The doctors in the two videos below talk about alarming aspects about the way governments are dealing with the Wuhan Coronavirus pandemic.
In the first video, the French doctor Jean-François Toussaint discusses the fact that measures taken against the coronavirus are increasingly divorced from any scientific rationale.
Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:
The second video features a German MD, Dr. Weber, talking about the upcoming vaccinations against COVID-19, which will use genetically-engineered material, and will be mandatory in some countries (apparently including Germany).
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:
Video transcript #1:
| 00:02 | Last week we heard the head of the scientific council warning of the danger of — | |
| 00:07 | the expression that was used was “super contamination” — during the back-to-school season. | |
| 00:12 | Do you share that view and concern? | |
| 00:16 | We have had multiple opinions from the scientific council. They remain, for the most part, | |
| 00:21 | inconsistent. On March 12, on March 14, they authorised a number of major measures in France. | |
| 00:29 | Then on March 15, legitimately, the confinement of the whole population followed. | |
| 00:35 | We had the first notification from the scientific council | |
| 00:38 | as early as March 12, which set the tone | |
| 00:41 | for all the other opinions for which the French were responsible. | |
| 00:46 | A certain form of relaxation before the containment had been established. | |
| 00:50 | So the idea had already been established, and this idea persists in the spirit | |
| 00:54 | of the scientific council, which has become legitimate by its own existence. | |
| 00:59 | The president of the scientific council announced himself on June 7th that the scientific council | |
| 01:03 | had to complete its work in July and that it was not healthy, | |
| 01:06 | these are his words, that it was not healthy | |
| 01:09 | for a structure that was created from scratch to continue beyond the emergency resolutions. | |
| 01:14 | The council was important, but uncertain and strained at times, during moments when | |
| 01:18 | the scientific knowledge was very weak. The problem is that the consequences are gradually | |
| 01:24 | appearing more and more, because knowledge is progressing, and this isn’t taken into account. | |
| 01:29 | That leaves us with the beliefs from March 12. So we are in a world of belief which is | |
| 01:34 | increasingly less and less scientific and increasingly irrational. | |
| 01:38 | I don’t see the scientific arguments being provided for many of the decisions that have been made. | |
| 01:43 | In the beginning, decisions were made in uncertainty, and we can understand that. | |
| 01:47 | However, now we must quickly re-evaluate what we do. We have to show that others aren’t | |
| 01:52 | doing the same thing, but are having the same results. So maybe the containment was not useful; | |
| 01:56 | maybe it didn’t help in the end. The side effects of which we knew very early on, and are now | |
| 02:01 | witnessing. We know that they are long-term. This should have been anticipated. | |
| 02:05 | In addition to that — and this is where I still have a great difficulty | |
| 02:09 | hearing the current discourse, | |
| 02:12 | which is about designating a scapegoat. As always in a phase of major tension, we’ll operate | |
| 02:19 | irrationally and try to designate the scapegoat. Who is the scapegoat at the moment? Young people. | |
| 02:23 | Precautions must be based on scientifically proven elements. —OK. | |
| 02:27 | At present, we have absolutely none, for example on the usefulness of masks outdoors, | |
| 02:34 | at the end of the pandemic phase. We are currently at the end of this pandemic phase. | |
| 02:40 | Perhaps this is a first phase. Perhaps there will be others with the return to seasonality, | |
| 02:45 | which won’t a result of bad behaviour on the part of the French. | |
| 02:49 | What’s currently happening in South America? In the case that the virus returns in the fall, | |
| 02:54 | at that time it will be necessary to resume these behaviors and to show where the danger is. | |
| 02:59 | However, the danger is currently no longer present, and we continue to spread | |
| 03:03 | an irrational fear, and I would like to point out in addition… | |
| 03:06 | It’s a political health parameter to protect us. That’s all. | |
| 03:09 | I don’t believe it is just political. Primarily it is scientific, and if a committee is not | |
| 03:13 | a scientific council but more of a political health committee, we should change the rules | |
| 03:18 | that apply to the population that is being impacted by its side effects uniformly. | |
| 03:23 | The decisions that have been taken, these side effects this second half of the time that | |
| 03:26 | we will have, if we manage to blow the whistle | |
| 03:29 | at the end of the first half, so if the second half comes, | |
| 03:32 | it will be essentially social, economic and health-related, because today’s economy is | |
| 03:37 | tomorrow’s prevention and tomorrow’s health. | |
| 03:41 | We have just shown that more than sixty thousand children in the world have already died from | |
| 03:47 | the effects of general confinement. From blind confinement, that has not allowed them to have | |
| 03:51 | the necessary nutrition, to have the food intake that allows them to survive. | |
| 03:56 | In all the countries that have blindly confined people, it is clear that in all of these countries | |
| 04:01 | there is no relationship between the intensity of the confinement and the motivation behind it. | |
| 04:05 | We have had multiple opinions from the scientific council. They remain, for the most part, | |
| 04:10 | inconsistent. On March 12, on March 14, they authorized a number of major measures in France. | |
| 04:19 | Then on March 15, legitimately, the confinement of the whole population followed. | |
| 04:24 | We had the first notification from the scientific council | |
| 04:27 | as early as March 12, which set the tone | |
| 04:30 | for all the other opinions for which the French people were responsible. | |
| 04:34 | A certain form of relaxation before the containment had been established. | |
| 04:39 | So the idea had already been established, and this idea persists | |
| 04:42 | in the spirit of the scientific council, which has become legitimate by its own existence. |
Video transcript #2:
| 00:07 | What is lying even closer to my heart is this planned vaccination. | |
| 00:12 | This vaccination is… one that will most likely be a novel vaccination. | |
| 00:20 | So that you’re not vaccinated with weakened pathogens; | |
| 00:23 | rather this is a genetic manipulation. | |
| 00:27 | I don’t want to go into details, but it is genetically engineered. | |
| 00:31 | We are the ones who are genetically manipulated. | |
| 00:34 | And even the best researchers do NOT know what the outcome will be. | |
| 00:39 | Autoimmune diseases could result. | |
| 00:42 | Cancer diseases could come out of it. We will only know that in five to ten years. | |
| 00:48 | Mrs. Merkel makes the German population | |
| 00:51 | available as laboratory rats for the pharmaceutical industry, | |
| 00:55 | and that has to be said very clearly so that the last one wakes up, | |
| 01:00 | and I hope that they — that they… that the doctors finally understand | |
| 01:06 | what is happening there, and that they enlighten themselves, | |
| 01:10 | and that they educate their patients, because if they don’t do that in time, | |
| 01:14 | then they, too, will be one of the lab rats | |
| 01:17 | who will be forcibly vaccinated. |
I agree with the warning that mandatory vaccinations are the most dangerous proposal imaginable. In the first place, the death rate of the CORONA virus is, at worst, about the same as a very bad flu. It’s pretty horrible for people with previous weakening conditions, including advanced age, but not, on the average, very dangerous to healthy people under, say 70 or 75. We know for sure that school-age children are almost immune to bad effects from the virus.
The proposed vaccine is different in type from other vaccines. Other vaccines depend on stimulating the natural immune system of the body to fight the organism before it gains a foothold. The CORONA vaccine bypasses the defense mechanism of the body altogether. It goes into the DNA of the nucleus, and changes its structure so there is no foothold for the CORONA virus to take charge of the cell. So, what is the effect of this rather blind smashing of parts of the DNA structure of the cell? Who knows? The time frame of the testing is months to a year or two. But, DNA is forever. How will changing the DNA affect the immune system, the reproductive capability or the general well-being of the organism? We know that 84% of the DNA involves the brain. Will there be subtle brain changes that only become apparent after years?
The CORONA panic is being pushed for sure by Democrats, with Republicans, as usual, tagging along. Even Trump constantly talks about a vaccine. Will Trump fight any attempts to make the vaccine mandatory? Will schools require proof of vaccination to admit students? Imagine subjecting the entire youth population to a relatively-untested, DNA-altering treatment. There is no way it can have a beneficial effect on the birth rate of Americans.