Country Doctor on Medical Experiments with Dr. Charles Hoffe
In this episode, Doctor Charles Hoffe and RFK Jr., discuss medical experimentation from World War II to today. Hoffe also reveals exciting new data on immunity evolution citing studies with former SARS patients.
Dr. Charles Hoffe was issued a gag order from the Canadian Interior Health authority after he reported concerns around vaccine safety to colleagues responsible for implementing the vaccine rollout. Dr Hoffe had observed a high rate of severe side effects developing post vaccination including anaphylactic shock and neurological conditions in 900 members of the First Nation community.
In British Columbia, I'm in a small town about three or four hours inland from Vancouver.
And would you call that kind of mid-coast?
We're in this sort of on the edge of the coastal mountain range that one drives through when one leaves Vancouver.
So the Rockies are further east towards Alberta.
So this is a different mountain range that runs up and down the coast.
The Coast Range, yes.
You're part of a series that we're doing on heroic physicians and doctors from all over the world.
Who've just said that they're going to stand up to this kind of medical totalitarianism that we're seeing.
And I know that you've, you know, been particularly courageous because you're really alone up in that part of the world.
And you've had the entire medical cartel in Canada, which was once the most democratic nation in the world.
And it has taken this really, really ugly turn recently.
So will you tell us what happened to you?
You work in what we would call a reservation in our country, but it's really an Indigenous community in Canada.
Yes, that is correct.
So I'll give you some background.
The patients in my medical practice are probably 70% First Nations.
And so I don't actually work on a reservation, but the reservations here are small and they're spread out and scattered.
And so people come to me from a, you know, it's probably a 50 kilometer radius in each direction.
They're mostly First Nations people.
So how this all started, because I have never been...
An activist or one that ever wanted to be in the limelight in any way.
I've just been a country doctor quietly trying to get on with my job and look after my patients.
So what happened was the Moderna vaccine was the one selected for our population group.
Initially, it was given to a group of 900 First Nations people in our community, and that was in mid-January of this year, 2021.
So then shortly after that, I actually went off to South Africa to go and visit my 89-year-old mother, who was in despair and terror over all the COVID. She kept watching the news and was absolutely terrified and was literally Losing her mind to some degree because she was, I think, just very afraid and very isolated.
And fortunately, she was in her own home but couldn't have visitors and was in despair.
So I went to South Africa and spent a month with her.
And then I came back to Canada and I had to do some period of isolation and the usual things.
And so I came back to work after a six-week gap.
I'd been following the international scene with, you know, trying to keep up on research and trying to just find out as much as possible about COVID-19 and available options and these vaccines and all of that.
Very shortly after my return to work, I became quite alarmed at the number of serious side effects that were being reported from Europe and from the U.S., And one of the basic principles of medical ethics is that if you're doing an experiment, which is what this is, I mean, this really is an experiment.
This kind of DNA and RNA therapy has never been done on humans before.
There were no animal trials.
And in fact, previous animal trials of different versions of this ended in disaster, so they were stopped immediately.
In this case, there were no animal trials and there were no long-term safety information at all.
It was literally a two- or three-month trial and then out onto the public.
So I was very concerned that this...
Hadn't gone through the usual scrutiny.
And so when I started seeing all these reports of this, it raised concerns with me because there's a principle of medical ethics that if you're doing a clinical trial on some new treatment and In the course of that, you start seeing serious harm.
Ethically, you're supposed to stop the clinical trial.
You're supposed to stop it and investigate it and pause it and see what's going on.
You're not just supposed to barrel on regardless.
I then sent an email to a group of other healthcare providers in our area, and they were doctors, nurses and pharmacists.
Basically posing the question, this is causing harm.
Should we be pausing this just to take stock?
Within literally two or three days, I had a telephone meeting with the local health authorities to tell me that I was causing vaccine hesitancy and that they were going to be reporting this to my licensing body, which is the College of Physicians and Surgeons, and that I was forbidden from saying anything negative about these vaccines in our health facility.
Let me ask you one thing.
Did you actually have patients who say that Were you involved in vaccinating patients?
And part two, did any of those patients...
No, no.
So let me just say, I'm not an anti-vaxxer.
I give flu shots to people who need them.
And I give tetanus boosters to people who need them in my office.
So I'm not an anti-vaxxer.
This was an ethical concern, that this was an experimental treatment that was causing harm and on the basis of ethics.
But had you ever given a COVID vaccine at that point?
No, no, no.
I had been very clear that I wanted nothing to do with it for exactly that reason.
Within three months of the vaccine rollout, there was evidence of harm.
And so I said, I don't want anything to do with this.
I will stand by and watch, but don't involve me.
And were there people in your community who were reporting injuries?
Yeah, so at that point, I'd only been back at work Two days, after six weeks away.
And so then as the days went on, people started coming into my office with serious injuries.
You know, initially there were literally three that had disabilities from this, and this was now nine or ten weeks since their shot.
You know, some of them, for example, couldn't open a jar anymore because both hands were so weak.
There were some that had shortness of breath, where they could previously walk two miles.
Now they can only walk a quarter mile.
But most of them were neurological problems, loss of sensation, loss of strength.
And a major thing was chronic pain.
Many of them had chronic pain.
One of them with dizziness, where she couldn't drive a car anymore because she was dizzy all the time.
And this was now eight or nine or ten weeks since her shot.
So I then became concerned that this wasn't just...
Let me interrupt you, and I want you to complete that thought, but let me ask one detail.
For most of these people, did the injury occur immediately, or did it appear weeks after the shot?
No.
In every case, it was within 72 hours.
In most of them, it was within 24 hours.
In other words, the next day.
But in some of them, it took three days.
But I've now got 10.
Initially, when I started speaking out, there were three, and then there were six, and then there were...
Anyway, it's now 10.
That have ongoing neurological problems and or ongoing shortness of breath since their shot, which is now three and a half months ago.
I don't think we can call these 10 people coincidences because they all occurred within 72 hours.
Because somebody reported that these so-called vaccines are the greatest cause of coincidences known to medical science yet.
I don't think that these can possibly logically be all coincidences.
Right.
Because these were previously well people who had none of these symptoms before.
Was there an age group that you saw that was disproportionately injured?
No, there was, well, I think, yeah, it was mostly in the older population, mainly because they were the ones who were told they needed the vaccine the most.
But the youngest of these people is 38.
So this is the lady who can't drive anymore because she's dizzy all the time.
And she can't work anymore.
So she's 38.
She had no pre-existing medical problems.
She was completely healthy.
She just decided she wanted to get the shot.
So what was the reaction of the government and the medical community?
Yeah, well, so firstly, I sent a letter to...
So the other thing, when I got my gag order, I was told that if I had any questions about this, I wasn't allowed to address them to my colleagues.
They should be sent to the medical health officer responsible for our area.
So I sent her a letter as these people started appearing.
Minister of Propaganda.
So anyway, I sent her a letter saying, you know, are these the normal side effects for RNA therapy?
You know, and if so, what disease process has been initiated and how should I, as their family doctor, treat these people?
And of course, there's no answers because nobody knows.
This is an experiment.
And so, of course, she didn't reply.
So then I was seeing more people day by day.
And so then I sent a letter to our provincial health officer in charge of the whole province of British Columbia.
And because I'd been told that she doesn't respond to letters, a colleague said, just send it as an open letter.
Maybe somebody will listen.
And I was basically trying to advocate for my own patients.
I wasn't trying to cause trouble.
I was just saying, hang on a minute.
This experiment is going badly wrong.
I think we need to have a look at this.
I didn't expect a response, but I got one.
Not from her, but she referred the matter to a vaccine safety specialist.
And so I then had a telephone meeting with this person.
And so I set out all my questions and said, you know, what is this?
And this person insisted.
And at that point, there were only six that were vaccine injured with ongoing problems.
And this was now about three months after their shot.
And she insisted they were all coincidences.
Either coincidences or being caused by poor vaccination technique.
In other words, the shot was a bit too high up in the arm because there was one of the patients who had a weak hand and loss of feeling and swelling of the hand, sort of lymphatic edema.
And she said, no, no, obviously they gave the shot in the wrong spot.
But that was literally one.
And all the rest, these neurological problems were elsewhere in their body.
Apart from, you know, we're not just in the vaccinated limb.
And in many cases, the losses were symmetric.
You know, the people that, three people that can't open a jar anymore have weak hands on both sides.
So then I didn't realize that my open letter was going to go viral, but it did.
It's gone around the world.
One would think then that the local authorities would then come to speak to me about it, but nobody did.
All they did was deny to the media that there was any harm and say that basically all that I was claiming was just the opinions of one man and had no basis in truth.
I was just even more amazed that they basically said it was hard to investigate.
But meanwhile, they never went to the source of the information.
Nobody ever phoned me or my office to say, please, can you just tell us what's happening?
At no time did that ever happen.
It's just denial.
They're just trying to discredit me and deny it so that they can carry on with the experiment.
So that's been my experience with the authorities.
In your experience, have any of these patients been contacted?
First of all, do they report?
In our country, we have a vaccine adverse event reporting system.
So those at least would be reported, maybe.
And then the question is, and this is something that never happens in our country, which is after you make that report, you would think that the company, some representative Yes.
Well, so we also do have a vaccine injury reporting form, which is a nine-page document.
Now, I'm what's called a fee-for-service doctor.
I'm a private doctor.
I bill for each thing that I can do.
And mostly my billings go to the government because we have a sort of a national health care system.
But these nine page forms do not get, they take 20 to 30 minutes to fill out and there is no remuneration at all.
In other words, it's working for free.
I've now filled out, I don't know, I think 12 or 13.
So you get paid absolutely nothing for that.
And, you know, on top of all your other work, you just don't have time for it.
And I really think that is an incentive for doctors to not bother because they've got so much other work and they'd rather do the work that actually puts bread on the table.
And in my case, I had filled out these forms for the ones that I knew about at that time.
And because we're in the small, predominantly First Nations community, there was no public health office.
Normally, there's a public health office that you Send the forms to.
We don't have that.
So I sent the forms to the nurses who were doing the vaccine rollout in the hope that they had been told where they had to send these things.
Anyway, they all just mysteriously disappeared.
Because the authorities kept saying there was absolutely no evidence of any harm from these vaccines in Lytton, and that what I was saying was not true.
So in other words, if there's a medical experiment, you're supposed to be monitoring your subjects.
You're supposed to be literally week by week, they should be phoning these people to see if there are any problems.
And in every one of these cases, I'd ask the people...
Has anybody phoned you?
Has anyone contacted you?
Has anyone reported any of these things?
And there was one patient out of the 10 that have the ongoing things who said that, well, they'd had an anaphylactic reaction.
And so they said that had been recorded.
But beyond that, nobody knew that three months later she still couldn't drive a car or go to work.
There was no follow-up.
In other words, this is also a huge ethical issue.
If you're doing an experiment, you're supposed to monitor what it's doing to people, and it's just not happening.
And when I try to raise concerns about that, I am literally, it's just denied and discredited.
This is just quite simply unethical.
You're familiar with the Nuremberg Code.
Absolutely.
Exactly.
And I think, I mean, the Nuremberg Code, yeah, the Nuremberg Code is something that was established after World War II at the Nuremberg Trials, where there were government officials or military people who did terrible things to innocent people in the form of medical experiments.
Doctors.
They were doctors, exactly.
They were doctors, and they experimented on people.
I just want to interrupt you.
Doctors were so deeply involved in atrocities in Germany that they had a separate trial just for the doctors.
There was a trial for the government officials like Goering and Himmler and all of these officials who had orchestrated the Third Reich.
But they also had a separate trial for the doctors who had been directly involved in these barbaric experiments, horrible, horrible experiments on human beings.
And the Nuremberg Code came out of that.
Yes, and the Nuremberg Code effectively says that if you do an experiment on someone, you have to have their informed consent.
You're not allowed to experiment on people without telling them that they're being experimented on, and you're not allowed to experiment on people without informing them on the risks and benefits of whatever it is that you're trying out on them.
And then the third thing is you're not allowed to coerce them into doing this by some kind of Even mild coercion is very specific.
You can't threaten anybody with any denial of any right they have in order to compel them to participate in the experiment.
Correct.
Exactly.
And so my concern was that, firstly, the public has been coerced through fear to participate in an experiment that they don't, they're told is not an experiment.
They're told that all the usual, I don't know how it is in the US, but in Canada, the government information is Assures people that all of the normal safety protocols have been followed and that this is an approved vaccine, and it is not approved.
Neither the FDA nor Health Canada have approved these.
They've been given emergency authorization in view of the pandemic, and they are not approved or licensed.
This is an experimental treatment, which is all the more reason why they should be monitoring these people very closely and be very alert to any harms.
So firstly, there's no informed consent.
These people are being coerced by fear, and they're not monitoring the situation.
And those are my personal experiences of this.
What's been the impact on you and your life?
Well, so I was told that I was not allowed to speak about this in our department.
I have...
Who told you that?
Our local health authorities, when they gave me my gag, that was my gag order, that I was not allowed to say anything negative about this.
And I suppose even calling it an experiment could be construed as being negative about it.
But, I mean, let's be honest, it is...
About two weeks ago, I was informed that my clinical privileges, in other words, the authority that I have to work as an emergency room physician, have been revoked or been suspended, I should say.
I am accused of having breached my gag order.
And I'm still, so I'm now working with lawyers.
I've lost half of my income.
I'm still allowed to work in my private doctor's office because I haven't had my medical license withdrawn, but I'm not allowed to work in the emergency room.
And so I'm now going through a legal process of trying to figure out what actually they interpreted I mean, they're being very vague and very hedgy, and so this is an ongoing thing.
But I've basically lost half of my income.
This is also, of course, damaging to one's reputation because, you know, word goes through the community.
Dr.
Hoff's been fired by the health authorities.
You know, that has connotations of misconduct or of, I don't know, some kind of negligence.
But effectively...
Yeah, so that's an ongoing thing, and I can't give any details around it, but that's been the effect on me, is that I've lost half my income.
Let me just ask you one kind of last question, which is, during the 1976 swine flu epidemic in the United States, there was 140 million vaccines given out, administered, and there were 33 reported deaths.
And there was about 1,500 injuries, mainly Guillain-Barre, a neurological injury.
And because of those injuries, that vaccine was pulled.
These vaccines in the United States have been given to 220 million people.
And there are 4,000 deaths reported.
And there are about 180,000 injuries And about 18,000 hospitalizations, serious injuries of the kind that you are seeing in your patients.
And what do you think has changed?
Why did that, why did we, why did FDA and the health agencies pull a vaccine because they were so alarmed because it caused 33 deaths.
And here we have a vaccine that's caused 4,000 deaths, you know, that are reported under VAERS and VAERS. By the way, HHS's own study shows that VAERS captures fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries.
So the likelihood that there are many, many more deaths, you know, order of magnitudes more deaths, and order of magnitudes more injury is highly, highly likely, according to their own data, What do you think has changed?
I don't know.
I've sometimes quipped to friends that there are three senses that are lost with COVID-19.
The first is the sense of smell, and the second is the sense of taste, and the third is common sense, because this absolutely makes no sense at all.
I think to put it in perspective, I mean, initially when this pandemic broke, we didn't know how dangerous COVID was.
But we now know that for people under the age of 70, the risk of dying from COVID is less than the flu.
And for people over the age of 70, it's a bit more than the flu.
So in other words, it targets the elderly and those with serious medical conditions.
So if this was a new experimental flu shot, which is effectively...
You know, it's the equivalent risk.
If this was a new experimental flu shot, if there were 30 deaths, they would have stopped it.
But as you say, there are 4,000 now in the US, and probably close to 10,000 in Europe, and who knows how many elsewhere, and they just barrel on regardless.
From an ethical point of view, this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
If this was Ebola virus or some absolutely lethal disease, then of course it's worth the risk of the vaccine because it's saving a lot of lives.
But this is not Ebola virus.
This has equivalent mortality to the flu.
So this makes absolutely no sense.
You know, there was a Lancet article that came out last week.
It looked at mortality rates from COVID per age group and that study found from all the data at the risk of people from four years old to 16 years old is the risk of death is about 1.6 deaths per million doses given.
And it's hard to believe that the vaccine itself is not going to cause more deaths than that because the vaccine, according to all the data, wreaks the worst havoc on younger people, people with more robust immune systems.
And, you know, we've seen such a wave of deaths among the elderly who were the first to receive it.
You know, it's really irrational that we may be and we are highly likely giving a vaccine to these children that is going to cause more deaths than the disease that it is purported to prevent.
Exactly.
And unfortunately, I think the driving factor is fear.
You know, people desperately want to feel safe.
And it just amazes me.
I hear people on the radio talking about the incredible relief that they felt when they finally managed to get their COVID shot.
You know, that they finally felt safe.
I mean, the media have driven an agenda of fear, which is driving people to not think clearly and to not really examine the risks.
And the fact that they would want to give this thing, which clearly causes harm, to children For whom COVID poses almost no risk.
I mean, as you've said, they have a higher chance of getting struck by lightning than they do of dying from COVID. Oh, but the lifetime risk is, that's true.
Yes, exactly.
And the other thing is, firstly, we don't know what the long-term consequences of this are for people.
And we do not know how long their protection will last.
We know it does not give them immunity, which is why vaccinated people still have to wear masks and still have to keep away from one another.
They're not immune.
And the reason why they're not immune from a medical point of view is that their antibodies are in their blood, not in their respiratory system.
The respiratory system is how you get COVID and how you spread it.
And in order for somebody to be immune, the antibodies would need to be there at the portal of entry and at the portal of transmission.
The antibodies measured by the researchers were in the people's blood, and that's why it only protects serious illness once the disease goes into the rest of your system.
So the idea that this is an immunity is nonsense.
They are not immune, which is why the whole idea of vaccine passports is absurd because vaccinated people aren't safe to others because they can still spread it.
And the idea that children need to have the vaccine in order to protect their parents or their grandparents or their teacher or somebody else is nonsense because the vaccine doesn't stop you spreading it.
And apart from that, children are not the main spreaders.
Well, not only that, but there's now data that have come out in the last two weeks that have shown that children don't spread it at all.
Apparently, this is a scientist who I actually have a podcast with, who's a top scientist at Yale, has talked about this week.
Is that when children get COVID, they tend to internalize it.
And it shows in mild headaches, it manifests in mild headaches, but not in respiratory illnesses.
And they're not spreading it.
There is, in fact, according to him, no evidence of any single case of transmission from a child to an adult.
There are many cases of adults spreading it to their children.
None of a child spreading it to an adult.
The justification, first of all, I believe that ethically you cannot force somebody to take a medical intervention to protect somebody else.
So that rationale should be DOA from step one.
Even if you could prove that a child taking this vaccine is going to protect his grandparents, you still can't do that to people.
That is an ethical precept that we agreed to long, long, long ago that you cannot treat One patient and put them at risk to save another.
You can't do that in a Western democracy and, you know, in an ethical culture.
But in this case, there's absolutely no justification because giving that child the vaccine is not going to protect their grandparents or their parents.
Correct.
Absolutely.
And not only that, even though they have a small degree of immunity, we have no idea how long that immunity will last.
Whereas the immunity that they have from a natural COVID infection Which is no risk to them, but there's some fascinating research that Dr.
Mike Yurden of Pfizer had made evident was that they had scientists last year tracked down people who had the first SARS virus infections.
Back in 2002, 2003, and survived it.
So the first SARS virus also came out of Wuhan in China in 2002 and 2003.
It was much more dangerous than this, but much less infectious.
And so through contact tracing and isolating people, they were able to stop it.
So these scientists last year tracked down people who had that infection and who are still around and asked them if they could get blood from them.
So they analyzed these people's blood to see if they were still immune to SARS. And they found that they were.
These people still had strong immunity 18 years later to that first SARS virus.
So then what they did was they checked to see whether that immunity covered COVID-19 as well.
And they found that it did.
People that had had the first SARS virus were immune to COVID. And the important thing with that is that those two viruses are 20% different.
They're 80% similar, 20% different.
So that was amazing because it showed that this immunity was so good that it could recognize a similar virus that was 20% different.
Now, all these other variants that we keep being told about are less than 1% difference.
In fact, according to Dr.
Yerden, the most different that any of them is to the parent COVID virus is 0.3% difference.
In other words, they're almost identical.
There's a very, very minor difference.
Cellular immunity or T-cell immunity can recognize a virus that was 20% different.
It is not going to have any difficulty recognizing any variant that is less than 1% different.
So the take-home message is this, that anyone who has had a natural COVID infection has good, robust, long-lasting immunity that will cover every variant.
And they absolutely do not need the vaccine because they are immune.
Let me ask you something about yourself, because you have a British accent, you're clearly from the UK, but you ended up in Canada somehow.
Correct?
Yes, yes.
I was actually born and raised in South Africa.
And South Africa has many different accents, just like the US does and Canada does.
So my ancestry is mostly European, English, Scottish, Irish, but mixed in with a bit of French, Huguenot, and Dutch in South Africa.
So I'm a complete mongrel.
After I left South Africa, I... Worked for a while in England and then moved to Canada.
So I've been in Canada for 30 years as a rural family doctor.
Dr.
Charles Hoff, thank you so much for that information, for your heroics.
And tell us, is there any way that our listeners can help you?
Do you have a legal defense fund or is there anything, is there any way that we can support you?
No, I don't think so.
I have had lots of Support in terms of people who have an ethical conscience and can see through the craziness of this have been very supportive to me.
It is only the authorities that have not.
So yeah, thank you for your kind thoughts and suggestions.
If I can think of anything, I'll let you know.
But as I say, I've taken a few hits, but I'm still in the battle.
