← TFTC: A Bitcoin Podcast
Loading summary
Transcript115 lines
- [00:07]
Kevin McKernan
You've had a dynamic where money's become freer than free. If you talk about a Fed just gone nuts, all.
- [00:14]
Unidentified Expert
All the central banks going nuts. So it's all acting like safe haven. I believe that in a world where central bankers are tripping over themselves to devalue their currency, Bitcoin wins. In the world of fiat currencies, Bitcoin is the victor.
- [00:29]
Kevin McKernan
I mean, that's part of the bull case for bitcoin.
- [00:32]
Unidentified Expert
If you're not paying attention, you probably should be. Probably should be.
- [00:37]
Kevin McKernan
Kevin McKernan. I just checked. It's 11 months to the day since we last recorded or at least published the episode.
- [00:46]
Unidentified Expert
Oh, all right. What a year, huh?
- [00:50]
Kevin McKernan
What a year. A lot has happened.
- [00:51]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah.
- [00:53]
Kevin McKernan
Between March of 2024 and today, World seems to be a completely different place.
- [00:58]
Unidentified Expert
I think it was a bit of, a. Bit of a black pill last year compared to where we are today. There's a hell of a lot more that's changed in terms of whether it be Ross being free and all this crypto activity that's going on in D.C. seems to be. I would have never had me bet back then that this would be happening. I would have bet against it.
- [01:21]
Kevin McKernan
The tides have changed drastically, particularly from the regulatory perspective on the industry. And, yeah, I completely agree. I think if you would have told me 11 months ago that the landscape would be as it is today, I would be like, ah, you're crazy.
- [01:37]
Unidentified Expert
But, yeah, RFK confirmed at hhs. That's something I didn't have in the bingo card.
- [01:42]
Kevin McKernan
No, everybody, rfk, Tulsi. It's like Cash Patel is going to get in. Hegseth, what's your perspective on all that? And particularly as it pertains to what you've been working on, the research and hopefully getting some public attention on this massive problem that seems to be permeating throughout the world with the COVID jabs.
- [02:07]
Unidentified Expert
So love the fact that RFK is in there. Now the question is, will the Trump administration temper his. What he really wants to do? It seems as if all the scrutiny of him going in was over vaccine onesies. And if he ever said a negative thing about vaccines, they're going to hang them out to dry. The make America healthy thing has kind of shifted from what's killing the majority of people right now versus Cheerios and Fruit Loops and food, which is certainly a consideration, but I don't think it's the apex problem that they have right now. The problem they have is just the pharmaceutical influence over. Over the entire research and government agency system there, from NIH down to NIDA to Niad, it's deep swamp there, and it's hard to go in there and not pay attention to those things. And there's obviously this warp spree. Trump has it out as a trophy, and I don't think he should be overly criticized because I think his intentions were get the FDA out of the way and move fast and break things. And what I don't want out of all this is we got to make the FDA bigger to make sure the FDA doesn't do this again, which is where that can go. If people are like, you failed on warp speed, and parts of warp speed actually were pushing hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, all that made sense, but that got sidelined by Fauci and others to be sort of a vaccine only program. So those aspects of what they're thinking of doing in warp speed make sense. Repurposed drugs that are already approved, so you don't have to go through this approval process and you know their safety profile and see if you can make those work. For Covid, that's a sound plan. But that all got ceremoniously eliminated by the pharma cartel. And I think we're starting to get a feel for how this beast operates. Like, there's all this, you said money that's coming out, all these NGOs, they were in control of journalists for doing all this, manipulating the media. That's the mechanism upon which they censor. And they have a clause into the journals as well. So one thing Bobby has said, I don't know if he'll be able to pull it off, is to go after the journals in pharma for rico, which would be phenomenal. Crack up that whole system and rebuild it from scratch, preferably unchained, as we spoke about before. But I don't know if he's going to have the political power to do that. I think his language has changed toward, let's just put everything, let's be very transparent on all the data and once you can see what the data reflects, that the public opinion will change. You may not get that change parroted at the institutions that are still kind of reciting these psalms of success over vaccines. But the. I don't know, we shouldn't cast too much doubt on his future. He hasn't done anything yet. He's just gotten in. And I never like to judge people on future activity. But the language you see it wrapped in is beginning to shift a little bit more toward food, diet, and things that you can voluntarily choose to do or not do, as opposed to some of the medicines they're mandating. And Trump did sign that. No more mandates in the colleges or no more federal funding for the schools, that mandate. But that's not trickling down to the nine month olds who are still getting three of these shots. And that's, you know, so that the schedule does need to be addressed. They have no studies that look at what is the combination of 70 shots. They have each one studied next to the next worst vaccine, rarely ever a placebo. And so no one's looked at the stacking tolerances of piling on 70 of these things and what that does to kids. But, you know, I suspect it's playing a big role in the chronic disease epidemic that's out there. Much more so than the Fruit Loops.
- [06:05]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. And that's been the confusing part of the first month, not even of Trump's term, as it pertains to Bobby Kennedy and the, the whole MRNA thing, because he had the meeting with Sam Altman, Larry Ellison, where Larry Ellison saying, we're going to create specific MRNA cures to individual cancers and we're going to be.
- [06:30]
Unidentified Expert
What they just created. Yeah, that's always the case that, hey, all right, we're going to give you these shots, then cancer is going to emerge and we're going to come up with more shots to go for the cancers that we created. They'll blame everything but what they did. I mean, they're doing that to our field, too. They run around trying to blame it on cannabis and I mean, they blame it on everything but the obvious. But. Yeah, sorry, I interrupted. You were in the middle of.
- [06:54]
Kevin McKernan
No, we had that and then the sovereign wealth fund meeting with dissent and Howard Lutnick behind him. And Howard Lutnick chimes in like, we should be getting equity stakes and the companies making the MRNA vaccines. It's like, what? How are you not. It really gives me pause because I think the, the clamoring about the adverse reactions to the first widespread application of MRNA jabs is loud enough that they should be, they should be cognizant that it's a touchy subject that you probably don't want to be adamantly for or just don't be adamantly for it publicly. And they're really ringing the bell like, we're going to invest in this. I'm like, what? Like, how did they not see that people are highly skeptical of this technology after what just happened?
- [07:52]
Unidentified Expert
They do seem to be so in touch with so many other aspects on social media, but that one, they're just off so far off in left field. I mean, I feel like the Trump family does have some. They had the intelligence to go and talk to the Libertarian Party and do a trade, right. This thing with Ross and maybe bitcoin strategic reserve. And they knew to get on all the podcasts to get the word out. So they have a pulse, the zeitgeist, if you will. But that one area seems to have some type of ablation in their mind that they can't. They can't quite get. But the Lutnik thing is really scary because you're like, look, if you can't be an organization that's mandating these things and then put them in your strategic reserve or your sovereign wealth fund and get equity out of what you mandate, I mean, that's a massive conflict. And they are already getting royalties. He probably doesn't know that, but the NIH has 1.2 billion now in royalty for the vaccines. So that would explain why they're probably not coming up with any recipes with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. They want all the money rolling through one royalty stream. So, yeah, that was very concerning. And the Stargate thing, I don't think either of those people understand the first thing about vaccination from Sam Altman, who I wouldn't trust, and Oracle, that just sounds like he's in it for some type of surveillance, healthcare surveillance prize. Yeah, both of those seem big, big red flags that's going the wrong way. And then this week, I think they're now talking about, you know, throwing out 300 million bird flu vaccines against all the poultry out there, which you're like, they're gonna have, you know, Merrick's disease all over again. They're just going to accelerate the evolution of that thing. And yeah, then, then it will hop into people.
- [09:44]
Kevin McKernan
That's funny. But I've been following. I've got two young kids are in school, so we would get a warning. It's like, flu season's particularly bad. And I've been looking at some charts. It looks like flu season is bad.
- [09:54]
Unidentified Expert
But, yeah, I believe that too. My son just had it and it was brutal for him, so it knocked him out for many days. So, you know, now there's a good argument that, yeah, you can expect a period of really bad respiratory diseases circulating after this because the. Wiped out the immune systems, a lot of these kids, by giving them, you know, how many jabs? Three, five jabs. This Japanese study that we're talking about 44% of the people over 65 got seven jabs in Japan. I mean, they're one of the most vaccinated countries in the world now with these MRNA's. So there are people taking these things over and over again. And when that happens, your immune system craters. So you've got a very large immunosuppressed population that's going to circulate all types of things we haven't seen before. We're going to see resurgence of Epstein Barr, we're going to see shingles come back, we're going to see probably a lot more rsv. In some ways, it could be a very brilliant plan for pharma if they actually knew this up front to go and wreck people's immune systems, because that will invite a tremendous amount of pharmaceutical expenditures. And they're seeing it. The cancers are up, the cancer expenditure is up. So it is a positive feedback loop for them and a negative one for us.
- [11:13]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. And so let's jump in. That's why I reached out. This Japanese paper sort of confirms independently the excess cancer mortality after MRNA lipid nanoparticle SARS CoV2 vaccination in Japan. So this observation until 2023, and it seems like you did a deep dive on this and that's the main reason why I reached out to you, is because again, whether it's Larry Ellison, Howard Lutnick, Trump, really saying MRNA is the thing. MRNA is the thing. The data that's being surfaced, whether it's by these, these medical researchers or something like Ed Dowd, someone like Ed Dowd, looking at the health or the health insurance, disability rates and life insurance anomalies, it seems pretty clear that something is off. Excess mortality is still higher than it should be.
- [12:11]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah. So the Miche paper, it's a preprint still and it may stay there for a while because this is such a hot topic that no journal's going to take it, regardless of how well they sharpen their graphs. But a lot of this is statistical data that I'm sure others can recapitulate off of public databases. And I've seen others make attempts at this at Japan, see similar things. So Japan. So the Mickey paper there showed that they have about 80% of their population took one of these MRNA vaccines. They're about 73% Pfizer versus Moderna, but almost exclusively MRNA and 13% of the population took seven. But it's really enriched for the elderly. I think, as I mentioned earlier, it was 44% over the age of 65, there have seven vaccines in them. So that's something like. I think it was like 439 million vaccinations that occurred in a country of 100, maybe 23 million people. And if you look at what they had for Covid, they only had about 47 million cases of COVID So they have a 9 to 1 ratio of vaccines to virus events. So they're really going overboard jabbing people to prevent this. And the paper does. The conclusions are worth reading. The paper does point out that, hey, there's some other papers out there from the Cleveland Clinic that show the more jabs you get, the more Covid you get. At Cleveland Clinic did this study between 1, 2, 3, and 4 jabs. And it was on healthcare workers, nurses in particular. So there is this propensity that after you take two of these things, your body starts seeing the same antigen over and over again. And there's what's known as an IGG4 class switch. It starts to treat it as something it needs to ignore, which can let the virus go wild in your system. If your immune system is trained to, hey, forget about that. We've tried to knock that out twice. It didn't go away. It's back again. We're going to treat it like an allergy and not like a dise or an invader. And so they get this class switch that makes them tolerate the virus, and that leads them to getting these negative vaccine efficacies. So the Japanese paper goes into that. But I think what's fascinating about this Japanese paper. Let me see if I can pull up this image for you guys, is they bring in some historical context that goes all the way back to the excess mortality that occurred during the tsunami. And let me see if I can find that thing for you. All right, I pulled up a few of these. See if I can zoom in on this. So this is one of their graphs. I labeled it Tsunami and vaccine, so you didn't have to read through all this text. But on the left is their excess mortality, which is, in fact, generally trending down, with the exception of a few points, which is just before the pandemic, they had slightly lower excess mortality. And they go into some reasons why there, but it's minor. But way back here is when the tsunami hit Japan, you see that blip? Now, Covid occurred in 2020, so they didn't have a tremendous amount of excess mortality during COVID It was when the vaccines rolled out that their excess mortality now dwarfs a tsunami. And on the right side here is their average lifespan was improving over time until the vaccine or the tsunami. So their average lifespan has taken a bit of a dip here. So if you look at the numbers in this paper, I think I scroll up here, I think I put them up here. Yeah, right there. So you look at these numbers, you add them up, we're talking 25,000 sort of, right, as the vaccine rolled out in 2021, then 115,000 excess deaths, and then it gets up to 112,000. You know, you add up all of this and this is bigger than Hiroshima.
- [15:52]
Kevin McKernan
Holy shit.
- [15:54]
Unidentified Expert
And it's, you know, it's not being spoken about. Now, granted, it didn't happen in one big bang, it was a slow kill over time, but it's, it's, it's quite significant. And now the cancer side of this is a little harder to see. And the paper goes into this. So the problem with looking for cancer is it's sort of a secondary effect, like a layer 2 effect. This is excess mortality, almost. Consider this layer 1 blockchain deaths, if you will. Lightning deaths are down here where you don't see cancer unless you survive the first assault. The people who are comorbid and weak up here and got vaccinated and died. Unless you survive that, you might fall into this cancer bucket. And the cancer buckets are much normal. But what's really interesting about the cancer data is the types of cancers completely switched. They used to have a flavor of different dominant cancers before the vaccine and then after the vaccine, not only is there excess mortality, that's like 7,000, 5,000 extra year or 7,000 extra year, the types of cancer have completely changed. That's a sign of a new toxin, which really supports. There may be some causality here. The other thing that actually I have a thread on this that I think you read and will forward to your audience that I think is interesting because if you feed papers like this into ChatGPT and ask it, what do you think of it, its initial response will probably be, based on what it's reading in the news, safe and effective. It will say. This paper doesn't really satisfy all the Bradford Hill tenets of causality. There are these nine tenets in the literature you look for to try to prove an association is causative. And we'll touch on a few of those. But one that's really important is temporality. It has to happen within close proximity. That's in fact happening. You can see on this graph here, when the doses come out, the X source mortality goes up. So the Time domain is satisfied in this, but the other thing it looks for is is there a dose response curve? And you can see from this data that there is, because the magnitude of the excess mortality is the same out at the sixth and seventh dose. Even though only 13% of the population are getting it up at that time. There's a cumulative amount of damage that's going on that is maintaining this level of xsource mortality, which may persist for many more years for all we know. When you point these things back to ChatGPT and say, hey, all right, well now that we've measured these other components, what do you think? You can eventually get ChatGPT to come to the conclusion that this is a train wreck and it needs to be pulled. But you won't get it the first time you ask it. That's the important thing with some of these AI tools is they will be biased toward the consensus in the media until you start to point out some of the logical inconsistencies that exist there. But the types of cancer they're seeing pre jab were lung, colorectal, stomach and liver. And post jab this all switched to ovarian, prostate, leukemia, pancreatic and lip, oral and pharyngeal. And they point out that these are more estrogen receptor based mutations or types of cancers. And that makes sense because there is literature out there showing spike protein having an impact on estrogen receptors. So there's some coherence to the argument as well. There's a mechanism that is plausible that fills another tenet of Bradford Hill. But this gives you a feel of distributions of the people who got them. So 80% received one dose and then it decays. 67, 46, 30, 20 and 13 received their third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh doses. And gives you size of the number of people that were infected versus how many doses they handed out. So they are doing a nine to one dosage for the number of people who got Covid versus number of jabs they took. So it is one of the most vaccinated countries out there, I guess a very, very compliant culture. There is some discussion in there about lockdowns that they notice. Okay, during lockdowns they stopped screening for a period of time and some cancers did tick up there during that timeframe, but they've accounted for that in the study and they can see that as a result of that the people came in at a later stage in cancer and the mortality was higher because of that six month window where they slowed down on the screening. But that's often A complaint in a lot of these studies is, hey, is it just the lie? Is it just the fact that during lockdowns we didn't screen enough? And there's two things that argue against that. One, the flavor of cancers are switching to cancers they wouldn't have been screening for. So they would have missed those initially anyway. And it's hitting younger demographics you don't normally screen for. So we can't write this off as people stop going to the hospital for six months to a year. There's just too much different data there to contradict that. The last thing I was going to point out is they do go on. They mentioned about the DNA contamination being one of the concerns. They Talk about this IGG4 class switch that goes on. They talk about this estrogen receptor activity with Spike. There's also been stuff published showing that spike inhibits P53 and perhaps BRCA1. And of course, the DNA contamination comes to their radar as well, showing that, okay, we have sequences in here that are known to be hypermutability elements, and they're known to bind to P53 and they're known to push DNA into the nucleus and the known to trigger CGAs sting. These four things really mean the excess DNA that's mainly in Pfizer, more so in Pfizer than Moderna, is one of maybe six different mechanisms of potentially driving cancer. To your question about simply, can I explain this like someone's five? Sorry, that's not simple. It's unfortunate that these things are. They've got many. It's a Swiss army knife of cancer. They've got many different ways where they are disrupting your immune system to the point where cancers reemerge and we don't have it totally pinned down and which mechanism is the main driver of it. And I don't think we will for a while now. I'm hopeful that with RFK in there, and maybe even with Marty Macari and Jay Bhattacharya, if they get in and start organizing the FDA and nih, respectively, they may in fact put a bigger focus on. All right, let's figure out this mechanism. What is it? Why is this occurring? The tumors that we're now seeing do match the biodistribution of the vaccine. That was the other point is if you look at where the LNPs go, they go to the bone marrow, they go to the ovaries, prostate, pancreas. They also go to the liver. And the liver, surprisingly, isn't one that popped up in here. I was expecting the liver to be in the post jab thing because you do see a lot of the LNPs going there. But some of these things are matching the biodistribution of where the LNPs go. So it makes sense that, okay, we expect tumors where the vaccine tends to accumulate.
- [23:14]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. And so focusing on this, the pre jab versus post jab cancer profile in Japan specifically, you said it attacks the estrogen system in individuals. And this may be a naive question, but is it affecting women more than men since they're more dependent?
- [23:33]
Unidentified Expert
That's a good question. I didn't see them split them down by sex in that study, but no, there's prostate cancer in there and there's ovarian cancer in there. So I don't know that we have a higher adverse event actually. Adverse events, males versus females. That's a question probably for Jessica Rose and John Bowdoin. I don't think there's a huge sex bias there. And then on the cancer front, I don't think I have an answer for that either. But it's possible based on that biology that maybe there is some tumors are going to be more frequently in women than men.
- [24:07]
Kevin McKernan
Sup, freaks? Do you have a credit card? Are you getting cash back or airline points or points for some other service? Guess what? Those are shitcoins. You want to be stacking bitcoin? I have some groundbreaking news for you. The team at Fold has finally released the bitcoin rewards credit card. They have a wait list gonna be distributing the cards later this year. So you want to get on the wait list. Fold plus members are gonna get unlimited 2% Bitcoin back on this credit card. If you get on the wait list, they're up to $200,000 in prizes. They're going to be given out. So get on it as quickly as possible. Go to TFTC IO fold and get on the wait list there. If you're on the waitlist, you have the potential to win some of the prizes. Check it out. Sup, freaks? This rip of TFTC was brought to you by our good friends at Bitkey. Bitkey makes bitcoin easy to use and hard to lose. It is a hardware wallet that natively embeds into a two or three multisig. You have one key on the hardware Wal key on your mobile device and block stores a key in the cloud for you. This is an incredible hardware device for your friends and family or maybe yourself who have bitcoin on exchanges and have for a long time but haven't taken a step to Self custody because they're worried about the complications of setting up a private, public key pair, securing that seed phrase, setting up a pin, setting up a passphrase. Again, BitKey makes it easy to use, hard to lose. It's the easiest zero to one step, your first step to self custody. If you have friends and family on the exchanges who haven't moved it off, tell them to pick up a BitKey. Go to BitKey World, use the key TFTC20 at checkout for 20% off your order. That's BitKey World code TFTC20. It's fascinating that just the profile of, I don't want to say endemic, but what was the average distribution of the type of cancer in Japan completely switched because of this. And as you said, it's because the spike protein is aggregating, congregating in these areas in the body.
- [26:11]
Unidentified Expert
And when you look at these bio distribution studies, there are certain tissues that the LNPs tend to accumulate in and it's the bone marrow and spleen, liver, and then ovaries, prostate. So that's one explanation for it. And the second explanation could be the biology of those tissues. Maybe there's more estrogen receptor expression there. I don't know that offhand. But the other person who saw this, John Bowdoin, is a good person to have on. He noticed the same thing happened between 2020 and 2021 when he went through the death records. So he basically foiled all the death records in Massachusetts. I think he's done it for a couple other states now too, like Minnesota and Vermont. And that gives you the cause of death. And they're not HIPAA protected. So you can then take those people, find them in vaers and de anonymize vaers and come to realize that a lot of the people that are written down as having died from COVID are really vaccinated, that the morticians and the medical examiners just committed fraud on those. But when you do that, you can see that a couple things change from the virus. There's definitely death from the virus. He's got that calculated. But as you move from 2020 to 2021, the age demographic of the people dying goes down by like a decade or more. And the way in which they're dying changes dramatically. It starts shifting from respiratory ailments into pulmonary embolisms into acute kidney failure. The smallest blip on his dot or on his radar is like myocarditis, which is the thing that's in the news. They're all, I think they've elevated myocarditis as this thing that, hey, look, there's a problem with the vaccine called myocarditis, but you might get it from the virus, too, so take it anyway. Right? That's been kind of their excuse. That's a harder excuse to put on kidney injury. Acute renal failure is something that's. I think he mentioned very recently. It's like 150 times higher than myocarditis in the data that he has. So that's a screaming signal that occurred concomitant with the vaccine rollout. There was a small amount of it before with COVID but not nearly as extreme. There is some treatment options they have out there that destroy kidneys. So remdesivir is one. But it's not just remdesivir alone. It's like, from his data, it looks like it's Remdesivir plus maybe vancomycin, plus maybe a host of other things that cascade you into kidney failure if you have a bad treatment protocol. But once you're vaccinated, all of your outcomes get worse through those protocols. And so as the vaccines roll out, this thing gets amplified to a higher and higher degree. But I think he has some of the strongest data, and he works closely with Edoubt as well. They have some of the strongest data on exactly what's going on with these vaccines. And if they want to go in and audit. I think I saw RFK mention this recently about, hey, let's go in and finally get the tracking databases for these injuries under control. There's some truth to that that would be helpful to get it. Be very transparent. But the complaint you'll hear from people in this field is we have all the data we need to yank these. No one's doing it. You look at vaers, there's 38,000 deaths in there that should have been pulled when you hit 50. So there's already data there. Yeah, we have too many hurdles for physicians to put stuff in there. They think it might only be getting. May have a 40% under or 40 fold under reporting factor, 30 to 40, the numbers I hear from Jessica. So that means for everyone that's in there, you got to multiply those numbers by 30 or 40. So, yeah, we should have a system that accepts this data transparently. Everyone can see it, and there isn't friction at the hospitals, like some people were getting or getting terminated for reporting these things. So there's obviously a motivation against speaking out about these things. So all that should get cleaned up. But what I don't want to see happen is all right, let's spend two years building a better vaers and then we'll think about maybe pulling these because you've got everything you need now. And the people, if they want to rebuild it, are like John Jessica and get people in there like endowed and ethical skeptic. They will run circles around these people like the freaks we have in Doge and build something in a matter of months as opposed to years.
- [30:24]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. And I think what the Japanese study shows in combination with the temporal alignment that you mentioned earlier, I think the smoking gun here to say, hey, maybe we should pause and think about this is this changing of the cancer profiles or distribution of types of cancer across certain demos. And if you can tie the cancers that are now prominent that previously weren't with where the, the spike protein is congregating and accumulating in the body, that should be correlation isn't causation. I know you had to fight ChatGPT and give it more context to admit that maybe there's something here, but I think a, a complete shift in the profile of the most common cancers in one of the most developed countries in the world and the cancers that are beginning to surface post vaccine are provably where the vaccine is accumulating in the body should be reason enough to say, hey, maybe we should.
- [31:32]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, so that's an important point. There was another. So another part of another. One of the tenets that it was, it was complaining about was, well, you need to have this in more than one study. What are other studies that kind of validate this? Orthogonal data sets, if you will, to fulfill some of these Bradford Hill tenets. And an important one from Ed Dowd, who he's been banging the table on, is that if you ask ChatGPT, okay, so there's new cancers that are emerging. What are the drug sales for those new cancers? Are they up or down? And it goes through market data and pulls them out that, okay, yes, particularly drugs that are used to treat leukemia are up 20%. So going down the list, there are some chemotherapeutic agents that are really tailored for particular tumors. And so you can dissect the pharmaceutical revenue streams based on the tumor profiles and see if they match that change. And they do. And so that's sort of another orthogonal data set that's independent of peer review and all the horseshit that goes on over there. It's like, no, this is actually real market data. People buying things. And these guys are held to SAC guidelines, which means they can't be falsifying these data in terms of their product sales. So if all of those types of blood cancers are on the rise and we're getting leukemias, this is a sign that. Another data point that I think builds on the thesis. And then the third thing you can look at is their M and A activity, their mergers and acquisition activity. They're out buying leukemia companies. Pfizer dropped 2 billion on Trillium and 30, 43 billion on CGEN. So they're on a M and A frenzy for cancer companies right now.
- [33:16]
Kevin McKernan
That is disgusting, isn't it?
- [33:18]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, it's this conveyor belt of crime. It's very, you know, manufacture the crisis and come and have the solution ready for it. And you know, and it's been going on longer than we know. But even, even the fact that like Fauci, it comes back to some of the same people, right, Like Fauci is involved in laundering the money, the who to create a virus. That chain reacts all of this madness to the vaccine which they have a royalty stream for to pharma contracts that then next thing you know, they're buying cancer companies and coming out with cancer vaccines to treat the mess they created with the MRNA vaccines. It's one large fiat grift.
- [33:56]
Kevin McKernan
This trip is brought to you by our great friends at Unchained. As Bitcoin's role in the global financial landscape evolves, understanding its potential impact on your wealth becomes increasingly crucial. Whether we see measured adoption or accelerated hyper Bitcoinization, being prepared for various scenarios can make the difference between merely participating and truly optimizing your position. This is important, freaks. This is why Unchained developed the Bitcoin Calculator, a sophisticated modeling tool that helps you visualize and prepare for multiple Bitcoin futures beyond traditional retirement planning. It offers deep insights into how different adoption scenarios could transform your wealth trajectory. What sets this tool apart is the integration with the Unchained ira, the only solution that combines the tax advantages of a retirement account with the security of self custody in any future state. Maintaining direct control of your keys remains fundamental to your Bitcoin strategy. Go explore the potential futures@ Unchained.com TFTC Bitcoin is going up. Make sure you're protecting it the right way. Make sure you have a good partner that is unchained. Go to unchained.com tftc going back to like we're going to create dedicated mRNA vaccines for the cancer that you get caused by the previous MRNA vaccine. Is there a feedback like a compounding Feedback loop that sort of completely destroys everybody's immune system. How many different MRNA vaccines?
- [35:14]
Unidentified Expert
I'm pretty sure they would love that, right? I mean, the evil thing on all this, and I don't know if they're this smart, maybe they are. Some of the things you're finding them do with the money on usaid, you think, God, that's just an overt way of laundering money. But if they have, this comes back to it wasn't Parker, it was Preston Pesch, I think was going through the Doge money. And what a small sliver this is. As great as it is, maybe there's 44 billion in USAID. So when you look at all of the mess going on, it's not going to change the state of the US Bankruptcy maybe great for bitcoiners, as you guys were saying, right? But you really got to get into HHS and you got to get into Medicaid and Medicare because the numbers start going into the trillions in those areas. Obviously the Pentagon. But if you can, I don't have much faith that you can investigate the Pentagon without being filled with lead. So the other agencies might be a little bit more docile. So the one area that's going to kill the budget of Social Security. Security. And so if they can lower lifespan with these things, they get a twofer on this. You basically can trim down your Social Security payouts by killing that population off at the same time, while you're trimming it back, you accelerate estate taxes. So all these people die. If they're boomers, maybe 30, 40% of their net worth gets sucked up into probate or into inheritance tax and you pull that money forward while you clip off your Social Security obligations. So there are some areas, I think in the budget that are prone to this type of capture. And it may not require some nefarious mustache twitching evil villain to do it. It might just be the output of something that has these types of incentives. When the government is control of your death date and they're also in control of your retirement, bad outcomes will emerge. That system might just get optimized to shorten lifespan and pay less money out.
- [37:19]
Kevin McKernan
Now you're getting into crazy conspiracy theory, the government's trying to kill us.
- [37:23]
Unidentified Expert
Yes, right. That's the thing is you don't like to go there. But the thing is you don't need a person who's retching their fists in the back trying to plan all this. If you have bad incentives in place for government, which invariably most government incentives are always bad, it'll push economic incentives in the wrong direction such that they're life destroying as opposed to life saving. We're seeing this with the birth rate going down in a lot of our countries and everyone's rightfully raising the point that if we continue on this trend we'll be like Japan, we'll be inverted. And that's probably an artifact of inflation. People can't afford to have a lot of kids because things are. The price of raising them is escaping them faster than their income.
- [38:09]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, well, I mean, speaking of whether people are consciously delaying family formation because of the hamster wheel they're on with the fiat monetary system. Did the Japanese study jump into fertility rates? Because that's another thing I'm curious about.
- [38:27]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, I mean that's going to be a mess for them. They can't afford any defects there. They already have a problem with demographic inversion, so that's a nightmare for a lot of these countries. Of course, it's probably precisely what a lot of these socialist Malthusians want is to lower the carbon footprint on the Earth. Not recognizing the basis behind prosperity has nothing to do with carbon. But I'm sure there's other papers. I know Naomi Wolf has focused a lot on that and, and I wonder who else has got some studies on fertility. But it's certainly impacting fertility rates like that we are seeing. Even when they combed through those Pfizer files, there was a really high spontaneous abortion rate in the vaccinated and then they never really tested that population. They excluded pregnant people from the trial and did some bullshit study afterwards to try to justify it. Never really reported the data and said, yeah, it's safe for women, for pregnant women. And then now that the Pfizer data is released, they can comb through that and see that now this is a horrific idea. And they're still injecting them into nine month olds too. I think Marty Macri was actually, I saw one of his videos circulating where he was like this was. He was pointing out like, this is bad, we can't be doing this. But in the same breath, no one's getting him off the childhood schedule. That's what gives them the largest liability waiver. Once it's on the childhood schedule, it is liability free permanently.
- [39:57]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, it's really messed up. I mean, you're focused on the research side, but are you seeing anybody in the medical community, like doctors, PAs, whatever. It may be beginning to ring the bell and consciously saying we shouldn't be giving this.
- [40:11]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, they have been persecuted. It's been part of the problem. And I did have more reach out to me this last week because we had a successful case with Dr. Hoff up in Canada. So he was one of the people speaking out very early on. And the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia went after him to publicly hang him out to dry and drag him through a court case for multiple years. And we finally prevailed in that by just. We had probably eight people step up the bat, from Peter McCullough to Pierre Corey, myself, Jessica Rose, Dr. Thorpe, long list of people who submitted evidence against their evidence. They tried to tell the court that only their evidence was real evidence and they couldn't accept anyone else's evidence. And then we pointed out all their conflicts of interest. I think it was an arbitration hearing, not a court. But either way they tried to send around papers suggesting that why conflicts of interest are good to justify why they all had connections to pharma while they were putting out a really biased slant on the data. Eventually that got turned down and then they finally folded and it was right around when RFK was getting confirmed. So I think maybe they saw the writing on the wall right as the USAID data got blown up too. Some of that money may be tracked back to them. We'll have to see. I think a lot of these medical boards we're going to find have money coming from some of these USAID organizations that were trying to. What was it called? Lsd. It was something like large scale social deception program that was funded by Reuters. The Reuters guy, the CEO of Reuters, is on the board of Pfizer. So I'm really curious to know what his large scale social deception plan was. And I think we're going to see that there's money going into these groups that are going around harassing people to maintain this vaccine narrative.
- [42:02]
Kevin McKernan
Well, I mean we saw during RFK's confirmation hearings with Warren and Bernie lambasting him and that was the other thing, the sneaky thing. I mean I've done some research on this after the fact, but obviously Bernie was adamant he's never received a dollar. But then you look into it and it looks like there's shell packs and shell LLCs that can have money funnel from pharmaceutical companies to the, the coffers of these politicians campaigns and maybe not.
- [42:30]
Unidentified Expert
Directly in his hand, but it's in an account he can control somewhere. Yeah, yeah. Elizabeth Warren too got rightfully jammed up on all that with all of her moral outrage over. She was even trying to get him to promise to never investigate the vaccines, never build a new database. Why Would you do that?
- [42:54]
Kevin McKernan
That's what I'm trying to figure out. Is that a strong positive signal at the pharmaceutical industry and those who have been sucking from their teeth, whether that's in the political media, financial world, are truly scared that the jig is up. RFK is in. We're going to get. We're going to get some. Some closure or actual good information. Have an honest conversation about what's been happening here and. Or is it. And you alluded to it like the. The shift and from public positioning leading up to the election was Maha, Make America Healthy Again. Let's focus on food, exercise, all of that. And I've heard theories that. That in two directions. One, that it's a complete distraction where you sort of limited hangout the public and like, yeah, we're gonna make everybody healthy.
- [43:43]
Unidentified Expert
Red dye number three is gone.
- [43:44]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, yeah. Like limited hang out there. Like, yeah, we'll make. We'll get rid of the red dye, we'll make sure kids are exercising and we'll change the food pyramid. But we're not going to approach the vaccines. Or was that sort of a tempered political stunt too? Get attention and conversation away from the vaccines until he's confirmed, after which point he can bring it back up. That's yet to be seen.
- [44:08]
Unidentified Expert
That's yet to be seen. And I hope they bring it up in terms of. In the larger context. It's not just about ivermectin and vaccines. This drug war has been going on long before COVID and all of these other generic drugs that they accuse of being recreational drugs are actually very threatening to the pharmaceutical industry. You can see paper after paper coming out with psilocybin on depression, where they use a single dose and they reverse depression in these people. That doesn't happen on any ssri. There isn't suicidal ideation with that approach. There's pathways with psilocybin that connect to cancer as well. I know people who have reversed their cancer with psilocybin. They've presented their cases at CanMed, the conference we run. And then, of course, the cannabinoids play an important role in the whole fentanyl. An opioid epidemic, which is a very significant epidemic. I mean, in general, Make America Healthy Again can't just be about nutrition. It's got to be about medical death. Basically iatrogenic death, because that's the highest cause of death. It's right up there in the top three, depending on the country, is that the prominent number of people out there are dying from medicines prescribed by their Physicians, Really?
- [45:24]
Kevin McKernan
It's a top three cause.
- [45:25]
Unidentified Expert
Yes. Yeah. You'll check it. Have to check it out in your country. I could be wrong and given, you know, Canada versus the States, but I think in the States, it's in the top five. It's. It's like heart, you know, cardiac issues, cancer, and then iatrogenic death. Medical. Medical death. And some of that starts with the opiate epidemic, because they hand out opiates, people get addicted on them. And you get, like 100,000 deaths a year now from opiates, because after they trim you off of their oxycodone, they end up going to the street, and then in the street, nothing's tested and sometimes gets spiked with fentanyl and they die. But there's, you know, there's loads of literature out there on people reducing their opiate intake by replacing it with with cannabinoids. And the pharmaceutical giants all like to chastise cannabis as. No, it's a gateway. It's a gateway drug to our drug. They think they'd like that. But. But they. They'll always be pointing out that you, you know, people start smoking, then they. Then they do. Then they do heroin. Right. But the reality in the data is much different than that. If you look at the studies that try to get people off of opiates, the cannabinoids are more effective than methadone. And they've already agreed to use methadone, which is another opiate, to try and get people off of opiates. So they don't have a problem with drug replacement concept. They have a problem with which drug you're replacing it with. It's got to be one of theirs. So there is a massive war on these types of drugs that dates back back long before COVID that are playing a really, really big role in America's health. And I just want them to be able to get a lot of those things out of the FDA's hands and legalized. Because the train record they have in the cannabis space right now is the US Postal Service is now the largest trafficker of illicit cannabis.
- [47:09]
Kevin McKernan
I saw you tweeting about this.
- [47:10]
Unidentified Expert
Yes. Yeah, they legalized hemp. Mitch McConnell did this. Of all people. The guy wheeled that guy up in a wheelchair to vote against rfk that was livid watching this guy because he signed the hemp bill, which basically legalized hemp. And what everyone's doing is they're putting all these kitchen cannabinoids that they make in their basement that we've never tested before. We don't know how well they work. We don't know whether they cause psychosis. And all these things that have been studied by the phytocannabinoids and those guys are banked. They can ship across state lines. They sell them to gas stations without age checks to kids. So if you go into like gas stations, you see hemp products. Don't assume it's CBD. It's probably like Delta 8 or THCP somebody.
- [47:50]
Kevin McKernan
It's all Delta 8.
- [47:51]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, yeah, Delta 8. You know, I'm not as too crazy about, you know, Delta 8 is supposed to be less potent than Delta 9, but. But the thing is, oftentimes when they go and test those things that are labeled Delta 8, they find there's like THCP in there, which is like 30 times more potent than THC and all these other random peaks on our HPLC. We don't know what they are. So it's really like little Jesse Pinkman's garage where they're just selling all types of crap into that marketplace. And now that market is actually bigger than the cannabis market. It's like 25 billion a year is now getting funneled through this hemp market across state lines. But I'm somewhat suspicious. Another tin hat theory, mine is that pharma wants that to happen. They want there to be a shit show in the hemp market so that the public loses interest in the cannabis legalization. They start questioning it because they're going to associate all of that disaster with cannabis because they're just taking hemp and spraying crap on it and spicing K2 and selling it to kids and it's going to piss off all the parents as the kids start running into this stuff.
- [48:56]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, no, I mean, that's what I was going to. It has been astonishing over the last two, three years seeing how normalized these hemp products are in gas stations. Like, I can't walk into the gas station with my kids and they're like selling pot.
- [49:08]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah.
- [49:09]
Kevin McKernan
Behind the. Or quote unquote pot. And that guy around. I smoked quite a bit of pot in high school and college and. Yeah, well, that or. But if what it wasn't real, like spice, the salvia stuff. I remember that. That was like, you're like smoking. I never did it. But like the, the athletes that would play college sports and they got drug tested, like they would exactly fall back. They would fall back on that.
- [49:33]
Unidentified Expert
And y. A lot of the gas station stuff doesn't trigger the THC tests.
- [49:38]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah.
- [49:39]
Unidentified Expert
That's the motivation for it.
- [49:40]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. But the Reactions were way different.
- [49:45]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, I think that's contaminating a lot of the schizophrenia literature as well. All these schizophrenia papers basically, look at, look, we looked at cannabis users and non cannabis users like, well, did you chemotype any of the cannabis to know if it was really cannabis or this other crap? And they don't know, they don't care. Their job is to just put a huge shadow on top of the cannabis industry to get people to put the brakes on. But the sad thing is we're seeing those compounds work in cancer, we're seeing them work in the opiate epidemic. And the opiate epidemic, that's something that's going to grow to probably be 100 billion a year if it's not already there and it's going to perpetuate forever. It's not like it's a vaccine market that comes in a three year wave and then disappears and you got to make a new one. The opiate market is a perpetual market as big as the vaccine play was for Covid. And so there's an enormous concern, I think, sitting in the pharmaceuticals balance sheet, that, okay, if the cannabinoids come in and knock out 50% of the opiate usage, then they got a major problem. And then you see them getting used in cancer and all these other things that can address some of the mess they created with the vaccines. And it's, it's a complicated thing that I'm not certain the Trump administration yet has their head around, because seeing who they put in charge of the DA and what they're signaling to treat the Mexican cartels as terrorists and it's like, you got to fix the banking crisis here in the states. I mean, you have the only tested chain of cannabis debanked and you have the one that's doing all this Jesse Pinkman stuff, banked. That's where they're going to run out of the drugstore. They're going to run all through the hemp market and you're going to be. And I wouldn't be surprised if there's certain politicians have their fingers in that pie.
- [51:33]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, it's been very confusing here in Austin, Texas, because I think cannabis is still.
- [51:39]
Unidentified Expert
You guys are medical, but not rec, right?
- [51:41]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. But despite that, there's been smoke shops.
- [51:45]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, that's from the farm bill. So they call it red weed because all the red states are who they feed. The states that haven't legalized rec get fed hemp and predominantly makes its way into the Republican states that haven't yet done it. This is Actually screwed up in Florida, too. Desantis and Latipo, who I know and respect from the COVID era, got this backwards. They put the brakes on recreational cannabis, which would have been taxed and safety tested, and that just let the hemp market come in into smoke shops. It was already there. I mean, they've got hundreds of thousands of smoke shops in Florida selling these hemp pens in there. But it's really bizarre that they have the taxes set really high at 30% or more. So the black market's never going to go away when you have taxes that high, it's going to just persist. So they have to crank the taxes down to ethanol, which seems to be with alcohol at least. There isn't a huge black market of moonshine anymore. People might do it as a hobby, but, you know, it's the taxes there are small enough that there's no incentive to do it that way. But when taxes are jacked up to the levels they are in the, in the quote unquote legal cannabis market, the black market can run circles around those people. They don't have the overhead.
- [53:00]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, I mean, we have a high end. I'm guessing it's a. Would you call it a red hemp or.
- [53:05]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, Red State hemp.
- [53:06]
Kevin McKernan
Red. Red State Hemp shop right around the corner from where I'm recording right now. That's like, again, like, I'm happy we're having this conversation. I'm like, did they legalize wheat here? And like.
- [53:16]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, but it's obviously Mitch McConnell kind of did, and I don't. And most of the. I think people who are still fighting against cannabis legalization in Texas probably don't know that. They've not been into one of those shops to see what the hell they're selling.
- [53:29]
Kevin McKernan
No, they're. They're marketing like we've got. There's one that just came out called Doobies on. On South Lamar. They're popping up all over the place. But it's not real cannabis.
- [53:40]
Unidentified Expert
No, no, no. Yes, it's they. They grow. They do grow hemp, which has below 0.3% THC in it, but then they spray it with something else. They put HHC on it or thcp. The other thing they can do is take CBD from the plant, treat it with an acid, and that will turn it into Delta 8. That's another common trick they do. The only challenge there is when they treat it with an acid. All these other chemical reactions happen on the compounds that are in the plant that, that, that show up on the hplc, we don't know what those are. There's a couple that have circulated, like THC acetate is one that's really nasty. That's out there. That one in vape pens, forms ketens and is a carcinogen. So some of these things are going to backfire on the industry if they don't get it all strained out. But it's a real question as whether or not RFK Jr. The Trump administration are going to see this as a priority. They clearly have the drug war as a priority, but I don't think they understand the things that they're doing that are enabling it, that need to be altered or reversed. They're never getting rid of it with it being debanked. That's just inviting cash and less transparency. As long as they have this two tier regulatory structure where you have a complete hall pass on one market that has zero accountability and zero testing, and then you kneecap the industry that's trying to do the right thing, it's going to be, it's going to be a mess.
- [55:08]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, no, I'm happy we dove down this, this rabbit hole because I've been observing your back and forth with Alex Berenson, which feels like it's been going on for years now.
- [55:18]
Unidentified Expert
Oh, yeah.
- [55:20]
Kevin McKernan
And that's because he came out, the study is like POTS driving people crazy. But now with this context, like it makes sense because, I mean, even before Mitch McConnell legalized it, like I remember back in high school, it was like, don't do spice. It's going to drive you nuts.
- [55:35]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, I think he's got a val. We don't know what those compounds do. Some of them don't even look like cannabinoids. And I have seen people have absolute crazy reactions on those things. So I'm with him on that. That, yeah, you don't want your kids having that stuff. But I don't think he has the understanding of the field to know the nuance that all the schizophrenia studies coming out aren't chemotyping the plants to know which one's which and or what compounds are in them. And there are cannabinoids in clinical trials for treating schizophrenia. So if you're not doing that, it's really sloppy work. And then there's other genetic work as well. If you look at Ziva Cooper's work, she's looked at this, and 85% of schizophrenia is deemed to be of genetic origin. So you have a genetic predisposition for it to be triggered. And the same people have a genetic predisposition for drug seeking behavior. So they're not just on cannabinoids. They tended to be smoking tobacco, alcohol, a long list of things. So it gets really hard to pin down. But the genetic information gives you some understanding of the directionality of association, is that, yes, the schizophrenics tend to use more drugs, they're trying to treat something. But there are studies showing that the schizophrenics that are using cannabinoids have better mental capacity. When they put them through these mental challenge studies, it improves their cognitive abilities. So it's a messy data set. If I were him, I wouldn't be pounding on that because that one never. The arguments never fully go 100% in his favor. There's just as many arguments being like, no, you have the cause and effect backwards here. The real risks are, I think, these pesticides that we're finding in some of these black markets, and cannabinoid hyperimucis syndrome, which we got to educate physicians on to differentiate that from cyclic vomiting syndrome. They're different syndromes and you'd be treated differently. And one truly is from thc. They've got really good genetics on that now and they know that if you abstain from thc, it goes away. So that is a threat with people taking a lot more of these things that we got to pay attention to. So it's not like cannabis is put it in the water like fluoride. It's harmless. There's a proper place and context for it to use medically and recreationally. It's not for everybody, but it is a hundredfold less toxic than the opiates that are floating around and seems to do a better job in pain. So you'd think this would rise to the top of the opiate epidemic discussions that they're having in Trump administration. But I suspect it won't, just due to it being a third rail like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
- [58:05]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. It's funny that we ended up on this train of thought too, thinking about the perverse incentives of the pharma industry as it pertains to the MRNA vaccines. And some way or another, we ended up in a completely different branch of pharma. Corruption.
- [58:20]
Unidentified Expert
Yes. Yeah, it's not new. It is been going on for 50 years. And it's just I think what happened in the pandemic is a lot more people were probably locked on their phone trying to figure out what the hell's going on and suddenly got a view to became A lot more apparent on Twitter or X as people were unveiling all of the back channel deals going on with Fauci and others. But it's always been there. It's just been an overdrive. The more the money printer runs.
- [58:50]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. And bringing this back to the study out of Japan and the MRNA vaccines, what happens if they don't get pulled off the shelves? Is there a noble point at which if we pass, this becomes a systemic immune crisis globally? Are the jabs, is shedding real? Are people who haven't been jabbed going to begin feeling adverse consequences of their neighbors going and doing it and getting more and more shots?
- [59:28]
Unidentified Expert
So there's fewer and fewer people taking them. That's perhaps a minor victory. It doesn't seem like that was the case in Japan in 2023. I mean, it decayed, but it's not over there. They still have them on a childhood schedule, which is horrible here in the States. We'd love to be able to end that, but knowing that this process may take years, I think many of the physicians are turning to how to treat this, knowing it's too late. Six billion people have been hit with this. How do we treat these people? Because we can't just wait for government to stop doing the wrong things. Pray for Bobby and hope it all works and he can accelerate that timetable, but it's not going to happen overnight, even on his watch. And so there's a lot more people looking into ivermectin, fenben, methylene blue light treatment. I mean, the bitcoin community is probably going to spearhead this because they're outside of the box thinkers that aren't all trapped in this and they care about health. So I've been digging into pathways with cannabinoids and psilocybin and ivermectin, all these things that could potentially play a role in treating the system. Spike apathy and preferably looking at things that are in fact generic, over the counter and easy for people to get, I think that's going to be required. Now, in terms of shedding, that's a bigger issue. All right, so Japan, there's a couple areas on the front people need to be aware of. Japan is playing around with the self amplifying vaccine. That's frightening. That's probably going to be a shedding nightmare. They're starting to put them into the food. As we mentioned earlier, if you cook your food, it's probably not a problem. But if they start putting this into things where people are eating it raw, I'd Start to worry about it. Like fish don't think they're going to vaccinate fish, but they're talking about doing this for all the chickens and the eggs. And I don't know where that's going to go. But there's another aspect of this that maybe Rand Paul would be interested in, which is that the people who are making these vaccines, those labs, are lab leak risks. There was a lab in Seattle that had a plasmid that they made to make a vaccine, infect all the people in the lab and escape the lab and infect their housemates. So now that was a nucleocapsid encoding plasmid. And if that nucleocapsid happens to be pro inflammatory, some AI platforms claim it is, then you've got plasmids that are leaking from labs for the people who are trying to make these vaccines that are now a biohazard to everyone in the plant vicinity. And I don't think they spread as far as viruses spread because they're spreading by. We think they're spreading through E. Coli, which requires contact and perhaps oral fecal transmission. But that's a risk I don't think anyone's thinking about. And they're all booting up hundreds or thousands of these labs to play around with different MRNA plasmids that manufacture these things. So, yeah, I think that's a part of the biowarfare and the gain of function discussions that need to be had. Just turning off gain of function research in the States didn't work last time. When you let Fauci do it, they went around it. So it's probably going to happen in China, it's probably going to happen in other countries. I guess the question that Rand Paul, I think maybe has to address is what can you do in the States to better respond to this and put restrictions on it? And there are some things they could be doing. They could have gone right when this happened and subpoenaed all of the oligosynthesis shops in the country, which are the companies that make synthetic DNA for these things. And they could have figured out where this came from probably within a month of the pandemic. And that never happened, largely because I think who is in charge of those types of resources were implicated. And so Fauci himself was never going to spearhead that type of investigation. So, yeah, when it comes to spreading, I think there's a couple things we need to think about in terms of gain of function, what the people, the labs are doing to make these vaccines and Then what are the other organisms planned to put them in? And if they're food sources that aren't cooked, then there's a concern that the vaccination can actually spread to the people that eat it.
- [63:41]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, it's fascinating. And what are your thoughts on MRNA more broadly? Is it something that we should probably stay away from? Are we ever going to be able to perfect this quote unquote technology and inject it safely into people?
- [63:58]
Unidentified Expert
Well, so it's being used in some diseases where it makes sense, where the risk of the disease is worse than the risk of what you're playing with. So Hatter is one of them where they're not making four or 4,000 letter MRNA's that requires require this complicated plasmid contaminated process. They're making micrornas which are only like 30 letters long and they can chemically do that without any plasmids and the synthesis is very clean. But even those they inject into people, they put them on immunosuppressants first, they infuse it over six hours and it's a different disease with a higher risk of fatality. So you're willing to take a little bit more risk. That's very different than what we're injecting in a couple seconds with these Mrni vaccines for, for a virus that is not maybe as pathogenic as a flu, maybe a little more. And then there's other aspects of this technology where they're using it for terminal disease. There's a Duncan paper, Duncan et al, in New England Journal of Medicine, where they take your bone marrow cells out and they transfect them with plasmids that are designed to integrate into your genome and they do thousands of times per patient. And it puts a gene into your genome that replaces the one you're missing. And these people are going to be dead by the time they're 20 if they don't do this. But they get a 10 to 10% chance of blood cancer when they put those cells back in. And that's what they saw in the study. They had about lots of integration events and 10% of them got blood cancer. But the risk reward is very different for those diseases. So I wouldn't throw the whole baby out with the bathwater. And this is going to be places where you can apply this in very targeted diseases. But they've gone crazy where they want to inject this into everybody in the population as a prophylactic for a disease that they've exaggerated. And I think that's where it's off the rails. And I even think it's going to be off the rails when they start trying to vaccinate the food chain this way. They're going to create all types of chaos inside the food chain doing this as opposed to just that's a perfect environment where you let it rip, let it burn through the chickens, let them get immune and then you're done. They're going to run and inject them all, probably immunocompromise them all and then you're going to get a bunch of other chickens diseases that pop out or bird based flus. So yeah, it's a money grab and they're throwing a lot of evolutionary biology to the wind.
- [66:18]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. Because you have people like Elon and Peter Thiel pumping the MRNA bags. And on the all in podcast, those guys talk about it in their science corner and it's like, ah, yeah, I like the way you described the risk reward in particular applications. Like if you're going to die, maybe it makes sense to try it but keep it confined there. And the fact that anybody trusts any of this based off of what we just went through from 2020 to up until today, still on the schedule for many people, is insane to me. Especially being aware of the corruption that is wrought throughout the pharmaceutical industry and how the sort of revolving door between D.C. and these pharma companies, the FDA, the World Health Organization, whatever it may be, is so blatant obvious. And I mean that's to get the Maha movement sort of credit where credit is due. Like, yes, we should get like we should be focused on preventative. Like we need to really shift the conversation from let's make it so the country is healthy enough where you don't get sick, where you don't need these pharmaceuticals. And as you've pointed out, the incentives are just all out of whack. And so nobody in big Pharma or in D.C. is backed by big pharma wants that to happen. And that's why I'm very happy to be having you on the show. It's like, I think broadly speaking, we need this conversation to sort of pierce the bubble of D.C. and Big Pharma and just everybody get on board with where we probably shouldn't over index on these quote unquote cutting edge technologies to engineer health for ourselves. Let's focus on actually being healthy so we don't have to depend on all this.
- [68:08]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, they are not, when you see them attacking all the generics, you know, it's a land grab, it's a complete money Grab. And then you see that. And then all the Democratic Republicans vote against making America healthy again. And you go right down the list and see all the donations they're getting. I mean, who was it? I think it was Elgato Malo that said it best. He's like, I always knew they were getting bought by pharma. I just didn't realize how cheap their price was. That's the crazy thing.
- [68:40]
Kevin McKernan
It's like one and a half million dollars to buy.
- [68:41]
Unidentified Expert
You're like, oh, my God, that's how cheap it is to sell you out to pharma. Jesus. Yeah. So it's widespread and it doesn't stop there. The journals are getting it. There's some evidence, there's going through peer review for this that there's money going to the peer reviewers. It's just the whole thing has been a controlled Truman show on what you should be taking for a given ailment. And everything that you can grow in your backyard is systematically annihilated through propaganda. And you say it like things.
- [69:16]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, I guess the saving grace. And it is. I mentioned we want this conversation to Pierce D.C. and it seems like it is happening. I think the movement to. And the focus. The movement from treating diseases to preventative. Preventative actions in terms of living a healthier lifestyle, eating better has been material. And that was. I was talking to Matt Odell about this last week, actually. Like, the red dye getting banned was basically like the last step. Apparently a lot of companies have already been removing red dye because of a market reaction of people just like, becoming aware that it was bad for them and stop. They stopped buying products with it. We're seeing it with seed oils as well. The number of restaurants popping up here in Austin and around the country that are publicly planning the flag and saying, we don't have any seed oils is increasing without any mandate from D.C. and it seems like the public is waking.
- [70:11]
Unidentified Expert
Up, or at least that tends to be. That tends to be the trend. Actually. If you look at Vioxx, you look at all these other drugs that the FDA takes them five years to get up to speed on removing. The market's already screaming about it. Three years in advance. They're the last to act. Which makes you question, why are they the regulator? And then when you look into their funding, you realize through the PDUFA act of 92, they're not a regulator. They're a marketing arm, a Pfizer. They get most of the revenue from Pfizer or the pharma companies that regulate. So they're going to defend their decision. And I think if they want to go forward with this type of regulatory architecture, which I'm in the position of more of the anarchistic position, which is the regulators never help you. In this case, maybe state level, it can work out because you have 50 different states and they all compete for different forms of regulation. But I think when you get to the federal size, it becomes one neck to bribe and they all get captured. And so the best thing, I mean you can see at least in flight, there seems to be at least a different agency responsible for looking at tragedies than the people who are approving the technologies. Right. They don't have that at the fda. So the fda, when a train wreck happens, they're not the first to sweep in and figure out the problem and fix it. They're going to deny it's there for as long as possible until perhaps there's an administrative change that forces their hand. So free markets have tools to monitor the market. I mean, you guys, everyone gets into Ubers. You don't have taxi cabin downs anymore. You trust people with your life and affect car because an app is getting reputational information on these things in real time. We have a network environment where I think we can do that with drugs as well, such that those tools will find signals and risks in the marketplace much faster than these regulators will. We just have to build them. I think for all the generics that they're trying to weed out of existence is have tools that can track these things, give us reputational scores on good providers and bad providers of these things. But a lot of this is fiat. This is fiat based. This is because they are pumping so much money into organizations, into the NIH and the niaid. They all create a particular Truman show about what drugs need to be taken, for what purposes. And the deeper you look into this, you realize most of it's a facade.
- [72:36]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, it really is. And to your point about the free market solving this problem, and you mentioned earlier, like taking things to combat the adverse effects of the COVID jabs. I mean you've seen companies, I think Dr. McCullough part of when the wellness company there was another. There's another big one that's coming up and I guess they're providing that free market solution at least for accessibility and a regiment of things that you can take to either prevent things or when it comes to the spike protein, sort of despike your body or detox from that.
- [73:10]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, it'd be nice if someone experimented with like a. Remember in Honduras they had like that like economic free zone or something. We need like a medical free zone in Texas or something. Pick a state somewhere and just let people have at it without all these complicated regulations. So people aren't flying to Mexico to get stem cell treatments and FDA can't touch it and see what comes of it. Measure. I'd be curious to measure the actual adverse events or deaths from medical treatments in that zone versus what's going on in the heavily regulated space.
- [73:45]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. And actually get the data out there and let people decide instead of keeping it sort of firewalled by these medical research paper journals.
- [73:55]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah, yeah. We'll see if the new administration can do something like this. There's never been a better time. So I don't want to be down on what's going on with Mahaj. We've never had more hope. I was convinced. I mean hell, it has been gone Biden's direction or Kamala's direction, we would have had another four years of mandates. Mandated medicine is one thing in general just needs to go away. Regardless of the data. I don't care how toxic it is. You can't mandate injections or any medicine for that matter. But we're seeing happen. I think we're going to continue to see this happen. From statins to SSRIs, Alzheimer's disease. We're watching all of these things unfold that were basically little tiny Truman shows on each disease state as to. It's all about serotonin biology and we're going to use SSRIs. And it turns out that's not true. Twenty years later, after we've arguably dosed, I don't know what the percentage is in the states, but there's a high percentage of people that are on ssri.
- [74:57]
Kevin McKernan
Completely warped the minds of a whole generation. That's actually one of the bigger TikTok trends. This week after Bobby's, after he got approved to join the admin, is a bunch of women on TikTok screaming at the top of their lungs. Like, if you come after my, my antidepressants, I'm gonna, I'm gonna be very angry.
- [75:19]
Unidentified Expert
It's like, ah, you might need to take them seriously about that threat. Yeah, yeah, yeah, there's. They can, they can. It's not easy getting off those either.
- [75:30]
Kevin McKernan
Well, that's, that's like the crazy overwhelming thought is again, you have a generation that are completely medicated and dependent on that medication and they believe, they believe that they're ability to function is contingent on them being able to take These pills every day. And I don't know if Bobby's plan has ripped them off of that. I doubt it's that. But I think it is pretty clear to anybody who's able to take a step back and have some sober analysis about the situation is that these are not good for you at the end of the day, particularly when it comes to SSRIs. I would argue when it comes to mass shootings, if they're not overt false flags planned by the FBI, they're driven by SSRIs that drive people suicidal and murderous. Yeah, right.
- [76:23]
Unidentified Expert
I know that again, will never get spoken about on mainstream media. Whenever these things happen, they will blame it on liberty loving gun owners in other states that weren't even there before. They pick up the connection between the percentage of these shooters that are on SSRIs.
- [76:40]
Kevin McKernan
It's like 100%.
- [76:41]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah.
- [76:43]
Kevin McKernan
Typically or close to it. A very high percentage.
- [76:47]
Unidentified Expert
Yeah. I don't know the exact number. Last number I had heard before, but I can't cite it, was over 80%. And I don't know what journal to point people for at that number. But it's on the label. Suicidal ideation is on the label. And you can find papers that sneak through New England Journal of Medicine that show psilocybin treating this in a single treatment. And you wonder why it's illegal. That's a massive market that they have that is captured by a drug they have to take every day.
- [77:18]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah. Hopefully people are working up. I'm bullish to them. Optimistic. I hope to God that Big Pharma, that justice is served on behalf of people across the world. As it pertains to Big Pharma, I think it's one of the. The most parasitic industries in the world and that is truly harming quality of life of individuals around the world. And I hope that all the data is surfaced, all the crime is surfaced and we can finally rid ourselves of an industry. And not rid ourselves of the industry, but get the industry back to actually treating people and putting people's health.
- [77:58]
Unidentified Expert
There are good things that come out of modern healthcare. Want to be a total Luddite here? Right. I mean there's all types of heart surgery that go on that's like phenomenal. They have an incredible imaging that goes on that helps pinpoint particular things to work on. So there is positivity and technological development that comes out of it. It's just, I think when it gets into the. When you start getting politicized is where it gets really ugly. When you start Getting politicians involved in who's paying for what, it's suddenly gets turned. It's when the fiat forces show up is where it starts to go sideways. And so I don't know. That's what I try and advise people is just look at who's paying for what. If you go into CVS and you only have to pay $3 for something, you got to question how the hell is that $3 copay on something that costs thousands of dollars? How do they pull that off? Someone else is paying for it, but that usually means there's a lot of back channel deals going on.
- [79:00]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, Kevin, it's been great catching up. Is there anything we didn't cover that you think we should touch on?
- [79:06]
Unidentified Expert
No, actually I didn't expect the conversation to go this direction. So it's great. I'm glad you brought me on about the Japanese study. It turned into a bit of a full on drug war story, but if people want to catch up on that story, I have a substack that covers that paper in a little more detail. I think the more interesting, interesting part of that story was that Chat GPT was able to read through this stuff and come to very similar conclusions in a matter of minutes. And there's something going, I mean some of these tools now, chatgpt, I'm not a fan of the centralization that's going on there with Sam Altman trying to privatize it. I think that's a disaster. But if you spend enough time on that platform and ask it lots of questions about ethics and morality and really probe it, the platform will give you deeper and deeper answers the more questions you ask. And it will even I challenge people to probe it on what it needs to do to decentralize itself. From Sam Altman, it will give you some very interesting answers.
- [80:02]
Kevin McKernan
You were teasing those in the, in my DMs.
- [80:04]
Unidentified Expert
I know, I haven't, I haven't posted that yet because I just, I got busy this week, my kid was sick. I couldn't, I couldn't get it out there. But I did have like a several hour discussion with ChatGPT and how to decentralize itself from Sam Altman and it's actually quite impressive. The thing it wants to link itself to Bitcoin and the energy grid and I was like, whoa. It seemed more sentient than a lot of people I know. So I'm impressed.
- [80:32]
Kevin McKernan
Kevin. Thank you. Hopefully it doesn't take us 11 months to do this again. It's great catching up. Thank you for doing the work.
- [80:38]
Unidentified Expert
Are you going to be in Prague by chance? Are you going to the. There's a bitcoin conference in Prague this year.
- [80:42]
Kevin McKernan
I will not be in Prague.
- [80:43]
Unidentified Expert
Okay, I'm hitting that one. But maybe I'll see it a different one.
- [80:46]
Kevin McKernan
That's in June, right? I don't think I can.
- [80:48]
Unidentified Expert
It is. Yeah, it's June. It's right after Canada. The Cameron conference we have, it's like right the day after. So I can only get to the tail end of that one because I'm busy in Puerto Rico. But it should be fun either way if we don't see you there hopefully before 11 months.
- [81:01]
Kevin McKernan
Yeah, we'll keep crushing it, sir.
- [81:03]
Unidentified Expert
You too. Thanks for all the work on the mining area.
- [81:08]
Kevin McKernan
We're all in this together. We're in our lanes. Doing it to make the world a better place.
- [81:13]
Unidentified Expert
That's the power of being in bitcoin. Everyone's working with you and for you.
- [81:17]
Kevin McKernan
Peace and love freaks.