Alexandra Henrion-Caude is a French geneticist who was born in the UK. She is a former researcher at the French government’s Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (INSERM) and a widely respected expert on RNA.
Below is a three-part interview with Dr. Henrion-Caude that was recorded last October. In it she discusses the widespread disinformation that surrounds COVID-19, the mendacity of the media, and the likelihood that the virus was artificially modified for “gain of function”.
Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling.
Update: Due to technical problems at 3Speak, the three videos of Alexandra Henrion-Caude were lost. Vlad has re-uploaded the three parts combined into a single video:
Video transcript #1:
| 00:00 | Alex Henrion-Caude is a geneticist, RNA specialist and former research director at INSERM. | |
| 00:05 | In this excerpt from an interview given to Nexus, she unravels the charts of “covid cases” on TV. | |
| 00:10 | She believes that we are not experiencing a “health crisis” and regrets the fact that | |
| 00:14 | rather than testing “patients”, we’re testing consumers. | |
| 00:18 | This is usually how cases are presented in the media today in France. | |
| 00:25 | The situation is quite worrying, since we’re shown an exponential upward curve. | |
| 00:33 | It is indeed an exponential upward curve that we see. So now we are talking about cases. | |
| 00:37 | What are “cases”? Usually when we say “case” in English, or in our jargon, it means patients. | |
| 00:43 | Are they patients? Given the fact, as I told you, that 64% to 90% of these cases | |
| 00:48 | have no symptoms, we’re not talking about patients. | |
| 00:52 | So perhaps this curve should be made not only in relation to | |
| 00:56 | the presence of positivity, but to symptoms as well. | |
| 01:02 | So when you look at this, I really understand everyone’s terror, | |
| 01:09 | because this looks like a calamity. We’re not in control of information anymore. | |
| 01:14 | So then, what’s the reality on the only parameter that’s actually of any interest, | |
| 01:19 | since that is, once again, what determines the danger? The lethality. | |
| 01:24 | Here we have a chart showing the curve of deaths in France from February | |
| 01:30 | of this year (2020) until October. October 12, 2020. | |
| 01:34 | That means we currently are at 50-80 deaths per day in France. | |
| 01:40 | 50-80 deaths a day in France is always one too many. | |
| 01:44 | However, these are not deaths which justify any of these sanitary measures. | |
| 01:49 | Nor does it justify calling it a “health crisis”. By calling it a “health crisis”, we are lying, | |
| 01:57 | because this part is worrisome, but this part isn’t. | |
| 02:02 | That means it must be monitored. It must be checked, it must be watched, | |
| 02:06 | but it is necessary to have a reason to watch it. | |
| 02:10 | That means this doesn’t deserve any special treatment, other than | |
| 02:14 | the treatment we have for the flu or those we have for any other of the usual pathologies. | |
| 02:20 | So as soon as we have a test that works just as well as the oropharyngeal test, | |
| 02:24 | from that moment, we’ll be doing oropharyngeal tests that are obviously much easier | |
| 02:29 | to implement by laboratory technicians, they’ll be more than happy to implement this technique, | |
| 02:36 | because it is much less invasive | |
| 02:41 | and less intrusive for the non-patient consumer! | |
| 02:46 | So now that paradigm has shifted a little bit, because | |
| 02:49 | people who are tested are usually patients. | |
| 02:53 | So we go to a laboratory to verify something, for diagnosis and so on. | |
| 02:58 | But now, that’s where we are, even when you don’t have any symptoms. —So has medicine changed? | |
| 03:01 | Is it medicine or consumerism? | |
| 03:04 | Is it medicine which changed to the point where medical indicators are no longer followed | |
| 03:10 | as the law of bioethics currently does? For me, this is no longer medicine. | |
| 03:15 | We’re no longer acting according to our Hippocratic oaths. Therefore, we are in the midst | |
| 03:19 | of a change, a break in humanity’s understanding of what medicine is. |
Video transcript #2:
| 00:00 | Alexandra Henrion-Caude is a geneticist, RNA specialist, and former research director | |
| 00:04 | at INSERM. In this excerpt from an interview given to Nexus in October 2020, | |
| 00:08 | she discusses the origin of the coronavirus genome, which raises questions to whether | |
| 00:12 | it has natural or artificial origin, and she believes that, on paper, this genome was terrifying. | |
| 00:17 | Obviously from the beginning, I was interested in the sequence. | |
| 00:21 | The SARS-CoV 2 sequence presented out of the ordinary compared to | |
| 00:26 | the other coronaviruses. —Why? —Well, this virus has a certain amount of information which | |
| 00:34 | enables it to infect cells. One of these pieces of information is called the protein S. | |
| 00:41 | In fact, almost all vaccine strategies and a huge number of vaccines are based on this protein. | |
| 00:50 | Protein S is part of the information of the virus genome | |
| 00:56 | and it consists of two elements: s1 and s2. | |
| 01:01 | In all Coronaviruses s1 and s2 are side by side. | |
| 01:05 | In the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, | |
| 01:10 | they are separated by the insertion of a sequence | |
| 01:15 | which uniquely gives access to the virus | |
| 01:21 | to possibly infect human cells. | |
| 01:25 | This is what we call in our jargon the “gain of function”. | |
| 01:30 | So let’s consider that this virus | |
| 01:35 | is indeed an artificial construction: | |
| 01:41 | when you look at the sequence, it should have been very nasty. | |
| 01:45 | Much nastier than it was. | |
| 01:48 | So, in a way, that’s where we see the humility that we must have. | |
| 01:52 | That means when reduced to the sequence alone, we were right to expect lethality | |
| 01:58 | comparable to SARS or MERS, we just never reached the same lethality. |
Video transcript #3:
| 00:00 | Alexandra Henrion-Caude is a geneticist, RNA specialist, and former research director | |
| 00:05 | at INSERM. In this excerpt from an interview given to Nexus in October 2020, | |
| 00:09 | she criticizes those who claim to be guardians of the truth. She also discusses | |
| 00:13 | the origin of the virus, and she believes that the mainstream media are not trustworthy. | |
| 00:17 | Taking action perhaps means doing research and making discoveries, and then | |
| 00:21 | a moment comes where we are faced with a new situation, like the one we are living through, | |
| 00:25 | and speaking up seems to me the fundamentally approach in order to give another perspective. | |
| 00:31 | That is to say, the goal isn’t to say that I, myself, possess the truth, | |
| 00:35 | I’m convinced that no one holds the truth, but many have declared themselves | |
| 00:40 | as the guardians of this truth. I mean, very quickly things were presented | |
| 00:46 | as if we understood everything and that we had certainties and that these certainties emanate | |
| 00:52 | from a scientific consensus. —Like what for example? — Typically, the origin of the virus. | |
| 00:56 | So, the virus comes out and right away we had the story with the market, | |
| 01:02 | as you are well aware of… | |
| 01:07 | The pangolin? — The pangolin, but afterward, nope, it wasn’t the pangolin, it was the bat, | |
| 01:11 | and then after that, it was the pangolin again. | |
| 01:14 | In the end, it’s a kind of game that’s quite unhealthy, | |
| 01:18 | because it was still presented as the only story. As we say in English, the “storytelling”, | |
| 01:24 | the art of telling the story. In fact, the terrible thing about this story is that people | |
| 01:28 | were considered irresponsible and incapable of managing their own health. | |
| 01:34 | This is the exact opposite of what I think, and what I promote at SimplissimA. | |
| 01:39 | That’s what interests me right now. Looking at things through a different prism, | |
| 01:44 | because the prism of the mainstream media, of the usual media, I’ve witnessed that | |
| 01:50 | they are capable of lying about me and lying about COVID. So I can’t trust them, | |
| 01:56 | because they’re not trustworthy. |
The Hippocratic Oath clearly forbids abortion. Which is why most doctors no longer take it.
Doctors surrendered their right to be trusted when they started as a group to support and perform abortions.
Any further dishonesty is only further evidence of something that was already apparent.
Word. Read Isaiah 5: “…woe to those who call evil good and good evil.” There will come a time when these “Doctors” will hear the words: Anathema sit.
I have long contended that allopathic MD’s, trained to push pHarmaceuticals, have been taking a Hypocritic Oath rather than the Hippocratic Oath.