations, cumulative total hospitalizations, have been flattening.
So this is that S-curve that we've been talking about.
And over time, it will start to go down.
People still need to realize, even with the flattening of the curve, we're above capacity in terms of treating some of these severe patients.
Not just in New York, but in many areas of the country.
Like Michigan. Michigan's another hotspot.
Watch out for Detroit.
Watch out for New Jersey.
Watch out for Chicago. So we have to understand that you could be flattening the curve and still be above capacity for hospitalization.
But here's what's important to really hit home.
Once we start going back to work, New York will probably be the first ones to get out of shelter in place.
Once we do that, we're going to start seeing probably cross-infection around 14 days later.
14 to 24 days later.
Because not everyone that's coming out is well.
They may be asymptomatic.
In terms of testing in New York, we've only tested for COVID-19 478,000 People.
Well, we have a lot more people than that in New York.
So when you do shelter in place, there's a high probability of doing this cross infection or reinfection.
So we might have little mini waves in between the primary wave and the secondary wave, which probably will happen late October.
And that's where the real understanding of how bad this is going to get.
We will know by the end of October if, you know, we may be measuring this stuff in mega deaths, not in just deaths, mega deaths.
All right? And that was a term used in nuclear war.
I remember. Yeah.
So, I mean, you know, so when we say 6.9 million deaths, that's 6.9 mega deaths.
You know, so this is a new nomenclature that people aren't familiar with unless, you know, they're, you know, Back in the 80s, we were talking about a possible nuclear war.
But I hope and pray that there's only one wave and that when we get out of shelter in place across the country, that...
We will not have the secondary wave and everything is going to be okay.
But there is some strong scientific evidence that there's going to be gain of function with these other receptors and this thing is going to get out of control and these other receptors are dealing with the immune system.
So my concern is this possibility of down-regulating these T cells, the CD4 plus cells.
And the last time we heard that, It was in the 80s when it came to HIV. So we have to be very vigilant and very careful and don't be too optimistic until we understand the true dynamics of this weapon.
Because it was designed to kill.
Because it's so early in the whole cycle, so people are getting better, but we don't know how much better they are going to get relative to final function.
Have they had diminished lung capacity?
Are there any lingering after-effects?
Plus, of course, the issue with some of the medications that are being used to treat them and the side effects from that.
Re-infection is an issue, and we don't know if there could be long-term effects.
A friend of mine shared this.
I'm going to read this rather...
Syllable mishmash of stuff and maybe you can break it out a little bit.
So he says SARS is shown to directly assault the immune system.
This is a quote from paper and the quote is this.
SARS-CoV-2, that's what I was just talking about in the presentation.
SARS-CoV-2 infected T-cells through receptor-dependent S-protein mediated membrane fusion.
SARS-CoV-2 infected T-cells through, oh sorry, membrane fusion.
So is this what you're talking about how it's Taking down the immune system.
And again, it's not AIDS, of course, but it's also not exactly the opposite of AIDS, if that makes sense.
Because AIDS, if I remember rightly, I guess the HIV, what it did was it attacked your immune system, which kind of left the castle walls open for any stray bug that happened to get past your skin or your mucous membrane.
And so if it's going for the immune system, Then that would explain to some degree why the comorbidity is such an issue.
It's not the comorbidity plus SARS. It's SARS taking down the immune system that's keeping the comorbidities less virulent.
Exactly. Exactly.
I mean, what we noticed with AIDS, now, that was caused primarily by HIV virus, right?
That it's a retrovirus that attacks the immune system.
Well, if you have another type of virus, even if it's not a retrovirus that's attacking the immune system, you're going to have AIDS-like syndrome, all right?
And, you know, carcinomas and sarcomas and all this type of stuff, pneumonias, all these diseases that usually your immune system attacks early on and, you know, keeps you in homeostasis, that's down and you can't fight those diseases.
So this is a serious problem.
And this is why your presentation is so important, is to raise the alarm, not just on the scientific side, But also that philosophical side, the legality side, that we had individuals in the scientific community and at the governmental level that were doing things that they should have never done and is now taking down the world.
And they need to be held accountable.
And it's not, you know, a big component of it is the CCP. But there are elements in our own government, meaning the United States, That we're complicit in this.
And they need to be held accountable.
Let's just make sure we break that out for people so that it's really clear.
Because, of course, mine was the case against China.
It's very specific. Let's talk about the case against the U.S. as well.
Right. Well, part of the story here, and you brought it up, is that Dr.
Xi was working in the United States in conjunction with the Defense Department Where they were developing a weapons program at Fort Detrick.
And then it was shut down.
And that information, Dr.
Xi brought back to the Wuhan facility.
So the United States has been working on a weapons program, and Fauci was involved in it.
I'm going to be talking to George Webb.
He's very well-knowledged on the key players of this.
He's been researching this for years.
He's not a newcomer to the scene, but he's well-versed on the players of this.
I'll be talking to him tomorrow to do a deep dive, a brain dump, if you want to call it that, to be more educated on how deep this rabbit hole goes for the United States.
To the point where I'm at in terms of the knowledge is that the United States was involved in a weapons program that was supercharging SARS. And Dr.
Xi was the mezzanine between what was going on in the United States and what happened with P4. And the French were involved because the French helped design the building for P4. So this was an international thing that was going on.
Then, all of a sudden, The Chinese basically kicked out the French in terms of the development of the building.
And I think that's when they were saying, okay, we know enough about how to build this.
And then start making the more weapons part of the lab.
So they kicked out the French designers and architects.
But the main point here is that we have people that are in leadership positions in government and at the UN level or the WHO level that have tentacles in the weapons program and they need to be called off on it and there needs to be some sort of trial.
Against humanity, you know, this is, in a strange way, we are seeing a worldwide holocaust, literally a holocaust worldwide, because of scientific and defense department humorism.
And everyone that was involved needs to be held accountable in a court of law.
It is a strange thing, of course, Paul, and I'll just, I've got more questions from the audience that want to point this out.
That people say, well, but there was a treaty, you know, like there's a Bill of Rights.
It doesn't really matter if the cops are going on a power trip, as they seem to be in various places throughout America, throughout the West as a whole, probably happening in other countries too.
It's just a little less obvious.
But this idea that, well, there's a signature, there's a very formal piece of paper that's in a filing cabinet somewhere, I'm sure that's going to be the physics of how people make their decisions.
They're just pieces of paper.
And without the will for enforcement, they have to reflect the will of the people.
They have to reflect a commitment to moral absolutes.
If they are expected to do sentry duty for you to maintain the civilization you've inherited, it will not last very long.
All right, let's jump into this.
Daryl Silver wants to know, do you believe in herd immunity?
I guess define it and then your thoughts on it, please.
Well, you have to define believe.
That's way too philosophical a question for us, Paul.
Well, it's a philosophical channel.
But herd immunity is a fact.
There is the ability that if you reach a certain percentage in the population for certain pathogens, that you build up antibodies within that population, and it protects the ones that haven't been exposed.
It's been a practice for many years.
I mean, one way was for my parents.
They had measles parties where if an individual had the measles, people would bring them over and they would get infected.
And that's how they, you know, had the herd immunity.
Same thing happened in Gen X, at least in the United States, for chickenpox.
So now we have, in this world, all diseases, every single pathogen is bad.
And then we've become all germaphobic.
But a long time ago, that was the way the individuals, you know, built up enough antibodies within the population, you know, to quell that disease.
So, yes, herd immunity is a fact.
And, you know, it does work.
But that doesn't mean that individuals shouldn't get certain types of vaccines.
Certain vaccines are, I mean, certain diseases are so deadly, you have to be You have to get them.
For example, and I know historically there's been problems with it, but I had a friend in elementary school that had polio, right?
He was adopted from South Vietnam.
He was an orphan because of the war.
And he...
He contracted polio in South Vietnam.
American family adopted him, but he was crippled for life.
So he probably would have been able to walk if he had that vaccine.
Now, yes, there have been cases where individuals are harmed by vaccines, and that's why we have to have a safe vaccine today.
Committee or body that looks over and makes sure that what's in the vaccines are proper and that we try to reduce the harmful effects of these vaccines, instead of getting into all the details and why that happens.
Some people, though, that the 100% anti-vaxxers, they'll say, well, we'll just have herd immunity for any disease.
Some diseases are so bad, you can't do that.
But in some diseases you can, and there's a middle ground.
To that point, TacforAlt says, if it mutates and has multiple receptors and is so contagious, how can there be herd immunity?
Well, that's the point.
If you can't get attenuation, you can't.
So that's why I said that in certain diseases, the concept of herd immunity will not work.
So I'm very concerned that if we have a second wave and it's not attenuated, whereby the first wave was the worst wave, the second wave is less, and the third wave is even worse.
It's even decreased even more.
Then you have attenuation and the virus learns to live within the population.
We live to be copacetic with the virus.
Um, but because there's so many receptors, I am very concerned about gain and function.
And you brought up the article where it's affecting the immune system and that sets in motion a whole slew of other problems.
And, you know, I have told people listening to my channel, you know, when I do my rotation in medical school, that will be in 16 to 18 months.
And if my theory is right that this thing doesn't end, I'll be rotating and seeing cases that are in the tertiary wave here in my clinical rotations.
And then for my residency, which is a long time for people to understand getting an MD degree, you have to go through a residency program.
Within that residency, I most likely will see the effects of what's happening right now.
What are the long-term effects?
So you're talking about eight or nine years from now, we're probably going to see pulmonary syndromes or immune syndromes 10 years from now.
That we'll be able to pinpoint and say this was because of COVID-19.
But we couldn't see exactly what those syndromes would be until they start manifesting themselves.
It's very possible that certain types of cancers will pop up in 10 years.
Especially if it's down regularly in the immune system.
But it's just too early to tell.
But I suspect that 10 years from now, a lot of people...
In the medical community that's just starting to be going in, like myself, just starting to get into medical school and then doing the residency, we're probably going to see those syndromes start.
Well, and of course, anybody who's immunocompromised or anything which takes down your immunity system or weakens it renders you more susceptible to cancers, if I remember rightly, because, you know, cancers form, cellular division forms in your body, not continuously, but, you know, it happens, and your immune system is supposed to deal with it.
If your immune system is compromised, then the odds of that cancer slipping into something larger and larger become higher.
Exactly. And here's a good case, though, is that with smoking, The lung cancers didn't pop up until 10 to 15 years later.
Or longer, 20 years later.
But the point is that there is a latency for certain types of diseases, syndromes that might pop up through multiple mechanisms.
But people need to watch out that this might be popping up as a syndrome.
Steve Nichols wants to know, and of course, whenever we hear, as I talked about, the four HIV inserts identified by the Indian researchers and verified by people like yourself and others, they hear HIV immediately go to AIDS and so on.
Can this virus carry a more sinister payload, for example, AIDS? You know, the great terror, of course, would be something like airborne AIDS, which this, of course, is not yet, but I guess people are asking the relationship there.
Well, here's what's very important.
HIV is a retrovirus.
It has a reverse transcriptase in it, so it can integrate into the genome.
Coronaviruses, specifically beta coronaviruses, is what we're dealing with here.
Are RNA viruses.
They do not have a reverse transcriptase in it.
So they're totally different types of viruses.
Now AIDS is a disease.
HIV is the virus.
So you could technically have AIDS that is created by other viruses.
Now what is interesting is that the spike protein on HIV is GP120. GP120, certain parts of it, are in this virus, what we call SARS-CoV-2.
And it was done there purposely to gain function to ACE2. So as it evolves, it most likely will start to affect T-cells.
And start causing immune system issues.
If that does happen, which seems like it is, that is AIDS-like.
So the mechanism of what we call AIDS from the 80s was different.
It was from a retrovirus.
What we may be seeing as a new syndrome of AIDS is It is this gain of function from SARS-CoV-2.
So it's very possible to have AIDS-like syndrome.
And this is what I'm saying, you know, that a few years down the road here, we may be seeing, you know, these carcinomas that were very unique to, you know, the AIDS population in the 1980s.
Yeah, I mean, it is so...
And the... This sort of crushed the rise, right, to sort of bring down the number of new cases to give people time to prepare.
That started pretty early and has been, you know, I mean, it could have started a whole lot earlier, but it would have been a whole lot better.
But it is out there.
And the fact that we've crushed it down by stopping our economy, you know, this is kind of like putting someone in An artificial coma because of some medical emergency is like, okay, well, they're not better.
Maybe this is a way to have them not get much worse.
But there's not a permanent situation to put the economy in a coma.
Then it's like the cure being worse than the disease.
And when it goes back into circulation, as it will when people start moving, that's, I mean, I think the second wave can be much bigger than the first.
Just my particular thought.
I mean, there's some historical precedent for it that was the case.
With the Spanish flu, but I think that the second wave is going to be bigger than the first, and I think people are walking in, and the reason we're saying all of this, I don't want to speak for Paul, of course, the reason I think it's important to say this stuff is, yeah, okay, some of it's speculation, for sure, but this isn't just like bong hit speculation, like, hey, man, maybe we're just like an atom inside, you know, like, I mean, this isn't ridiculous, grateful, dead speculation.
There's some actual science and historical precedent and math Behind all of this, but it is really important to be cautious.
And, you know, if this gets people to wear masks, if it gets them to wash their hands more, it is not a bad way to go.
You know, there's a theory in chaos theory that if you want to try to minimize the damage of a chaotic system, a situation, that you want to over...
Overreact. Because you don't know the system dynamics.
So it's better It's better to be prepared than to not be.
And by saying, hey, this is the worst case scenario, it will start to get people to wake up and start preparing.
Either having food or building up their immune system, changing their lifestyle habits, being more conscientious of looking around and helping the elderly.
The elderly is a big... A cohort of deaths here.
So, you know, by sounding the alarm, it saves lives.
It's not fear-mongering.
It's trying to save lives.
Well, it's funny. Sorry, go ahead.
And also, to bring the ones that are responsible to justice.
Yeah. Yeah, no, it's funny.
When I was a kid, I found a whole bunch of Reader's Digest books, like the little magazines they used to have.
They're kind of old school now.
But I remember reading this program.
I don't know if it's still around.
It was around back in the 70s called Scared Straight.
And what they would do is they'd take these teenage thugs, wannabes, and they would basically bring them to prison.
And, you know, these hardened, terrifying prisoners would say, hey, man, you really don't want to end up like me.
Here's what life's like in prison.
Here's what you can look forward to being someone's girlfriend for three years kind of thing.
And the idea was scared straight.
Now, you know, there was some ambivalence about the program, but the idea of just, you know, it's the worst case scenario if you keep on the path that you're keeping on.
And it does cause people to change their behavior.
And I don't know, this pause, it's kind of a weird thing that there is this unreality to it because it's not the new normal.
This can't be the new normal because we've got to eat and we've got to have electricity.
The water's got to flow. It's like, you know, we're at the top of our trajectory and we're just kind of hanging there.
It's like, I've escaped gravity.
It's like, nope, you've just reached equilibrium with gravity.
That's going to change. All right.
Addy Ads has asked...
Beside the lungs, what is the second most highly concentrated part of the body in terms of the ACE2 enzyme?
Is that the right word? And this is why you're here, because that's not my wheelhouse at all.
Okay, the ACE2 receptor is a protein, but it's also an enzyme.
Okay, so it's just kind of using different terminology.
But you have it in your lungs.
You have it in your myocardium, so in your heart area.
You have it in your intestines.
You have it in your kidneys.
You have it even in the smooth muscle.
There's lots of different smooth muscles that's controlled automatically.
It helps with contracting the bronchial tubes.
It helps with contracting the movement for your intestines.
A lot of people that go through chemotherapy, what happens is that they lose that ability of that wave motion in your intestines, and it can cause a lot of problems in terms of digestion.
And they start losing a lot of weight.
That's not the only reason why they lose a lot of weight, but, I mean, that's one of the reasons.
So, you know, there's a lot of ACE2 that can affect.
And different cohorts of patients will have different upregulation or downregulation of ACE2.
So that's why this is hard to treat, because it's infecting multiple organ systems, especially in sepsis.
Once they get into sepsis or this high cytokine storm scenario, it becomes a chaotic system.
And 8% of the people that go on the ventilator, they don't get off and they die that way.
So, in some cases, it's even higher than 80%.
But it's definitely a problem.
But the ACE2 receptor is a very common receptor in our body, because that's a key homeostasis receptor.
Right. Okay, so let's talk about racial disparities in how this SARS-CoV-2 is affecting people, and some racial disparities, I think, are going to be environmental.
They're going to be socioeconomic.
But I think that there are some genuine, obviously, there are biological differences between the races.
I'm thinking sort of sickle cell, obesity, and prevalence of smoking, which have racial differences, prevalence of alcohol abuse, which have racial differences.
Have you looked into, and of course, I have heard, this is way back at the very beginning of this whole nightmare journey, not this presentation itself, but, you know, the whole thing itself.
But way back at the beginning, there seemed to be some indication that it did hit East Asians more than it would hit, say, Caucasians or blacks.
Have you looked into racial disparities and any reasons as to why these might be occurring?
Yes. So early on in the investigation, we're talking about early February, there was research that was published where it suggested that the ACE2 receptor was upregulated for Asian males.
And so everyone was thinking, well, this would not affect the Caucasian population as bad.
Well, the reason why that data was skewed to Asian males is that Asian males have a tendency to smoke versus Asian females.
Now, if you just do baseline, no one's smoking, you'll have more ACE2 in males than females.
So it's focused on sex, actually.
So more males will have a problem because we upregulate ACE2. If you look at that as the baseline, now you add in smoking, then you'll upregulate ACE2. Now in Asia, more males smoke versus females.
It's like 50% versus 2%.
It's like a crazy disparity.
Right, right, right. So that was the reason why the data was skewed.
And this is why it's so important to kind of like, you know, dive into the data and figure out why that, you know, those biases happen.
But as the infection started to spread around the world, then we were starting to see that there were other receptors that were involved, not just the ACE2. And those receptors are the GRP78, which is upregulated when you have stress.
Now, those stress factors could be environmental stress factors.
They could be internal stress factors.
But in modern society, especially in the West, you know, there is a lot of stress, you know, and poor health habits.
And that will upregulate the GRP78 receptor.
So those types of societies are more prone to be getting the disease.
Hmm. In conjunction with the CD209 and the CD299 receptors that are also upregulated with if you're elderly, if you smoke, because it adds stress, and individuals that are Caucasian will upregulate CD209 and 299 versus Asians.
So when you look at this In its totality, with these five receptors, you will realize that it's more biased to Caucasian, stressed male individuals.
That's not exactly pushing back against the weapon of war hypothesis, right?
Right. I mean, it's, you know, no...
The big receptor at this moment is ACE2. But as it's moving through the world, it's adding more and more probability of gaining function and higher affinity to these other receptors.
And that's my big worry, that this pinballing will take place and that the second wave, third wave, could be more virulent than the primary wave.
Right. This is obviously not any kind of individualized medical advice, but Devon Trellis, I have not heard about this, so maybe this is something else, but he says, please talk about rashes that occur with this virus.
I have a deep red non-blanching, I don't know what that means, rash on my neck.
Have you heard about anything to do with rashes?
Yeah, there was a study that came out with rashes.
I didn't see them on the neck, but actually on the hands.
Now, the question is if these individuals are being treated with hydroxychloroquine, because one of the side effects is rashes.
Now, if they're not being treated with hydroxychloroquine, then...
Then it might be due to this hypoxia issue where there's this big debate.
Not to get into the weeds here, but there is ARDS types of presentation and non-ARDS types of presentation.
So basically for the listeners, the ARDS types have huge inflammatory response and accumulation of fluid in the air sacs, in the lung, and it prevents people from breathing.
But there is non-ARDS That test positive for COVID-19 that have other clinical presentations but still have the hypoxia.
So this might be related to lack of oxygen and maybe lysis of the red blood cells.
But that needs to be further investigated.
But I think there's two avenues here.
Are they being treated and it's a side effect of the treatment?
Or is it truly the disease?
Right. So, and I reported on this a month or two ago, but South Korea reports more recovered coronaviruses, patients testing positive again.
And is it a case that once you've had it, you have the antibodies, you should be okay?
Is it kind of like, you know, there are like 100 different varieties of the common cold, so it's not like you get the same cold again.
It's just that it always changes or the flu, which changes every year.
Have you heard much coming out of South Korea?
I'd heard it's up to 14% reinfection rate for...
SARS-CoV-2, but what are your thoughts on that?
Right. This is the worry that we have.
Once we get out of shelter in place in New York, I think there's going to be a high probability of reinfection.
And the data is showing that this is happening in China and in South Korea.
You know, it's smaller percentages than, let's say, the original case.
Now, the question is, we've got to parse out how they're doing the testing.
You know, are they doing the RT-PCR testing, or are they doing antibody testing?
You know, I'm not really sure.
I suspect it's the RT-PCR testing.
How long does the virus stay in the body?
Once you are infected and, quote, recovered, do you still shed this for weeks or months?
That's a big question.
Because if you're still shedding it for weeks and you are asymptomatic, then you could still pass it on to others.
So, and what happens if you're weak?
Let's say there's a new strain that starts to develop in that population.
Your system's already hit from the first infection, but let's say you're asymptomatic and you're, quote, recovered.
Your immune system is still down.
It hasn't fully recovered.
I mean, anyone that's gone through the flu, it takes weeks to really get back to normalcy.
So if you get infected with, let's say, a slight mutation of it, And your immune system is still down.
It may be different enough where whatever antibodies you have might not be able to fight it.
Or, and I think this is more the case, the antibodies that you did create, it creates what is called an antibody-dependent enhancement, where the antibody attaches to the actual spike protein, and that helps it to get in other cells.
And this is my worry that this is part of the way.
That news is too bad. We can't continue the show.
That's it. It's all over.
I'm moving to the mountains.
Sorry. And we might have an asteroid hit, too.
That might be a relief at this point.
But people need to realize that for some individuals, we may have antibody-dependent enhancements.
Jennifer Day is pointing out he did his hair, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say that's probably directed a bit more towards Paul than towards me, unless she's talking about nose hair.
All right. So let's talk about the flu crew.
This is from the real Vincent Griffin, who says, according to the World Health Organization, I don't believe this anymore just because it has the word who attached to it these days, but let's say this is true.
Quarter million to half a million people die each year of standard coronavirus influenza worldwide.
This, of course, is something that is talked about a lot and I believe is worth addressing, if you don't mind.
Well, first of all, I have to ask the question, how do they know how many people actually die from influenza?
Because they don't test for that.
They don't test that full population.
That's a projection. That is a modeled epidemiological projection.
We have roughly about 15 to 25 million Americans that get, quote, influenza.
And we, depending on the year, have about 50 to 60,000 that pass away.
All right? You're telling me that they test 25 million people in the United States every year with influenza tests?
And I've had influenza.
You've had influenza. Have you ever been tested for it?
So it's a projection.
Yeah. That's a projected number.
And people need to keep that in mind.
And now we're trying to...
And I think, to Donald Trump's credit, he kept on saying, test, test, test.
I want to know what's going on.
It might be for military purposes, actually, to understand how bad really it is.
But the reality is that...
We don't know truly how many people have influenza in the United States, let alone in the world, because we don't test for it at that level.
Right. So already kind of a projection.
Chuck Norris makes Stefan Molyneux jokes.
I think that's probably a fair statement to make.
I think he's trying to say that I'm kind of tough.
You know, fair enough. All right.
So we do have some concern from the male listeners about their testicles.
I assume this is related to coronavirus, and if I remember rightly, it does seem to go for the berries just a little bit.
Can you give them some facts on that?
It does. It does affect the testes.
I don't think there's any evidence that it's affecting the ovaries, but I would have to look into that.
But if it is affecting the testicles, then you have to go to the next question.
Is it affecting the germline?
Because if it affects the germline, then the future generations are going to be infected.
Okay, can you break that down a little bit for me?
All right, so we have cells in our body that are somatic and germline cells.
The germline cells are the ones, the sperm and the egg cells, that make a new human, right?
So if you infect germline cells, then that sperm or egg cell We'll have something go wrong, and that's passed on to future generations.
If it's only affecting your somatic cells, then it's not affecting future generations.
It would only affect future generations in that case by just spreading it naturally within the population.
But it doesn't affect the germ cells.
But if you have a virus that affects the germ cells, all future generations are affected.
And there's not enough research to say it does or does not.
Right. Okay. So another question, which was floating around here.
So what might be a good consequence to impose on the CCP? Now, I know we're kind of jumping out at some medical stuff, but I think that's an important question.
Have you given that much thought?
Do you want to just open the gates to my rants or what are your thoughts on that?
I'd say let's open up the gates.
Alright. Well, so the problem is not the Chinese Communist Party.
the problem is the communists within our own society.
If you look at a place like Russia, see, Russia has survived communism.
Let's look at using our medical analogy here, right?
So you get assaulted by some virus, you fight it off at great cost to your life, at great despair and anger and weakness and sickness, and you fight your way back.
You now have immunity, right?
Because you've got the antibodies for that virus.
So if you look at the countries in the West that are able to act outside of this paralytic political correctness that is in swamping us in fever dreams of egalitarian perfectionism, you look at places like Poland, you look at places like Hungary, you look at places like Russia, Well, these are places that have experienced communism and now have the antibodies, and they don't take any shit.
From the communists in the media who are constantly trying to undermine and weaken and subterfuge the entire society by screaming racist at anybody who wants to survive this damn thing.
And you get that, what was it, that mayor in Italy saying, go hug a Chinese person to show that you're not racist.
It's like, my God, we completely lost any sense of self-protection.
And we're like the mice who have this weird cat virus that makes them think that cats are their best friends so the virus can spread further.
and it's mad.
So the problem is not the illness.
The problem is the lack of antibodies in the West.
And we do have, and I, you know, I understand that they're human beings.
I'm using this as an analogy.
I don't mean to call them viruses or anything like that.
But from a medical standpoint, we're immunocompromised, that we have groups and ideologies within our societies that are rabidly attacking any sense of self-protection or self-preservation that we have.
That is the major issue, not what's going on in the Chinese Communist Party.
Because I am absolutely convinced that if we knew the truth about communism, which has been, we've been lied to for the last three or four generations because of communist infiltration into the media and into academia in particular, but other places as well into the news, then we would never have imagined that China could be trustworthy.
Never would have imagined that Chinese numbers could be believed for We never would have imagined that they would tell the truth about anything.
And we would have taken all precautions early on, closed borders, not taken flights from China, not let people in from China, and we would have been safe.
So the issue is not...
SARS-CoV-2. The issue is not the Chinese Communist Party.
The issue is not China. The issue is not bat soups or feeding tadpoles to your children.
The issue is that we're immunocompromised in the West because of leftist, hard socialist infiltrations into our institutions, and that is what is letting the virus in.
Now, we can talk about, oh, well, we've got to go deal with China.
Okay, well, I don't know what that means.
Because you can't go bomb them.
They got bombs too. And so the issue what we should do with all of this is wake the hell up ourselves and start dealing with this.
And now, as consumers, what you have to do is say, well, I'm not sending my kids to schools that have a heavy Marxist influence, which is to say most of them.
I am not going to support or buy from communist infiltrated institutions.
And look, China, if you're wondering about institutions in the West, China has massive control over many, many Western institutions, media, academia.
I mean, look at this, the head of Harvard, what was it, bio...
Biology or whatever was arrested for collusion with China.
You've got people kicked out of labs.
Dr. Lieber.
Dr. Lieber. Yeah, that's right.
And you've got people kicked out, two people or more, kicked out of the level four biolab in Winnipeg.
You've got people caught at the border.
Chinese scientists caught at the border smuggling out Biological material, dangerous biological material in a sock.
We're claiming that they have nothing.
I mean, you have all of these problems when we've not woken up to the dangers of communism and we are immunocompromised.
That, to me, that's what we can do right now, even as individuals.
Like, you and I can't decide what the heck is going to happen in the world court with regard to China, but I assume the world court is as compromised as the World Health Organization, the UN, the World Trade Organization, all of this stuff.
I mean, they're not dumb. Communists are evil, but they're not dumb.
Far from it. And so they've infiltrated all of these organizations.
You won't get any more justice from the World Court than you will from James Comey regarding Hillary goddamn Clinton.
So what you need to do is start as a consumer to say, I am not going to support institutions that are run by communists.
You can make those decisions.
You can put your money.
Where freedom is and keep your money away from those who are undermining the entire structure our society is built on.
So forget about China. I know I just did think the case against China.
Forget about China. As far as you as an individual goes, there's decisions that you can make.
Make having communist infiltration a business liability rather than an asset.
It is really not that hard to find out who owns what in the West.
Exactly. And, you know, social responsible investing, SRI, that's becoming a more popular trend in investment portfolios now.
I used to manage professionally a portfolio for a very large nonprofit in Australia.
City.
It was actually Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of New York.
So we had an SRI component of the portfolio where we couldn't invest in certain types of companies because of, you know, fetal tissue or, you know, war, you know, weapons of war or whatever.
So So I think people will start to think in those terms.
Don't invest in companies that hurt you.
But you can also bring it to another level.
Don't buy products.
From countries that hurt you.
And it opens up the entrepreneurial spirit for jobs to come back to Canada and the United States.
Canada and the United States has lost a lot of jobs.
Everybody wasn't that cheap.
People say, well, they'll just buy wherever it was cheapest.
It's like getting 50 bucks off that big screen TV doesn't seem so great when you can't work for three months now, does it?
Right, right. Well, you know, we are starting to wake up, I think, to the idea that our system became very fragile, very fragile with this dependency on the CCP. Well, this is the thing, too.
Like, I mean, we live like there's never any accidents, you know, like everybody, a third of Americans couldn't pay their rent this month.
And it's not like we've been in lockdown for months.
A third of Americans don't have enough savings to cover one month's rent if they're out of work for two weeks.
Like, that is not good.
That is fundamentally a system that doesn't work at all.
It's sort of like if you're driving someplace, you say, oh, it's 300...
Miles to get there. How much gas do I have?
About 300 miles worth.
Great, then I don't need to refuel because, you know, I'm sure it'll be fine.
And it's like, well, maybe, but probably not, right?
I'm probably going to roll to a stop a mile or two before you get there.
This living on the edge stuff, it's weird.
And I guess we've been relatively peaceful, relatively secure.
There's been all this money printing and interest rate manipulation to the point where people are like, savings!
Those are for idiots. And of course, you have inflation eating away people's savings, interest rates so low, it's not worth putting your money in the bank.
And we've just lived with no buffer at all.
And boy, you know, civilization and intelligent living is basically about having a buffer.
And hopefully people come out of this with like, okay, well, I could buy another 50 useless lattes, or I could have a month's rent in the bank, which seems like a pretty good idea these days.
See, I like the analogy, would you drive on a highway with no shocks on your car?
You need shocks to be able to absorb the potholes.
And what has happened lately is that people are driving their car with no shocks.
Yeah. Demand the desubsidization of colleges?
Absolutely. There should be no government-supported student loans.
There should be no subsidies to colleges at all.
And it's really, really appalling how the colleges, I think Harvard and other places, sitting on these enormous, enormous endowments are just firing people, tossing them out on the street.
I mean, it's just, oh, it's just hideous.
Absolutely hideous. All right, let's take a question or two more.
I know you've got somewhere else to be.
And so we'll take a question or two more and we shall release you.
And what have we got here?
Boycott Chinese-controlled industry companies.
Yes, support German manufacturing.
Yes, you certainly know that there won't be...
If you're supporting German manufacturing, it's not much likelihood of money going to migrants.
So let's see here.
I think... Well, we've got a lot of stuff going by that's not hugely helpful for questions for you.
Yeah, I mean, the fact that the government can close the borders like that is really quite remarkable.
And that is something that hopefully, you know, everybody said that it was so, so hard to do.
Couldn't be done, man. It's like, well...
Well, that brings up a great point that dovetails into this concept of the BioPatriot Act.
People don't realize that the government can take away your civil liberties very, very quickly.
The powers that the American president has in an emergency are pretty staggering.
Mm-hmm. I'm very concerned about forced vaccinations.
Very, very concerned because they're going to say, you know what, to save the economy, you have to be vaxxed so you can go back to work.
And you're already starting to see it with Governor Cuomo, who's the governor of New York, starting to prime with these ideas.
Well, we're going to test for antibodies and the ones that have the antibodies can go back to work.
Well, what happens if you've never been infected and you need the antibody to go back to work?
Then you have to get vaccinated.
That's the only way you get the antibody.
So it's just opening up the door to, you know, show me your papers that you, you know, you've been inoculated.
Right. Right. Bill Gates has been orbiting this like a gnat around a vampire these days.
What are your thoughts on this whole vaccine thing, the Bill Gates thing?
I can't quite unravel it, although it often seems put forward in kind of a sinister context.
Right. There's two ways to look at this.
Would you ever buy a car, the very first model of that car?
No, of course not. So one, the very first version of this is probably not as safe to deal with.
So for that reason alone, I wouldn't want it.
But this messenger RNA platform is a new type of platform to administer a vaccine.
And you can do some nefarious things down the road.
That people, unless you're sequencing the actual vaccine, you wouldn't know is in it.
That's why I'm a proponent of a third party analyzing random lots We're good to go.
So in other words, they have like a little mini, you know, a piece of a virus, but it's not encapsulated.
So that messenger RNA can get into the cell, and then it's supposed to present itself.
It creates some proteins, and it presents those proteins to the cell surface, and then the antibody is created.
That's how it works, all right?
Now, you could put stuff on that messenger RNA to do nefarious things, like reverse transcriptase.
And that integrates stuff into your genome.
Now, honestly, I don't trust the government.
I think I have good reason for that.
And I think a lot of people feel the same way.
Even if you are pro-vax, If you just look at the trajectory of them eroding your civil liberties and all these nefarious things that they've been doing in these weapons labs, that you're supposed to trust Bill Gates with this messenger RNA platform?
Hell no. Hell no.
Well, especially when the first thing he does is demand that people not be suable for this kind of stuff.
That is like, oh, I don't really like that.
That seems like a pretty good check and balance to me.
All right. Okay, well, listen, I really, really appreciate your time.
Obviously, we didn't get through to the coordinated TikTok dance moves that we'd obviously been practicing for most of the last week.
But obviously, we'll bring that up next time.
But so I really do appreciate your time.
And I just wanted to, if you want to mention to people who are just listening to the podcast version of this, where to find you on the web?
Okay, you can find me at Paul Cottrell.
That's my YouTube channel.
My YouTube videos has all the links to my website that has lots of important content about this virus.
I show papers that I databank on the website that you can follow the logic on how I arrive to these thoughts and conclusions.
You can also find me on Twitter.
It's at Paul Cottrell.
But the best place is just to go to my YouTube site, and it has all the links.
If you could please subscribe and click that bell.
I mean, as you know, we're talking about content that is...
I'm not quote mainstream thought.
I get censored.
I get shadow banned and, you know, and it, it, I'm trying to help people and, um, and spread the word to, to get a, a, an informed population, uh, out there to engage their governments and say, Hey, you know, this is enough is enough.
We're not going to allow this to happen because I believe that this is going to go down a road of less, less civil liberties across the world.
And it's, we as a people around the world need to stand up to this.
Yeah.
I mean, we're going to get a, they're going to try and get a biosecurity act in the same way they got the Patriot Act after 9-11.
And it's all been prepared for quite some time, I think.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. And it's not just at the government level, nationhood level, but it's also at the uber-government level, the New World Order level, the UN level.
Being an American, it's in our DNA not to be under tyranny of a new world order.
People need to wake up and get engaged and tell their representatives, no.
Yeah, we can hopefully come out of this crisis with more, buck historical trends, come out of this crisis with more freedoms rather than fewer and of the greater awareness of the dangerous of the Nietzschean wilder power universe characterized by most of the rest of the planet.
So, Dr. Paul Cottrell, thank you so much.
Don't forget, it's C-O-T-T-R-E-L-L, two T's, two L's in Dr.
Paul Cottrell. Really appreciate your time, my friend.
Thanks again for your help on the presentation, and we'll talk again soon.
Just one other thing.
What you did today was...
I honestly believe this.
What you did today is one of the most important videos about what is going on.
Because it's taking the philosophical look at this and exposing the larger picture.
And it will wake up people to get involved, to stop this tyranny.
And I honestly believe that your video is within the top five importance of this whole crisis.
And when we are older and we're sitting in the rocking chair going, what did we do during Wuhan?
We can honestly say we did our best on the battlefield.
So I commend you and I greatly appreciate your efforts.
Well, thank you. I appreciate that.
I mean, taking this kind of stand, as you know, Paul, either ends up with you whittling away on the rocking chair with your pant waist up around your nipples, or you end up in a gulag face down in a ditch.
I'm glad it's nothing in the middle because that wouldn't really suit me.
But all right, thanks again. I appreciate that.
And go check out Paul's stuff.
I'll put links to it below. And stay safe, my friends.
Please like, subscribe, and share on Paul's channel, on my channel, because, yeah, shadow banning is very, very real.
But we still have the energy and the community to get the word out.
So have a great, great night.
My friends, stay safe, stay educated, stay informed, talk people's ear off about this stuff, and let's turn this thing around and end up with taking more freedoms from the devil's temptation.
This is Stefan Molyneux from Freedomain, signing off.
▲
Export Selection