If Not This, What?
I’ve been resisting this one, dear reader.
It's long and complex and important.
But we need to hear this, if only to be able to have informed consent.
Vaccines have become such a contentious issue that any criticism is heard as a threat to all of science and truth and progress in the world.
But why should any one form of medicine, or any treatment at all, be exempt from inspection and discussion?
As I’ve said before, we would never assume that all drugs are good for all people at all times.
So what’s up with the V-word?
I’ll start by saying that the greatest personal growth spurt for me during the past year has been the willingness to question my own beliefs and opinions and to put them aside in favour of the truth.
Not relative truth, but technical truth.
The sometimes inconvenient truth.
I started by happily following all pandemic protocols, including wearing a mask and locking down.
Historically, I have taken all my vaccines and still take the approved ones.
But when I look at the mainstream media and government coercion used to vaccinate everyone, regardless of natural immunity, regardless of other proven prophylactic treatments, regardless of personal choice, and regardless of valid concerns about safety, I have to wonder.
What led to the show’s 2nd YouTube strike was the interview I’m sharing today.
Dr. Weinstein is an evolutionary biologist and professional wonderer.
He questions, he probes for answers, and he’s willing to lose his main source of income from his very popular and credible podcast by risking a 3rd and final strike by YouTube.
Because questions need to be asked and answered, and very few others are willing to do that in these strange and suppressive times.
This interview will take some time and attention.
The discussion is sometimes contentious - a raw conversation about life and death decisions that are ultimately impacting all of us.
But it is essential to understanding the many issues at play in this coronacrisis.
The 2 interviewees here are Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology, and tech entrepreneur and long-time medical philanthropist, Steve Kirsch.
These men are also putting reputation and income at stake.
In the case of Dr. Malone, although he is the inventor of the technology on which he speaks, he was kicked off LinkedIn for voicing his very well-informed opinions on the vaccines.
(He has just this week been reinstated.)
Steve Kirsch has put his own money into research on early C-19 treatments and has offered $2 million to anyone willing to refute his conclusions publicly.
And both these men have been vaccinated.
The people I’m following and listening to are not some fringe group of anti-vaxxers.
They are pro-vaccine scientists and educated laypeople looking at the facts, speaking from the tops of their fields, and unwilling to sell out to protect their personal interests.
It is the mounting evidence that has had them change their minds about these vaccines.
So let’s dig in.
The first thing to understand is that this new technology is not behaving as expected.
Regular vaccines stay in the shoulder, but this one is not.
It is moving lipids to the ovaries, to bone marrow, and to other areas.
This may explain why so many women are reporting dysmenorrhea after being vaccinated.
Why miscarriages have increased dramatically for vaccinated women.
And why there is concern about reproductive issues.
“What we’ve learned is that reproductive risks don’t always manifest in the first generation. So I don’t mean to scare, but I do mean to speak honestly and with integrity. And I think the honest position is, if you were to ask me, Robert, do you know what the reproductive consequences are for this signal, I have to tell you, no, I don’t. Because we don’t have the data. And if you then ask me, has there been any examples in the past of reproductive effects of agents in female reproductive tissue that were not anticipated by the animal model testing, I would have to say, yes, there is. So, my position on all of this goes back to the bioethics….There has to be full and open disclosure….We do owe it to people.”
Dr. Robert Malone
And these are just some of the adult issues.
In children, it’s even worse.
Heart and brain inflammation are already known risks for young people, for whom C-19 poses a 0% statistical risk of death.
Here are just a few articles on these issues…
The CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Report System is overwhelmed.
The reported number of deaths is now upwards of 5000.
“That number is more deaths than for all 70 other vaccines combined over the last 30 years.”
And events are likely underreported because many doctors don’t believe their patients or don’t want to risk reprisals for sounding the alarm.
There are also reports of events being “scrubbed” from the database.
I’ve personally noticed a recent trend to discredit VAERS, though it has been a recognized database for over 30 years.
Since anyone can report, they say, these are not verified injuries and deaths.
And yet, as Dr. Peter McCullough, the most cited C-19 doctor in the US, says, there is a fair bit of paperwork to fill out that includes a warning that it is illegal to falsify a VAERS report.
But even if these numbers were exaggerated, why are we quibbling over how many people died?
Isn’t the fact that people ARE being injured and dying enough to suspend usage of these still experimental vaccines?
Put VAERS aside.
The UK’s Yellow Card vaccine reporting system has alarming findings as well.
In fact, the highly esteemed doctor and researcher, Dr. Tess Laurie, wrote an open letter to the chief executive of the UK’s Medicines and Health Care Regulatory Agency (MHRA), where she advised:
“An immediate halt to the vaccination programme is required whilst a full and independent safety analysis is undertaken to investigate the full extent of the harms.”
”The MRHA now has more than enough evidence on the Yellow Card system to declare the COVID-19 vaccines unsafe for use in humans. Preparation should be made to scale up humanitarian efforts to assist those harmed by the COVID-19 vaccines and to anticipate and to ameliorate medium to longer term effects. As the mechanism for harms from the vaccines appear to be similar to COVID-19 itself, this includes engaging with numerous international doctors and scientists with expertise in successfully treating COVID-19.”
So why, the interview participants ask, are we pushing so hard to continue with an experimental vaccine, when there are safe, proven alternatives?
This, Dr. Weinstein asserts, is the underlying story.
Why aren’t we treating people early when we know that hospitalization and death can absolutely be prevented with early treatment?
Ivermectin has 40 years of evidence, including 4 billion doses used.
But you can’t make a profit on it because it’s out of patent.
“So somehow there is enough bias in this system to shut down anything generic, cheap, and safe, and to amplify things that are dangerous, new, still under patent.”
Dr. Bret Weinstein
The real problem lies in the medical establishment’s incentivization of financial gain and limited legal liability over good science and best health treatments.
As the interview participants point out, using the argument that Ivermectin shouldn’t be used because there’s not enough evidence is hypocritical if you’re not using the same argument against waiting to use the vaccines.
But the evidence is there.
The highest standard of evidence - a peer-reviewed meta-analysis.
Dr. Laurie’s study has recently been published and confirms the FLCCC’s findings and experience…
We could be treating people early, and treating their families prophylactically.
Instead, we are ignoring sick people until they get over Covid on their own or are sick enough to be hospitalized.
“We are actually behaving in a way that propagates the pandemic.”
Dr. Bret Weinstein
There is another story in this complex discussion.
The story of the victims.
And here we come to the reason why Steve Kirsch, a silicon valley serial entrepreneur is experiencing so much outrage, and has put up his own money to fund research.
“The people who have died from this vaccine don’t have a voice. The doctors that want to speak out, cannot. Because they don’t have a voice, especially if you’ve got any kind of NIH funding, if you’re in academia, if you speak out, you will never see a dime, you will never get a drug approved again.”
“I’m trying to be a voice for the voiceless. For the vaccine victims who are ignored by the mainstream media….Who is going to be a voice for the children and speak up for them?”
Not only are vaccine injury victims faced with disbelief from the medical industry and denial from the public, but they have been censored from talking to each other.
Approximately 200 000 members of a Facebook support group had their page deleted overnight.
Where are our priorities?
Since when do we believe the pharmaceutical companies unconditionally and throw epithets and derision at the people suffering harm from their products?
There is so much more covered in this interview, and I encourage you to piecemeal it if you need to.
(It took me over a week.)
I’ve also chosen not to embed the video here, but to send you to Dr. Weinstein’s Odysee page directly, which you can go to by clicking on the image.
There, you will find links to both guest’s articles on Trial Site News, as well as timestamps for each part of the conversation...
We need to get to the truth.
Those on the frontlines and in the know, those who ring the alarm bells first, are always attacked.
As Dr. Malone says, “This is always the case when you’re at the tip of the spear.”
Like today’s video participants, I tend to think there is less conspiracy happening and more cowardice, incompetence, and self-interest.
Don’t get me wrong, there are opportunists in the game, but I suspect human weaknesses are the more prevalent players.
I have not, however, given up hope that science can still be saved.
There are too many real scientists risking reputation, income, and careers.
I also have the perhaps naive belief that truth will out.
I consider it my duty as a human being alive at this critical time in our evolution to use whatever skills I have to forward the truth, to provide information and insight that isn’t readily available to the general public so that you, dear reader, can think, decide for yourself, and act accordingly.
As Dr. Weistein says, “What choice is there?”
We must speak out.
“If not this, what? And if not now, when?”
If you found this blog useful, please hit the ❤️ button below.
If you’d like other people to have this resource, please share.
If you haven't already, please go to the BLOG page and subscribe.
If you can afford even the cost of a coffee each month, please consider a donation.
If you’ve got something to contribute, please leave a comment.