Foundation Corona Committee, 82nd meeting on December 10th, 2021
Catherine Austin Fitts (formerly Investment banker / assist. Sec. of Bush Governorate [ Homepage ], UNITED STATES)
Cathrine Austin Fitts talks about how they pushing the transhumanistic agenda
in conversation with Viviane Fischer, Reiner Fuellmich and Woflgang Wodarg
(Original language: English)
[Transcript from Team corona-ausschuss-info.com – Ed]
Reiner Fuellmich [00:02:59]
[from simultaneous translation]
I’m traveling on business. I have a job, of course, that sometimes you have to deal with. And we have a number of videos today that we won’t all show at the end, but as we go. For instance, when Hans Tolzin speaks after Catherine Austin Fitts. The others, I’ll have to take a closer look. I’ll announce them as we go, so they’re not lost by the wayside. And we’ll have to make sure that this is not the end of our session, because they’re interesting videos.
But we’ll start with Catherine Austin Fitts now. We had her before. She is the president of Solari Inc. and publishes the Solari Report, and she was also the Assistant Secretary of Housing and– federal housing commissioner at the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. She was during the Bush administration, that is a– Assistant Secretary. And now she is managing director and member of the board of directors of the Wall Street investment bank Dillon Read and Company. We have heard a lot about the untruths for instance, that the PCR test can’t determine an infection, that we have a mortality rate of point 5 percent.
But we know that the measures taken to combat corona are having a huge impact, both social, medical psychological. And the question is how come? Have people become crazy? And Catherine Austin Fitts will tell us something about this.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:04:54]
[transcription from original English]
…so they would speak German at the dinner table when they didn’t want me to know what they were saying.
Reiner Fuellmich [00:04:59]
It was just a short introduction, but since we– since you’ve been on our show already, I didn’t need to go into any detail. So let’s go right ahead.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:05:09]
Right. But before we go ahead can I just thank you. This is my second time appearing, but I’ve watched many of your interviews, and I have to say doing this
open-source investigation, you know, we all feel we’ve been on a journey with you. And it’s been incredibly, incredibly productive, and I can’t– You know, transparency is step one. And I think you’ve done as much as anybody to bring transparency, and I want to just say I’m deeply appreciative.
Reiner Fuellmich [00:05:36]
Thank you, Catherine. We… appreciate your support, as well. It can’t work without us connecting, and connecting with other people as well. But we think this seems to be working really well right now.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:05:47]
Reiner Fuellmich [00:05:48]
Viviane Fischer [00:05:54]
Yeah maybe, because I think you are– today you’re going to take a closer look at this… sort of the plan or
the… It’s maybe more like the mindset behind what we can maybe see here. And you see, I think your… what you see as a… driving motor basically of this whole thing is the… transhumanist agenda. So what’s that… yeah.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:06:20]
So I spent many decades trying to understand, you know– my nickname for the governance system of the planet is Mister Global. And I’ve tried for many years to understand who is Mr Global and why is Mr Global doing what he’s doing. And I just did a two-hour Solari Report basically covering all the theories. Because the honest truth is I don’t know. I… can certainly share what I’ve experienced, but the– To me one of the biggest issues, in addition to who is Mr Global is what are the risks of Mr Global is facing. I believe, because of what I’ve seen in the financial system for the last three decades, that one of the priority goals of Mr Global is to engineer a multi-planetary civilization.
And a lot of what we’re watching in terms of central control is to help build the capital to manage that process and make that process go. And if that’s correct, then the question is why. And I do believe that for the last 20 years, we’ve had a financial coup, with extraordinary centralization of control of populations and resources. And it’s gone far beyond what the general population has understood until the pandemic. One of the positive results of the pandemic is, people are starting to dig and realize the extent to which the central control has been put in place.
As we talked about the last time I was here, we’ve had a… baby-boomer population going through the global demographics. And there is no doubt– I believe in… 20, basically two decades ago starting in 1998, that we began a process called the financial coup d’etat, where all the funding that had been accumulated to support the the baby boomer generation in their retirement was essentially being moved out of the sovereign governments. The sovereign governments were being levered up with debt.
So that essentially this hundred-year balance of power between the central bankers and the sovereign governments could be resolved by the central bankers taking over the treasury and fiscal function, which is where we are now. So we’ve had a financial coup, the boomers have been promised a great deal in the– particularly in the G7 nations. That money has essentially been stolen, and the question is, you know, how is Mr Global going to resolve and abrogate all the contracts and re-engineer the sovereign governments?
And, of course, that generates huge amounts of unanswered questions. We can all guess, but the reality is, we don’t know. And it comes back to, you know, what are Mister Global’s goals, other than complete central control, because the technology allows that to happen. Or… you know, somebody clearly thinks that it will permit it, to let it happen. What is his goals, or what are their goals, and… what are the risks thek’re managing? And then, how do we somehow provide alternatives?
I would say that one thing I wasn’t clear about when I last interviewed with you is… that what is happening now is a genocide. We have been watching in the United States for several decades what I call the Great Poisoning. And the Great Poisoning is a series of different things that’s generally poisoning the population, either suppressing their immune system or increasing toxicity. And… then people die of what they’re weak [in]. It doesn’t look like an epidemic, but it is. If you look at what we do know so far about the covid-19 injections, they seem to be radically accelerating the Great Poisoning. And it’s clear to me that the, sort of the death and the disability resulting from them is… more… much more significant than whatever is happening from what the phenomena called covid-19, which seems to be a… relatively complex phenomenon. But… the injections are far more dangerous, and so I wrote an article in the beginning of the pandemic called The Injection Fraud. And I continue to think– you know, before us we need urgently to stop the… mandates for the injections, because too many people are being harmed, and harmed in very gruesome ways.
But the other thing we need to do is stop the vaccine passports, because when the passports go into effect, we will be subject to a tyranny that will accelerate the evil that can be done to us. What we’re dealing with is nothing compared to what will happen if the passports go into effect. And it’s extremely important to understand that the passports– The passport system has been put into place for the last 20 years. We have in the west a very deep, complex, invasive social credit system already operating on a covert basis. If you get overt approval of the passports, the speed at which that covert social credit system can go into effect will dazzle you.
Because it’s already in effect on a covert basis. The vaccine passports just give us the ability to take it overt. And so whether it’s stopping the harm done by the mandates, helping the people who’ve already been harmed, which is very, very important. We have many, many people who are in real jeopardy from a health standpoint or– and this is the last thing. If you look at who’s financing this genocide, it’s us. And so I just watched yesterday with Polly Tommy on the Children’s Health Defense TV a 15-minute weekly show called Financial Rebellion. We have to unleash a financial rebellion if we’re going to stop the mandates and… stop the vaccine passports. Because right now, we are financing and building this prison, and we have the power to stop.
Viviane Fischer [00:12:29]
Can you– if the… passports go into full bloom, what is it you expect is going to happen, like, immediately and in the long run? So it’s… going to be total control for everything, for–
[Catherine Austin Fitts [00:12:45]
It’s going to be a total health control. So… if you look at some of these vaccine passport apps, they envision 7-plus boosters. And… that’s important, because we do not know what are in these injections. So we have a secret governance system, injecting secret ingredients into our bodies. We know some things about the injections and what’s causing harm, like the spike protein and the lipid toxicity. But there are also– there’s clear evidence that there are secret ingredients. And we’re not allowed to have informed consent, because we’re not allowed to know what’s in it. And I think if there is one dominant unanswered question of the pandemic, it’s: what are the secret ingredients? What is in this stuff?
And I don’t presume it’s just one batch. It’s, you know, it’s multiple batches in multiple places. But what is in this stuff? And why does Mr Global want it in? Because I think, you know, we mentioned transhumanism when we started. My guess is, those secret ingredients are going to tell us a lot about what transhumanism is being tested experimented envisioned and… where it’s leading.
And, of course, I believe where it’s leading is: Mister Global wants a slavery system, where humans are essentially, you know, linked into the machine instead of linked into the divine and each other. So we’re resonating with their machines as opposed to resonating with life. So that’s my– that’s always been my guess here, but to me, you know, I’m very big on unanswered questions. What are the unanswered questions that… we need to bring transparency to? One of the most important, is what is the secret ingredients?
Because if you just look– so, for example, the… Japanese found steel particles. Why are we injecting steel particles into people’s bodies?
Reiner Fuellmich [00:14:45]
Yeah, one of our scientists found these steel particles as well. But, you know, he believes that maybe this is due to the manufacturing process, that it was sloppily
done, but he’s not sure. So that’s, to him, too, that’s another unanswered question.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:15:01]
So if it was one researcher– But I’ve had multiple researchers report steel particles. And what I will say: if there’s anything I’ve learned about what I call– we did a 12-part series on the Solari Report called Deep-state Tactics. And two of the most effective deep-state tactics that I have ever encountered is– one is, “We’re incompetent. We made a mistake.” You know, I can’t tell you how incompetency is used effectively, you know– for 20 years, the federal government can’t produce audited financial statements as required by law.
But oh, it’s because they’re incompetent. The second thing is, “It’s complicated.” You know, it’s really very complicated and it’s really– You know, between incompetence and complexity playing off against each other– Yeah, for example, I’ll give you a perfect example. If you look at– I just published a review of Kennedy’s incredible book on Fauci. And one of the reactions I’m getting from people when they read that book is, they’re saying, “How could all of this [have] been going on and me not know?”
And if you go back and you look at the… coverage of the AIDS epidemic or swine flu or all the different things documented in that book — I can’t tell you how many of those were covered up with “We made a mistake. It’s really complicated.” You know, it’s been going on for… years in both the health and the financial areas.
Reiner Fuellmich [00:16:28]
The…. do we in effect to have two different governments: the people who are running the show behind the scenes, and those who are acting as their puppets, so to speak?
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:16:43]
So here’s the thing to understand: there… are no governments. There are no governments, you know.
There are governments as a technical, legal matter.
And the funding goes to the government, but here’s– you know. So… I use the U.S. government, which I understand. For a government to be sovereign, it has to have financial sovereignty, and it has to have information sovereignty, and it has to have a decision sovereignty. So I have to be able to say “No” without the bankers pulling my money and… putting me in a position where I can’t send checks to… the taxpayers and the citizens. So we don’t have financial sovereignty. Part of levering up the… governments is putting them in a debt trap. And it’s been done to a selected part of the population, too.
So 1) you don’t have financial sovereignty; 2) you don’t have information sovereignty. When I became Assistant Secretary, I would regularly trying and get data from corporate contractors that was required for me to run my operation according to the law. So according to law, the the Mortgage Insurance Single Family Fund in the United States is supposed to be run on a self-sustaining basis. That is the law. I could not get from Lockheed Martin the data I needed to tell whether it was making or losing money. I finally had to have the accountants moved over to report to me and do estimation so I could… basically try and implement the law.
But I can’t tell you the food fights I had with corporate banks and corporate contractors who would refuse to give me the data, because they didn’t want me to know what was going on in the operation, because it was clearly outside of the law.
The third thing you need is you need decision sovereignty. A… so let me step back on information sovereignty. We’ve seen story after story of a president trying to have a private phone call with another global president and not being able to have a private phone call. And it’s… getting leaked to the New York Times et cetera, you know, by the intelligence agencies. And this comes back to the IT systems which are now clearly under control of both the intelligence agencies and their corporate contractors.
The third thing is a sovereign government needs the ability to make decisions. So I need to be able to say “No” to big pharma without my children, you know, being killed or me having a car accident. And at this point, the covert operations are significant and out of control. And that includes generating control files on massive numbers of people. And I was told very clearly by the cabinet secretary I worked for, who used to keep ordering me to… disobey the law. I refused, which is why I had to leave. But he would basically tell me, you know, I’m going to find dirt on you and…basically expose you, unless you do what I say, you know, and… What was very interesting is: when I ended up being targeted by the Department of Justice, I think part of the problem was, if you don’t have a control file, they’ll just make one up. And I spent 11 years and six million dollars– you know, working for free for 11 years is a lot. And I spent 11 years and six million dollars proving that they had nothing. And… not everyone, particularly people with a large family, can afford to do that.
So financial sovereignty, information sovereignty, decision sovereignty. One of the things we need to grapple with– because I think the government is like a football, and… we want to get the… football back. The… central bankers are now taking over the treasury function and the taxation flow. This is all going to come down to taxation without representation, which is what I’d like to talk about, and how the vaccine passports fit into that. But the central bankers are taking over the treasury function world-wide, and I think we need to take it back.
In other words, I think we want to return sovereignty to government and get the balance of power between the bankers and the governments back, you know, back in favor of people having a say and in a democratic process as to how their world is run. But this all comes down to, you know– it’s good you bring up transhumanism. Do we want to have a human civilization, or do we want to have a transhumanist civilizatan where, instead of us being sovereign individuals under divine authority, you know, we’re livestock, you know, that resonate with the machine? Because we’ve had digital technology poured into our body one way or the other.
Viviane Fischer [00:21:16]
Let me– like one… step. Because you just mentioned this financial constellation together with the, do you know, the… vaccination passport. I remember like a few years ago, there were some… activity in, I think itwas in Africa, where they were offering also the vaccination passport that could also serve as a credit card. I think it was a… or like a… payment tool. So I think that’s the… point that’s… what they’re going to be suggesting, or like, introducing.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:21:45]
Well, if you look around the world, you know, oftentimes those systems are not being run by the health ministry. They’re being run by the financial ministry. I mean, this is a control grid. What they are putting into place is a… smart grid, control grid. They are ending currencies as we know it, and instead, putting in a financial transaction control grid. And… the vaccine passports and central bank issuing currencies are two pieces of what’s already been built.
I want to stress: the covert social credit system and smart grid has been significantly built, and [fire a few?] is a very important piece of putting it into place. But when it snaps together with… the vaccine passports, taking the existing social credit covert side over– and then you add in central banks digital currencies, what you will see is a complete control, where they can not only ask you to take seven boosters full of stainless steel particles or whatever the secret ingredients are, but they can literally coming into your house and take your kids. Say, you know, “We feel you’re not raising them. We would prefer raising them urselves, or using them in a variety of ways. And so we’re just going to take them.”
Viviane Fischer [00:22:58]
Well it’s crazy…
Reiner Fuellmich [00:22:59]
And it is all going to be– Go ahead, Viviane.
Viviane Fischer [00:23:02]
No, Reiner, you say.
Reiner Fuellmich [00:23:04]
No I… just wanted to say, this… covid passport, or the vaccine passport, that is the most important tool that they need in order to gain full control over us.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:23:20]
They need, first…
Reiner Fuellmich [00:23:21]
Or rather, as you said, this is the… overt part of the whole deal. It’s been going on covertly for quite a while, right?
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:23:29]
Right. This allows them to take the covert social credit system in the west overt. And… do it globally. And so… you– when you want to stop that, you also want to stop central-bank digital currencies. But the passport is going to go in first. And so it’s absolutely essential to stop the passport, and then you’re still going to have to grapple with the central bank digital control– or currency. Let… me– and again, it’s not a currency. Let me make a recommendation. We have just successfully stopped the nominee for bank regulator… in the… United States. Was a Cornell law professor who wrote an article in… the Vanderbilt Law Review that was published in October, 2021. It was just published one or two months ago. And it describes taking all the bank deposits in America and moving them from the banks. You basically extinguish the entire banking system, and you put it at the central bank. And the paper describes the facts. So that’s 18 trillion dollars moved out of private banks and credit unions — boom — right onto the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve.
And then, the… description is, the great thing about this: if inflation starts to take off, which it has, particularly– I mean, if you’ve looked at the German Producer Price Index lately, but it’s taken off. If inflation takes off, you can just shut off their bank accounts. And this is what is proposed. So, you know, luckily we were able to get that candidate quelled.
But… once you have central bank digital currencies and vaccine passports in place, you can have taxation without representation. And when I say taxation, I don’t mean they can just take a portion or a higher portion of your income. I mean they can take your assets. They can take your children. They can deny you any kind of service. And we’re talking about– I keep saying this word, but I… want to underscore it: we’re talking about a slavery system.
Viviane Fischer [00:25:35]
And you know, I think also because there’s already talk that there’s so many, like, vaccination passports now, or like, these vaccination papers that are now, do you know, people are faking them. And do you know, there’s already this kind of discussion. So obviously they need to move further and get this… passport in under your skin, you know, like, it’s either, like, you’re identified by your iris, an iris scan, or like, even more likely, that it’s maybe something that you get with the vaccination, you know, that you can show: oh, that’s… me, and I want to buy this piece of, do you know, this piece of bread or something like that.
So I think it’s… really, that’s the next step, that is, moving under your skin, this identification
system, I think.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:26:20]
Step one of the financial rebellion has to be to… refuse an all-digital financial system, and an
all-digital communication system. You know, digital technology holds out wonderful fabulous promise, but if you look at how it’s being applied– You know, it’s a tool. And if you have a governance system which does not have your best [interests] at heart, then powerful tools like digital technology can be used for ill and not for good.
So this is why, you know, we have to grapple with: who in the world is running these things and why are they behaving the way they’re behaving? And, you know, and… so bringing transparency to that and to the secret ingredients are, to me, two of the most important issues. I… think and write a lot about what kind of financial system could work for us. And what I keep coming back to: if you– I just published an article about– a book review of a book on the currency systems in ancient cultures, because I’ve been trying to go back through history and see what worked and what didn’t. And what you discover, again and again and again: the thing that makes a currency great is the rule of law and a covenant within the society to manage itself and its resources according to the rule of law. And there are no solutions– you know, it’s funny, I’m saying this is an investment banker to a group of attorneys. There are no solutions without the rule of law. And that’s the question: how are we going to bring transparency and then enforce the rule of law? Because basically, we have a planet being run by criminals, and it’s gotten worse and worse and worse and worse, as the secret money has grown. There’s a real correlation between the growth of secret money, including in the United States and… the growth of organized crime globally. And the power of their invisible weaponry and tools.
But it’s all going to come back to: okay, you know, how do we enforce, nurture and support the rule of law? Because until we do that, no financial system is going to work. And I don’t want to, you know, gold is not going to do it, block chain is not going to do it. You have to have the rule of law.
Viviane Fischer [00:28:36]
Reiner Fuellmich [00:28:37]
I absolutely agree. I’m… actually quite–
“frustrated” is not the right word– angry, I don’t know, that in Germany, the rule of law is completely destroyed. I mean, nothing works any more. There’s only something going on, on the surface, but this is only to keep people– to give them the illusion that some parts of the judiciary are still working.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:29:01]
Right. So here’s what’s happened. You have government officials, you have judges, you have policemen who have the same sovereignty issue. They don’t want their children killed, they don’t want to lose their ability to support their family, so everybody’s– you know, I’m going to grossly oversimplify– everybody is in a situation of blackmail. And… threat for their life. And so they’re behaving this way. And the reason, you know, the corporations who– and banks, who would love to sort of take over and run everything are leaving the sort of blackmailed judiciary and the blackmailed government in place is: they’re not yet in a position to implement taxation without representation. So they need the appearance of the government, and the budget of a government, to keep taxing and regulating.
And the danger, of course, is when they get the vaccine passports, if we don’t return the governments to some kind of position of sovereignty, we’ll have something far worse. Which is, you know, control by a very centralized group of people who are… implementing it through corporations and banks. And if you think the civil– if you have a problem civil service, wait until you see those things implemented with the corporations of banks. And… you know, and then we’re in Never Never Land. So before that happens, what we have to figure out is how to shift our tax money back to lawful governance and management, and how to start protecting government officials, so that they _can_ implement the rule of law.
Viviane Fischer [00:30:45]
Reiner Fuellmich [00:30:46]
I think it’s the only way.
Viviane Fischer [00:30:48]
Yeah. I– I’m really curious about this, do you know, the… attitude behind this… transhumanist aspect. You know, maybe we can talk a little bit about that as well, and, do you know, and then maybe come back to the solution parts again. Because I… think that’s very interesting what you, what you’ve been, do you know, thinking about that. And maybe could you elaborate a little bit, because I think it’s… must be– it’s also, like an obsession. It’s some kind of obsession, you know.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:31:19]
So, I have a couple of theories, and I’ll just share them.
Viviane Fischer [00:31:23]
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:31:24]
One is, I think: if you are looking at the entire planet from a very, you know, high level, and you’re in the process of bringing automation in, and you believe, which they do, that you can replace every existing job and employee with robotics and automation, you have a real question: how am I going to integrate robots into the labor force?
And if you sit down and you look at what it would take to create two labor forces, one human and one robotics, and you had to invent globally new law, new regulation to manage the robots and… keep the existing laws of managing people that would cost trillions of dollars and take, you know, decades. But if you can integrate robots into the existing system, it’s much more efficient. One of the reasons it’s much more efficient is: there is a continuum from what is a human, to what is a cyborg, to what is a robot.
So we’re seeing doctors around the world, you know, replace amputated parts of people’s bodies with robotics. And, you know, it’s working wonderfully for those people. So you have this continuum of… integration between robotics and humans. And so you say, “Look, it’s going to get wildly complicated. Why don’t I just integrate everybody to the existing labor system?” And I think a lot of the really bizarre transhumanist things were watching is– comes from that. So theory number one is: it’s much more efficient, from the labor management standpoint, to… integrate robots into one existing system with humans, as supposed to have two systems. That’s number one. And that gets us deeply into taxation, which I want to come back to.
The second thing is: once you have CRISPR technology, the– in my experience, the people who are at the top of the food chain in the United States believe tremendously in the power of genes. And so there’s a long history of what I’ll call special breeding programs. And… you know, whether it’s people or race horses or, you know, fancy dogs, that they take very, very seriously. They… invest an enormous amount, through personnel management. And I think once CRISPR technology came into being, they suddenly realized, “You know, we can control sexually what genes come into the world, rather than have, you know, a man and woman get together and have, you know, let nature decide what genes come into the world.”
And so the idea of de-sexing the population and then– you know, I don’t know if you’ve seen the advertisements and literally you know your baby is… incubated in an incubator sitting in your living room. I mean, you know, so… I think their desire to take control of who can have children and what genes they’re allowed to bring into this world is part of this.
And I think the third thing, you brought up earlier,
is… if you can disassociate people from their body and the real world, they’re much easier to mind-control, they’re much easier to control, they’re much easier to harvest. So when the World Economic Forum says it’s 2030 and… you know, your– you have no assets and… you own nothing and you’re happy, what I hear is, you know, “We put the vaccine passports in place, we stripped you of all your assets, and now you’re totally mind controlled.”
So I think those are some of the issues. Now there’s a third economic issue which is very important to understand, and that is: if you understand the competition to win in the race to develop AI and literally manage the planet with AI, what you will see is the… person or the company or the country that produces the best AI is the one that has the most data. In other words, great AI is not created by software developers. Great AI is created by essentially a feedback loop between data and– you know, the data generates the intelligence of the software. I’m grossly oversimplifying again.
And… so you see this race– We mentioned James Corbett, who has a wonderful… Corbett Report on “Data is the New Oil”. But you see this race to suck up as much data as possible. Asia has a tremendous advantage because it has a much bigger population. And so part of the effort in the west has been to literally digitize everything– digitize the trees, digitizing the animals, digitize all the material that we create, put digital technology into humans, digitize the atmosphere. I mean there is a race to digitize everything, on the theory then you can hook it all up to AI and use telecommunications to understand your world and manage the risk. You know, I… keep coming back to the fact: in my experience, the people, literally the top leadership in America was phenominally oriented to managing risk. And there’s no doubt that if you can get everything digitized and literally constantly map, you know, all reality and all life, you know, it can certainly help you understand and manage risk.
The problem is, you end up using the tools for control, and control to protect your leadership. And the next thing you know, you’ve killed meritocracy. And we’re on– right now, we’re on a terrible downward slope in terms of productivity, because the more you centrally control, the more you cut off the oxygen that creates open source intelligence. You know, markets and democracy are very messy, but they are brilliant at creating… open-source intelligence and improving the health and vitality of the culture. And, of course, the more you engineer central control, the more you engineer privilege, and the more that privilege is used to literally destroy the economy. You know, but make a few people very, very rich. I just heard Kennedy say that we’ve created 500 new billionaires since the pandemic started. Not surprising. I– my guess is it’s more.
Viviane Fischer [00:38:05]
And– but we have a… you know it’s… a citation here by, from Sean Parker, former president of Facebook, said in… 2017 in an access interview, “Because I’m a billionaire, I’m going to have access to better health care, I’m going to be, like, 160 and I’m going to be part of this class of immortal overloads. Give us overlords an extra hundred years, and you’ll know what wealthy disparity looks like.” So it also seems to be like, the dream of like an… endless life immortal and sort of like an ubermench kind of crowd that controls the rest of the… creeps or…
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:38:50]
So I suspect part of the genocide is not just that you’ve stolen the retirement savings, but part of the genocide is: if you’re going to expand the life expectancy in the, you know, top one percent of one percent, you need to lower the life expectancy, you know, in the bottom. And… you know, they don’t want to– the responsibilities of managing an ever-larger population. So they do expect to use this technology to live forever, and the problem is– you know, the reason to have complete control physically of a… population and reduce them to slavery is because once they realize how much money you’ve stolen and once they realize, you know, that you’re… using the technology to live for 140– There’s nothing more gruesome than looking at people who cannot afford to feed their children, taking their children down to a center to give blood so that a Silicon Valley executive can refresh their blood with young blood, you know. And it was that company, that Silicon Valley company, that had a lot to do with stealing all the federal moneys that, of course, has reduced the economy of the person who now has to give– It’s a vampire model financially, but then literally, with the blood.
Viviane Fischer [00:40:10]
Reiner Fuellmich [00:40:11]
That’s– you’ve mentioned this a few times, that so much money was taken out of the system, both out of the American system, but also out of the European system. And I think, if I remember correctly, this happened towards the end of the 1980s. And in both cases, it was roughly an amount– was it 60 or 61 trillin dollars, or euros?
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:40:34]
So… here’s what happened. There was a budget deal that busted in 1995, in the United States, in October of 1995. I was told by one of the, the president of the largest pension fund in the country that essentially at that point, “they,” whoever “they” is, they have given up on the country and are moving all the money out. Okay. The next month, November 1995, after the budget deal busted, is when Oxycontin was approved and the predatory lending skyrocketed. Interestingly enough, under Andrew Cuomo, who also had something to do with getting the pandemic going.
So… the policies, you know, somebody hit a switch, and switched to a– accelerated the great– the Great Poisoning was on, both financially and in health. And it started with a vengeance in November, 1995. And October 1, 1997, vast amounts of money started disappearing from the U.S. government. We’ve now documented undocumentable adjustments of 21 trillion, but there’s evidence to suggest it’s much greater. And I assure you, with treasury and securities fraud, you know, there’s a near-infinite amount of money that can be stolen.
Anyway, that started in… 1997. And it had become an explosive issue politically. I was working on a major expose that was scheduled to be published four days after 9-11, and published in Washington, in a way that it went to all the senators’ desks. At that point, there was four trillion dollars missing. When 9-11 happened, it blew up. The different offices that were doing the investigation, both in New York and Washington, were told of the offices that were investigating the four trillion dollars and to try and get it back. And so you had a huge, not only coverup of the money that had gone missing at that point, but an acceleration of the theft that could continue, because of the Patriot Act and the other sort of laws that facilitated central control. And the ability to strip sovereignty.
I mean, it’s a– the stripping of sovereignty. We were off to the races. And then at– as of 2015, there was an announcement of a new round of… money gone missing. At that point, I started– I was documenting and doing radio shows on this regularly. And if you go to missingmoney.solari.com, there’s great documentation 6.5 trillion of undocumentable adjustments in 2015 at the end of the Obama administration, a professor, Dr. Mark Skidmore, heard me describing this, and being a professor of economics, said “She has to be wrong.” Because that’s so many more multiples than the entire federal budget. You know, at that point, I think the… Department of Defense budget was about six or seven hundred billion dollars. Now it’s almost 800 billion, on the overt side. Covert, much more.
Anyway, he… dug into the financial statements and realized I was right, and called me and said, “Is there anything I can do to help?” And I said, “Yes, I’ve never done a full, complete survey of all the financials at HUD and DOD over this period. If you could get your students and do a survey…. He did, and published a series of reports documenting 21 trillion dollars missing.
Then, in October of 2018, the federal government, both the Senate, the House and the White House working together adopted a policy– and you’ll find all of this described at missingmoney.solari.com, called Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board Statement 56. I call it FASB-56. It is administrative policy that has not… risen to the level of law or regulation, let alone constitutional amendment. And what it says is the federal government can keep secret books by a secret process run by a secret group of people. In other words, the financial system at the federal government, both treasury and central bank is completely 100 percent out of control. No disclosure. They can do whatever they want. They can spend it on whatever they want. And I believe, I would… absolutely bet you a euro, that the pandemic could never have happened if they hadn’t been able to turn on that spigot.
It was interesting, right– literally the month after they turned on that spigot, Moderna was able to raise I think five hundred million dollars, you know. And I would have told you, looking at their balance sheet and their finances and management, no one, you know, no investor worth his salt would put a dollar in, let alone 500 million. So, you know, the question is: where did that money come from? And if you look at a lot of the money– you know, the… day the money started to go missing, I had been Assistant Secretary of Housing at HUD, and money started going missing in vast amounts at HUD, which is how I discovered this, and how we got, we initially got onto it.
And the minute, Reiner, that that money started going missing from HUD, suddenly all the– you know, you had firms like Carlisle in Washington suddenly raising billions of dollars with no… history or experience in this kind of investment. And everybody in the investment world was like, “How did those guys raise a billion dollars to invest in China? You know, what’s the miracle here? Where did this money come from?” You know, I’m– my big question now is, you know, and it’s the same now. You see private equity firms buying, you know, buying everything up around the globe, like a global sweepstake, just as the Fed is doing the– going direct quantitative easing, massive amounts of money showing up in all these… you know, places.
So… what happened after 2015 is, basically, we went into a complete secrecy about the money. There is indications that the… adjustments may be up to 90 trillion, but we can’t prove that those are undocumentable adjustments. And we don’t trust any of their numbers any more. What I will tell you is people [are] always trying, you know– the spin back is “Oh, the 21 trillion dollars is just accounting errors.” That’s ridiculous. I was the Assistant Secretary of Housing. I spent, you know, a long time and a great deal of money implementing perfect accounting systems, perfect accounting regulations, perfect accounting, you know, everything, at… the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and making sure the resources were there. There is not one reason on the planet that as of 1998 HUD should not have had absolutely perfect books, you know, with undocumentable adjustments of no more than a million dillars.
Viviane Fischer [00:47:42]
That’s really, in the– absolutely unbelievable. I mean, that’s… impossible, basically, that you’d have like a larger financial– you know, like bookkeeping– I mean, I’m sure there are departments, you know it’s obviously … impossible, that’s crazy.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:47:57]
But Viviane, the civil service is incompetent, and it’s very complicated, and we have these systems, and it’s very complicated, and we’re all incompetent and– Right?
Viviane Fischer [00:48:07]
Reiner Fuellmich [00:48:08]
So it’s the same story, always the same explanation. But it’s a very simple system, then. It’s just like… corona. It’s– everything is right in front of you. If only you could use your head, you would see immediately what’s going on. What they did is they stole the taxpayers’ money by creating agencies and entities like after 9-11 and… pushing the money into this new system, where it disappeared and then was forwarded to enterprises like Carlisle and others.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:48:41]
So you– You’re bringing down the old– it’s a coup, a financial coup d’etat. You… lever up the government, you put the money in your new system which you control, and you, you know, you slowly enervate and bankrupt the old system, but you use it to keep control.
Viviane Fischer [00:48:58]
And do you think it was– I mean, because you mentioned like covert budgets before, you know, that existed prior to that moment. Do you think they were just not sufficient enough, or it was like too complicated to… work with all these covert budgets, so they had to go overt at some point?
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:49:17]
I think that’s an excellent question, and my answer, grossly over-simplified, is yes. So at the end of World War II, they created the 47 and 49 Act, and I have an online book, “Dillon Read and the Aristocracy of Stock Profits” that explains this. [ https://dillonreadandco.com/ ]
And in fact, next week we’re just about to publish it, next week or the week after, in German. It’s in French and Spanish. But– so we created the 47 and 49 Act, which created the black budget, and we took the money seized at the end of World War II and put it in the hidden system of finance that you could use with that black budget, as well as the Exchange Stabilization Fund, which we created in ’34. But then what you did in ’81 when the Bushes came in– the Bushes were masters of this– they created an Executive Order that said private corporations and banks could do highly classified… functions. Well then you’ve got the treasury market both overt and covert able to pump an infinite amount of money into publicly-traded stocks. Well, then you’re off and running with the military-industrial complex. And what happens is, you engineer more and more laws, classification laws, national security directives and now, FASB-56 that allows you to keep all the money secret and to do amazing things.
So I have an article that– you need to link to it– from missingmoney.solari.com called Caveat Emptor, which I wrote with my attorney to help people understand– you know, who are managing retirement savings or positions in treasuries, what this means to their credit. In other words, you now have created a situation where the vast majority of the U.S. securities market has no transparency, or no correct transparency, or no meaningful transparency. Because national security law has basically allowed all of these different shenanigans and secrecy to go on. And so it is impossible, if you’re an investor, to understand, you know, sort of what the credit is behind the U.S. treasury, other than to assume all the assets you financed have disappeared into… another system. In 2000– I think was 2012, one of the rating agencies in the United States tried to drop the rating of U.S. treasuries. They were– they and their parent company were attacked by the Department of Justice. The president of the company lost his job; he was fired. And basically they had to– you know, the company was almost destroyed as a result of doing that. And now no credit agency dares to question the, you know, the treasure– or no American credit agency dares to… question the U.S. treasury credit.
So we wrote “Caveat Emptor” to help the investors understand what they’re grappling with.
Reiner Fuellmich [00:52:06]
How did they– how did they go about… shifting the money here in Europe, shifting it from our taxpayers’ coffers to… their entities? Is– was done through NATO? I think NATO played a big part in it.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:52:22]
So, my– the only money I found disappearing in Europe, and I haven’t looked carefully, was in NATO, which I found when I was still looking at the missing money.
Reiner Fuellmich [00:52:31]
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:52:32]
You had a Dutch auditor who highlighted the fact that there was shenanigans going on in the books. And my guess is, if you go back in NATO you’ll find enormous shenanigans. If you look at the condition of the European infrastructure in system, it looks to me like a lot more money in… Europe has gone into basic governmental purposes than disappearing. I mean, it’s very obvious when you drive around the United States that the money has not gone to the governmental purpose. So you have a tremendous deterioration in infrastructure and other systems that you don’t see in Europe, particularly in northern Europe. You see it more in southern Europe. So I don’t know about the European governments. What I can tell you is that, you know, there was clearly funny business in NATO. And I… think– you know, it’s funny because the… U.S. securities market has– and stock market, has significantly outperformed the European stock market. I suspect a lot of that is these kinds of shenanigans. And there– I know a fair amount of investors who, despite the outperformance, continue to prefer European equities, because they…. believe at least the earnings are closer real.
Reiner Fuellmich [00:53:56]
But now, you know, we’ve spoken– you… know Leslie Manookian. [Session 61] She’s a former investment banker. And she says– she took– and she spent some 10 years in Europe, I think mostly in… London, but also in Germany I believe.
And she says that one of the reasons why they’re pushing so hard, in particular in Europe, is because Europe is completely broke. The pension funds are completely empty. Every– the money’s– All of the money that should have gone to, well, let’s say the support of the baby boomer generation, all of it was probably through NATO maybe other– maybe there’s other vehicles that they used, but it was taken from the public and then shifted to these private entities that you mentioned.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:54:47]
That’s very– It’s very possible, especially if they’re full sovereign government bonds, when the governments have been denuded of their assets, are in debt. So if I fill up the pension fund, you know, whether in Europe or the United States, with sovereign government bonds, and I’ve stolen the assets from those governments, that, you know, that were purchased with the proceeds from those bonds, you know, then my… retirement funds are full of bonds, but essentially they are, you know, they’re next to worthless. Now let me just say, because, you know, if you listen to me, you could get depressed. But I will– I… will make this argument again and again. If you have a system– when you… centralize control in the way that we’re doing it, you destroy the vitality and the productivity of the economy. And you have what I call a negative return-on-investment economy.
What I did when I left the Bush administration, is I created a company called Hamilton Securities. And we built relational databases that let us look at the economy on a place-based basis. And to simulate how much wealth could be created with the blessings of new technology if we were to enhance the productivity of people, and places and living things. And build an economy where the… financial system and the environment have a win-win relationship. Right now, the financial system and the environment, living things, have a win-lose relationship. But if you re-engineer to a win-win, how much wealth could be created? And the little secret here is: the wealth that can be created is absolutely fantastic. But you’re going to have to go to a governance system that is not secret and it’s
not, you know, that is a meritocracy. And… so what I discovered is: it seems like there’s not enough money and everybody’s bankrupt as long as you have a negative return-on-investment system. But if you will switch to a positive return-on-investment system, you know, there’s a lot of hope, because then you’re talking about a co– you know, the economics dramatically improving wealth.
Now given how much money is stolen, I don’t know where it’s gone, what it’s in et cetera. You know, can you get that money back? Or do you have to generate new wealth? I don’t know, so…. there’s, absolutely there’s been a shift. But the idea that things are hopeless because we have a negative return-on-investment economy, when we could convert to a positive return-on-investment economy– It’s kind of like, you know, it’s– I don’t know if you ever saw the American movie “Animal House”? You know, but if everybody is behaving badly, there are no solutions. But if everybody starts behaving productively, there are real solutions. Are we going to have to tighten our belts? Absolutely.
You know, one of the ways we got into this– because there’s a, you know, everybody has a desire to say, “Oh, this happened because the top guys are bad guys.” You know, let me… just say as an American, I’ve explored the depths of the corruption at the, you know, at the– all the way, bottom up. And the bad behavior and the dependency on– You know, the… clear message of the American voting population is: keep the war and the financial fraud and the organized crime going, because it makes us money. You know, just, you know, just give me a story of “I am good. But I want the money. And I want to be able to pretend I’m good.” And the reality is, you know, the the corruption is not just at the top. The corruption is throughout the society. So we’re all–
Reiner Fuellmich [00:58:29]
Very visibly now.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:58:31]
Reiner Fuellmich [00:58:31]
Very visibly now, because if it wasn’t for the corruption in the lower ranks, so to speak, this whole thing wouldn’t have… been, they couldn’t have pulled it up off.
Catherine Austin Fitts [00:58:40]
So I’m going to say a very tough thing, you know, but I’m a big believer in tough love. What I studied for many years is how can 70 percent of Americans say they’re Christian and our number one business is war and organized crime? How can that be? How can this be engineered? And what I discovered– I came up with something called the story of “I am good.” What everybody in America wants is the story of why I’m good and I can keep taking the money, you know. So I can go to work for a pharmaceutical company that’s engineering death, and I can take the check and still feel good. Or I can put my money in their stock, and I can still feel good about myself, you know.
So everybody wants the story of “I’m good, it’s not me, it’s him who is doing it, Mister Global is a bad guy.”
But, you know, I hate to say this, if you– if you’re going to march people into gas chambers, then you have to face you’re doing genocide. But if you can give them an injection that poisons people slowly, invisibly– You know, that’s their story of “I am good.” And we have doctors and nurses all over the world, and paramedics, who are basically marching people into gas chambers. And they’re doing it because they have a story of “I am good.” And I think a lot of them know it’s just a cover story. You know, some of them believe it, but not everybody. But… they believe as long as they have– you know, the injection is the new story of “I am good.”
Viviane Fischer [01:00:07]
Yeah, I mean that’s all so perverted. Like obviously, like in the communication that you’re, you know, it’s an act of solidarity and so, do you know, they’re pushing also that button on… the people. Yeah, I mean…
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:00:20]
I can feel good about killing you. I’m… helping you. It’s extraordinary, but– Yeah but, you know, there’s a long since the… 47 and 49 Act went into place, there is a long history of the evolution of the story…
“I am good.” It started– George Kennan at the end of World War II, said– Yeah, I’m picking on America now, because that’s what I know, and I’m an American citizen. But George Kennan at the State Department, said, “We have… 50 percent of the resources and 6 percent of the people. We can’t keep this going unless we drop a lot of bombs. So Goldwater ran for president. And he said, you know, “We’re going to have to drop a lot of bombs.” And the American people rejected that. They said, “Oh, no, we’re good Christians.” So then Jimmy Carter came along, and he said, we’re, you know, “We’re good Christians. We’re going to cut back on our use of resources.” And the American people rejected him, and said, “Oh, no, no, no, no, we,” you know, “we want to be warm in the winter.” And… the Bushes came along and said, “You know something? You all are good Christians. Here’s your check; don’t ask questions.” And we said, “Okie dokie.”
Reiner Fuellmich [01:01:24]
What was the ratio again? Six percent of the… world’s population–
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:01:27]
We have– a very famous quote from George Kennan, and it’s up on The Soleri Report. I’ll… find it and send it to you. “We have… six percent of the people and 50 percent of the resources. We can’t keep this going without dropping a lot of bombs.”
Reiner Fuellmich [01:01:41]
Viviane Fischer [01:01:42]
And… in this financial coup d’etat, how many people do you think really know what– know the whole… thing?
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:01:51]
I think you would be shocked and amazed at how few people it took. Everybody is on a need-to-know basis, and a lot of those people have control files. So one of my theories is, I happen to believe pornography was used very astutely by the IT systems in the tech companies, to get control files. And I’ll tell you how. If I can get a civil servant in the account– if I can get everybody in the accounting departments watching porn on a government computer, and all I have to do is once, all I have to do is once migrate them to kiddy porn– you know, just an under-age actress, they may not even realize what they’re doing, bam. I’ve got a control file. I’ve got them on a felony.
Okay. So you have all these different tactics with this technology to get control files on people, and then you get somebody to do what you need them to do. But they don’t see the big picture. It’s very interesting. When we first started to publish all the… stuff, you know, the information on the missing money, we would… come out with a big thing on– you know, we found another, you know, 500 billion missing at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. And all of a sudden, these huge fights would break out, and I swear– because it looks just like what used to happen on Wall Street– I swear people had helped steal, you know, they’d helped steal a trillion dollars, and they didn’t realize it. And they weren’t getting paid. And… suddenly they would start complaining they wanted a bigger bonus. “Wait a minute, you know, if you’ve got 500 billion, I want…” you know. So the fights would break out, and that’s why a lot of what we focus on with transparency is: what can we do to bring transparency to the money that will cause those personnel fights to break out? Because, you know, the beauty of our opportunity here is: if you look at who’s running this, you know, they depend on force and greed. They don’t have a– they don’t have a culture the binds them.
And… so I believe ultimately they’re going to end up killing each other, and that’s why we need…. a plan. But if we can stop the… mandates, if we can help the people who’ve been physically harmed, if we can stop the passports now…. You know, the question is: how can we bring about a human civilization with the least pain? Right now, the pain is going to be tremendous if they get passports and full mandates. The pain is going to be unbelievable.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:04:29]
So we have to stop that before it happens. It is happening already in some countries; but in other countries, it isn’t. And in some of the states in the United States, I think in Florida wasn’t… it Florida where a law was just recent– no, there’s… a decision by one of the courts I… think….
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:04:48]
Yeah, you have two decisions in the 5th circuit. You have a South Carolina judge, a Georgia judge. I think there’s something in the sixth circuit. But you’re starting to see this momentum, and I think one of the reasons you’re starting to see this momentum– And… you know, I credit you guys with what you’ve done with helping is: for the first time in… 30 years, I’m seeing a critical mass of the talent we need to create alternatives, coming to the realization that it’s really this bad. You know, for– since 1991, I have spent an enormous amount of psychological energy struggling with the fact that the really talented people you need to run the planet just can’t fathom that it’s this bad. And… I’m very sympathetic. You know, so… you pick up, you know– Kennedy’s book on Fauci. And what everybody’s asking is, “How could it have been this bad and me not know?” you know, which is a legitimate question.
But… now that you see… the critical mass of talent we need to run the planet realizing, “You know something? I’m not going along with this for anything. I would rather– You know, I always tell people death is not the worst thing that can happen. I wouldn’t want to be part of that group for anything. I don’t want
to– I don’t– I call them the Midianites. I don’t want to be on Midianites’ team. So, you know, I’d rather die on this team than be on the Midianites’ team. So I think we’re going to win, but, you know– and… my concern is… I… would hate to, I would hate it to be as painful as it could be, but I wouldn’t be on the Midianites’ team. Because, you know something? They’re a creepy group.
Viviane Fischer [01:06:35]
Yeah, definitely, I mean–
Reiner Fuellmich [01:06:36]
Viviane Fischer [01:06:37]
Look, it’s still true, what we have here.
[“I do not consent.”]
You know, we really just have to disconnect, you know, and–
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:06:43]
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah!
Viviane Fischer [01:06:45]
So easy, it’s always the same, you know. It’s just a question of choice.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:06:50]
And it’s happening.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:06:51]
So… I– I have to tell you a story. So in the last month, twice I’ve been rejected to eat in a restaurant because I didn’t have a QR code. And I– when it happened, you know, I had assumed if it happened, I would feel frustrated. When it happened, both times I felt this magical feeling of– You know, it’s like there’s a divide going on and I’m going into this magical world. And it was really funny, because the… second time it happened, we had to eat outdoors. And it turned into an absolutely magical experience. And it was so– I mean, it was wonderful, because everybody in the restaurant had masks on, and they look totally miserable. So… we’re outside watching the prawn ships come into the port. And two seals came in and sort of– And I thought, this is wonderful!
And I used to have a friend who– would talk about a term, a south American term she called jatino, the magic that comes in dangerous times. And it’s happening to me more and more, that I feel this magic that comes in dangerous times, as the people who really will… go to the wall for freedom come together. You know, I was in Milan and Bern when Kennedy came to speak, and it was– The people in… Milan and in Bern– When you get together with thousands and thousands of people– I know you guys have known this because of the big protests in Germany, but God, it just feels like you could lift off. And, you know, it just feels like liftoff. It’s an amazing, amazing feeling.
So, that magic is going to work. And that’s our opportunity.
Viviane Fischer [01:08:32]
Yeah, it’s true. It’s a whole–
Reiner Fuellmich [01:08:32]
Viviane Fischer [01:08:33]
…like, new quality of people, you know, like all the small talk is gone, and it’s really like, it’s… to the point, like facing the brutal facts, but still be able, you know, to see the light at the end of the tunnel. And it’s– I think it’s… a whole new energy.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:08:48]
Viviane Fischer [01:08:49]
Yeah, I see that also everywhere.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:08:51]
Viviane Fischer [01:08:51]
And then you have people who are stuck, you know. Late yesterday, I went to some store will always bought, like thread, yarns, you know, for my… fashion business, and they were like you– do you know, really like timid and had masks on. You could only enter this tiny store with, like, 2G, so I mean, vaccinated and, or–
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:09:08]
So this is why it is, it’s so important we help the people who were vaccine damaged. I think we have to do everything we can to reach out and help, because– and… also we have doctors and nurses now because of the mandates coming out in the system– and they need to tell all and feel forgiven. We need to… bring in as many people as we can and help as many people as we can, sort of, enjoy the delights of teaming up with us. And I think there’s huge opportunity to do that, because I can’t tell you how sorry I feel for those people. And I… appreciate that some of them are sort of locked in the media. You know, the more we can get people to turn off their TVs and… go outside and… look at the seals swimming around the harbor, the better off we’ll be.
Viviane Fischer [01:10:04]
But if they could come out and not be hidden any more… Yesterday, someone from Israel told me that on mainstream Israeli TV, they are now discussing the vaccine damages…. And, you know, the… this… mov– you know, this film by, documentary by… Avital, do you know, Avital Levy? I think it was–
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:10:30]
Was the one that had all of the people who’ve been vaccine damaged?
Reiner Fuellmich [01:10:33]
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:10:34]
That was fabulous.
Viviane Fischer [01:10:35]
And I think that… also ran on TV. But then also they had, you know, now discussion, discussions about that on regular TV. And it’s becoming more and more obvious. And this person told me that the Israelis are especially obsessed with like, or like, I mean, especially, you know, with like saving their children from any harm. And so I think it’s really this… do you know, this threshold that they’re crossing. And I think it’s now really becoming also more and more obvious to them, apart from the fact that they’re re– realizing that they’ve been tricked into this vaccination circle, you know, that’s not supposed to be, to stop, you know, because it’s the second, the third, fourth, whatever.
So they’re… angry, plus like, becoming more and more protective about their children. Avital Levy, yeah, that’s her name.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:11:20]
Well there’s– you know, Mr Global’s tactic is to do– you know, divide-and-conquer is one of Mr Global’s most popular tactics. And so I’m sure you know, but… the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated is… the new great you know, effort to try and divide us. And we can’t let that happen. And that’s why if the… unvaccinated or the people have been opposed to the mandates reach out and do everything they can to help the vaccinated who’ve been harmed or damaged–
Reiner Fuellmich [01:11:47]
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:11:47]
…we have to do it.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:11:49]
That’s why we, a… couple weeks ago– months ago, actually– have come up with the idea of buying a whole new hospital. Or not a new one,
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:12:00]
Reiner Fuellmich [01:12:00]
… but one of those that are, that have been shut down. The… thing is, it’s too complicated to get this thing running, because you have to get all these official permissions, and we’re not going to get them. We will buy one, two or even more hospitals. But that’ll take too long, for… us to help these people who have now… come to the conclusion that maybe what they’re suffering from has something to do with the vaccinations. So we’re about to… yeah, it’s, but… that’s the only way. You have to– this is learning the hard way. And I just hope that the so-called vaccines, in particular the mRNA vaccines, which are not just dangerous because of the very toxic spike protein, but also because they are literally shutting off your immune system.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:12:47]
Reiner Fuellmich [01:12:48]
But it’s, I guess, I… think there’s still hope. And what we’re going to do is, we’re setting up a network of family doctors who are then connected and who have… the ability to help the people right where they are–
Catherine Austin Fitts
…in their homes and in their community. It’s the only way to do it right now.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:13:07]
What I get is, you know, I’m in country X. What are the practitioners I can trust here? And that’s what everybody needs to know, the practitioners. The other thing is: because when I got booted out of the establishment, I was in a political situation where I couldn’t go to doctors I couldn’t go to hospitals. Part was financial, but the other part was it just, politically it wasn’t safe. So I literally had to learn how to do everything yourself. And I re-discovered, you know, scads of old timey recipes, you know, I’ve tried everything. But I also got introduced to, sort of– there’s a whole underground health system in the United States, of people, for a variety of reasons who don’t feel it’s safe to go into the… sort of, majority hospital system. I grew up in an African American neighborhood. And that.. sort of, church network, and you have all these old timey networks there, that have passed down the technology, how to deal with these things.
But anyway, one of the things– our Hero of the Year of the Solari Report, you know, we have a hero every week and then a hero– we have heroes of the pandemic, so– Reiner, you were in the Heroes of the Pandemic. But our hero this week is Wim Hof. I’m a huge Wim Hof– do you know who Wim Hof is?
Reiner Fuellmich [01:14:23]
You, you’ve mentioned him when we spoke…
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:14:25]
Yeah. He is a… Dutch athlete who has done a lot of work with the use of cold water and ice and breathing exercises to improve health. And he’s had– a lot of doctors and universities now study his techniques. He’s come out with a new book, and what we’ve done is we’ve bought– actually, we… told people it’s 50, but we bought 100 copies of his newest book, “The Wim Hof Method”. And what we said is to any subscribers as part of our Christmas donations– every Christmas, we highlight a whole bunch of groups to sort of encourage donations– but we said, to the first 50 subscribers who email us and say “I’ve been harmed by the injections” or depression related to vaccine injury or death, you know, “send me a Wim Hof book.” We’re going to send them. Because Wim Hof believes it can help tremendously. And so we’re sending a copy of the Wim Hof.
We’re just about to publish an interview with him next week, and it’s extraordinary the health benefits he’s been able to bring to people who are struggling with inflammation and… suppressed immune systems. Whether it can help in this circumstance, I don’t know, but one of the things I believe is, you know, it’s amazing what people can accomplish when they just try and collaborate and share their results. So I’ve worked a lot with vaccine– families struggling with vaccine injured– injury before covid-19, and what they’ve been able to accomplish is just, you know, again and again they’ve been told by the doctors that it’s hopeless, and yet they… accomplish miracls, and it works.
So I never underestimate what the human race can invent when… pushed to the wall.
Viviane Fischer [01:16:13]
Reiner Fuellmich [01:16:14]
That’s why I think it’s not hopeless. Yeah.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:16:16]
Never– it’s never hopeless.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:16:19]
It’s never hopeless, because the human race is very inventive, and they don’t understand that. They are digitalized. They don’t understand–
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:16:27]
Oh, I think… they do understand that. I think they’re very concerned about maintaining control and, you know, we’re coming up into a huge shift in consciousness. You know, we’re coming into a shift in consciousness, where we can run the enforcement of the rule of law by culture globally, you know, to a very high extent. And we don’t need all these hierarchies of control anywhere to the same extent, particularly given the wealth that can be created from these kinds of technology. So, you know– and there’s a risk management issue that’s very, very serious, to be sure. But I can understand why they want to get complete control now, before this shifts out of control.
Viviane Fischer [01:17:13]
Yeah it’s… I think it’s very, like, crucial point in time, you know, and in Germany, I just saw an interview or, like a a speech someone gave at a demonstration, like a double-vaccinated person, you know, he was really reaching out to the unvaccinated, mostly at the demonstration, and he said, you know, I can feel that I’m here with, like, real human beings. And I really absolutely hate this… situation, do you know, that’s happening to democracy. And I feel this is a fascist situation, you know. That person said that clearly, and everyone, of course, was, like, happy that he was speaking out on behalf of the unvaccinated. And I think that’s also a push of solidarity from the vaccinated side. Not even because they all feel deceived, you know, because maybe they have not realized that 100 percent, but just because they feel, this is not what democracy is about. This is not what we want as human beings. So–
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:18:07]
Well, remember, the passports will be used to strip the assets and rights of the vaccinated as well as the vaccinated.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:18:15]
And there’s practically no difference between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, because the unvac– or the vaccinated are soon to be the new unvaccinated.
Because if they don’t get their booster shot, then they’re back to… where they were when they started.
I mean, this is something that is making them very,very nervous. So I think the most important thing is transparency. So we have to continue to expose everything, including what… we’re talking about now with you, because this is the, one of the most important aspects. This is a– Yeah, go ahead.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:18:54]
Transparency, but take action. So, what…
Reiner Fuellmich [01:18:57]
Take action. But you can only take action if you understand what’s going on.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:19:02]
Correct. So… first you need a map. You can’t drive, you know, I can’t drive to Berlin without a good map, an accurate map. But don’t think that you’re unimportant. You are very important — your bank deposits, your purchases, your investments, your taxes.
One of the things we’re going to have to do is– our tax dollars are being spent illegally. And we need to move our tax dollars back into lawful management. So let me tell you one story. When I settled the litigation I got a large settlement in. And at that point, I tried to pay off all the existing creditors who hadn’t been paid off. And I owed one of the large New York Fed member banks $14,000 on a credit card. And at that point, the missing money, which is now $65,000 per person, was $14,000 per person.
And I wrote them a letter, and I said, “I owe you 14,000, but you owe me 14,000. And I’m asserting a common-law right of offset,” something the Department of Justice had taught me about, “I’m asserting a common-law right of offset. And I’m offsetting my 14,000 against your 14,000. And if you have a problem with that, here is the name and number of my attorney. Please feel free to contact her, and we can, you know, proceed to negotiate and litigate this issue.” They wrote off the debt. I never heard another word. Now, a smart person would say they probably got me back on my credit score, and I can’t tell you that they didn’t. But that– you know, between offsets against the banks or escrows of taxes under some kind of local, you know, serious stewardship and management to ensure that our tax dollars go lawfully.
I just finished publishing with my attorney a very large piece. If you go to ourmoney.solari.com it’s a very large piece on the U.S. taxation system, and different ideas of how we could effect escrowing our tax dollars or doing offsets against the banks to start to claw back the money that’s been disappeared. And I would encourage you to think about this, because if we’re going to integrate the health side with the money side, it’s all going to come down to the fact that we, through our taxes, are financing this kind of criminal behavior. And that must be addressed.
So when we go back at them on the health issues– You know, so… for example, I always tell the… mothers whose kids have been vaccine damaged, I said, don’t go to the school board and talk science. Go to the school board, audit their books and records. I assure you they’re in violation of multiple provisions, and get them on the money, just like you can get the federal government on the fact that they are… not obeying the financial management laws. I mean, the… feds got Al Capone on taxes, not on criminality, right?
So… we have to integrate our pushback with the money, because if we’re financing the people who are killing us, and poisoning us, you know, there are no solutions until we deal with that financing.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:22:10]
Absolutely we have to stop them from grabbing our taxpayers’ money. We’ve been thinking about that in particular with our most important legal advisor, Professor Martin Schwab. He’s– he’s come up with some pretty good ideas.
Catherine Austin Fitts
With other [advisors], no.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:22:25]
Can you send– I’m going to send you a link to that article. It’s ourmoney.solari.com and just click on the taxation with or without representation. Now that’s the U.S. tax system, but I happen to believe a lot of the– in a sort of legal analysis and discussions, will inform any… country in the G20.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:22:46]
Very good. I’m going to check it out. Well, this was great, Catherine.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:22:52]
It’s always… great to talk to you guys. I can’t tell you how deeply I appreciate it, you know, when I say we have all this incredible talent now jumping in to help– what one of the guys who was leading the Swiss referendum said to me last Christmas, he said, “Friends are turning up everywhere.”
Reiner Fuellmich [01:23:11]
Real friends, for a change.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:23:13]
Real friends. And that is “the magic that comes in dangerous times”. So, from the bottom of my heart, thank you. And thank you for the opportunity to talk to you today. I hope you have a great day.
Thanks so much. Fantastic,
Reiner Fuellmich [01:23:24]
You, too, Catherine. This is not the last time. We’ll speak again. This is really, really great.
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:23:30]
We have to– well, next summer, if you can, you all have to come up here and go sailing with us, okay?
Reiner Fuellmich [01:23:36]
No problem. I’m… from–
Catherine Austin Fitts [01:23:39]
Okay. Okay. Bye.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:23:41]
Okay. Thanks again. Bye bye. Yeah, Viviane.
[from simultaneous translation:]
Viviane Fischer [01:23:47]
Okay. Well, it was fascinating again.
Reiner Fuellmich [01:23:52]
That’s the… all-around hit, really, in an… area that… we… best have guests.
She mentioned it last time, that tons of money how been kicked out or thrown out, or stolen out of the public system, because the public system is corrupt. You can’t imagine it, really. Privately you can. And it’s incredible in the US and over here.
Whether it’s 21 billion or trillion, or 80 trillion. So much money out of the public institutions to– for example, in the US, what was it? The… 9-11 acts, saying everything is very dangerous now all these new institutions have to be established where the money went, and from there it went into a private hands, Carlisle as an example.
So, absolutely simple. And that has to be made public. We have to stage that in a way that everybody catches it and gets it. So we know what we have to do, and we know we are at a very critical moment. You said this, Viviane, and she said this as well: we are in for it now. We have to stop their vaccine passports. It is working in some of the U.S. states, and I think it’s working in some other countries. I don’t know precisely for now, but some European countries, I think, mostly Eastern Europe countries, where it is working.
Viviane Fischer [01:25:33]
And it’s, of course, important that people refuse to get vaccinated, so that this doesn’t happen. That’s really crucial. If you don’t know what’s in those vaccines, and we know that there are different batches, so it’s a bit of Russian roulette that you’re exposing yourself to. But I think it is still a critical moment, and we have to tie the sack now, because if it opens up again, the the cats will get out of the bag and they’ll jump into your face with their claws exposed.
Foundation Corona Committee, 82nd meeting on December 10th, 2021
Dr. Shankara Chetty talks about the situation in South Africa and the new variant Omicron as a real dangerous thing
in conversation with Viviane Fischer, Reiner Fuellmich and Woflgang Wodarg
(Original language: English)
[Transcript from Team corona-ausschuss-info.com – Ed]
Reiner Fuellmich [02:21:00]
Okay so this is not– this is not about the Spanish flu, but it gives you an insight into what other people think about what’s going on right now. Pretty outspoken.
Dr Shankara Chetty, I’m sorry to have kept you waiting for so long. I hope that much of the stuff that you may have heard when we interviewed Catherine Austin Fitts… was interesting. But I’m really glad that you’re still with us. How are you today?
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:21:30]
I’m fine, I’m fine, thank you. No, it’s… fine. Absolutely fine. It was enjoyable to… actually listen to what he was saying; I don’t understand German very well, but… I got the gist of what was said.
Reiner Fuellmich [02:21:45]
Yeah he’s– the gist of what he said is that it’s very funny that the Spanish flu, the so-called Spanish flu– that nobody from the… scientific establishment ever took a closer look at the Spanish flu. So all he has, that he can work with is from other investigative journalists and from other sources.
But it turns out– and this is the gist of the matter– nothing… points in the direction of a flu. This… was probably not a flu. But on the other hand, everything points in the direction of massive vaccine experiments that were conducted back then, which most of the general public isn’t even aware of. There’s more to it, but that’s probably the gist of his story.
This is– it looks as though this is the precursor of what we’re seeing today.
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:22:43]
Yeah, sure. It… looks very much like that. I think we’re… heading into a pandemic of vaccine side effects any problems,
Reiner Fuellmich [02:22:52]
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:22:54]
…yeah, so we’ve got a tough road ahead, Reiner.
Reiner Fuellmich [02:22:57]
Yeah. Let’s– I’m… let me quickly introduce you. You’re a general practitioner with a natural science background in… whoops, can’t read this… genetics, advanced biology, microbiology and biochemistry. You have treated over 7000 covid patients with ON-label use drugs. No one died, and pretty much everyone was saved. Is that… about it? Or did I get something wrong?
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:23:34]
No, you’re absolutely correct. And I have I’ve… been through now quite… a bit more than 7000. Those are parients that I have physically examined myself. I don’t do– I didn’t do telephone consults with them. I’ve excluded those from the numbers. I’ve been treating patients around the world. But that figure is actually the patients that I have physically examined myself. And, look– people think that when you do outpatient treatment, you’re seeing only the milder cases. I’ve seen some critically ill patients. And all of them– besides the lack of hospitalizations and deaths in my practice I negated to the need for oxygen as well. So I don’t have oxygen in my practice. I’ve never found the need for it.
So yeah, some amazing statistics, but I think if you follow the signs, you can achieve the same results.
Viviane Fischer [02:24:30]
You think of, you know, the in other countries where people didn’t… get treated or like maybe also in your country like didn’t get treated the same way and then then died or had like serious side effects, you know, so that’s… really amazing.
So what is it you… think. Yeah I see that you had the information that this like on day 8 they can be like some allergic or autoimmune complication that causes a lot of problems.
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:25:02]
I’ll explain that to you. Look, when we… started with the pandemic itself I– before… we got the first case in South Africa, I started to look at the information that was coming through around the world to try and figure out how I’m going to deal with this, once I get the first patient in the door. And I felt it nonsensical to isolate, to not examine patients, to not understand the progression of the illness, because I think that’s what’s important to keep patients out of hospital. We know that we must treat early. Don’t allow the patients to deteriorate, in any illness.
And so I took the opportunity, when it started in South Africa, to examine every patient. I moved out of my home, I isolated myself, I put a tent out in my parking lot, so that I have the ventilation and sunlight. And I wanted to examine every patient. I wanted to understand why patients were getting to hospital so critically ill. What was the leading up to that… scenario. We knew in hospitals there were blood clots. It was the cytokine storm that patients were breathless, requiring ventilation and oxygen. But those were all hospital perspectives. There were no perspective on patients presenting on an outpatient basis from the onset of the illness to the point where they got to hospital.
So I wanted to fill that gap. I felt that that was the bit of information that was missing from the pandemic itself. And I think that’s what brought me to a realization. I… inquired on every patient’s symptoms the onset of the illness. I knew that breathlessness was a problem, so I… explain to every patients that if they start to notice that symptom, they must present back immediately, so that I could examine them and… figure out the clinical picture that we will see. With this breathlessness. And something very strange happened. All of the patients that I treated with covid had the flu-like initial illness. And it didn’t seem any different from an average viral flu.
Now there’s a lot of known information out there. So I… knew what a respiratory virus does. I knew how to protect myself from it. I understood to the… course of that illness. And what I’d expected a standard respiratory virus to do. And a majority of patients had this kind of illness. Yes, we have loss of smell and taste and a few minor symptoms that seemed different for coronavirus. But everything else was the same. And in all the patients that I saw, I noticed by the fifth or sixth day of illness, they showed signs of recovery. They got their appetites back, the fever had broke, they started to feel better.
But there was a subset of patients who developed breathlessness, who came back to me feeling breathless. And they presented back on the day breathlessness started, because I’d educated them them prior to present back timeously. And when I looked at that breathlessness, there were a few very unusual things. The first thing I noticed was that every patient that developed breathlessness in the first wave developed that breathlessness exactly the week after their first symptom. If a person started noticing that they were feeling unwell on a Monday, during that week, they would have the viral illness. By the end of the week they had improved. A lot of patients had completely recovered, completely. Were engaging in sport, were back to their usual lives.
And exactly a week later, on the Monday, got up feeling fatigued. By lunch time were breathless, and by the evening was showing signs of saturation dropping. So it was very strange that on the eighth day, you were having patients with breathlessness who, on the day before, were perfectly fine. So I knew from that point on that I’m dealing with a biphasic illness, something that has two completely different pathogenesities. So I started looking at the second part. Why was there the subset of patients who came back on the eighth day breathless? It wasn’t everyone. A lot of patients recovered and had absolutely no sequalae. Now when I looked at this group of patients, there were a few things. From the group itself, it didn’t seem to have a predisposition to co-morbidity. Yes, I was seeing patients slightly older that were representing with breathlessness, but I’ve had patients with severe comorbidities and the age, that presented with this and recovered relatively quickly. I’ve had patients who were in their fifties absolutely healthy no comorbidities, and presented on the eighth day with very severe illness.
So I couldn’t see a pattern related to comorbidity there. And then on examination of these patients, it was unusual. Now, I’ve examined patients with viral pneumonias before. A viral pneumonia, just to get the… ground set– A viral pneumonia is a progressive illness. It starts with an upper respiratory infection, spreads into a bronchitis, progresses into a pneumonia, and that’s where the breathlessness sets in. So you can almost see the progression on a daily basis to that pneumonia. However, with these patients, they were perfectly fine the day before. So there wasn’t that typical progression you’d see with a viral pneumonia.
The second thing I noticed: with viral pneumonias, patients are acutely ill. They have high fevers. You can see that the patient is acutely ill, whereas with these patients, they were breathless, they were fatigued, but they weren’t acutely ill. If you took a step back and examined that patient from afar, you would think that patient’s perfectly fine. So it wasn’t the usual, typical presentation of a pneumonia.
The third thing I noticed was: on examination and clinical examination, these patients had no restriction to air flow. So air was entering and leaving their lungs restricted, unlike a pneumonia where there is restriction to flow. And of course, these patients were breahless, but the only symptom they had with breathing was that they couldn’t take a deep breath. The breathing was rapid and shallow, but there was no restriction to air flow.
So they were panting. So I looked at that, and I thought well, this is definitely not a pneumonia that I’m dealing with, because these patients are presenting with something very, very different. Now, from the spread of all the cases that I was seeing, there was no link to co-morbidity. So whether you were diabetic or hypertensive or a cardiac patient didn’t seem to play any role in the severity of the illness that started on the eighth day. Now I must stress: I divide this into two illnesse, one of the first seven days, which is the vital phase of the illness, and the second part to this, which is the hypersensitivity-triggered inflammatory phase, which starts on the eighth day, and promptly.
So in the second phase of illness I had to figure out what the pathology was. What was causing these patients to deteriorate, devoid of any link to co-morbidity. Now, some patients on the eighth day had mild symptoms which upon treatment subsided very easily. Others had more moderate illness starting on the eighth day, and that seemed to be prolonged. And the– lots ofthose upset with having very severe illness, and that progressed to ventilation sometimes very quickly, within a day or two.
Now looking at pathology and what pathology actually would fit that kind of picture, the only thing that made sense to me was an allergic reaction to an allergen triggered on the eighth day. So a type-one kind of hypersensitivity reaction that for some reason gets triggered on the eighth day off the evidence itself.
So I looked at it and tried to treat using that modality. Now, as a doctor, every patient that comes to see me is put through a clinical trial. We come to a diagnosis, but we’re never sure. We put the patient on medication, and the speed to recovery is watched– justifies your diagnosis. If the patient recovers timeously, then your diagnosis is likely to be correct. If the patient doesn’t improve timeously, then you’ve got to re-look at your diagnosis and adjust, do the necessary tests.
So speed to recovery was always the most important parameter for me to determine what was going on. Now early on in the illness that the world was using steroids– we knew that this is a
steroid-responsive illness, we are aware of the problems with using steroids too early and especially in an infection. It can supress your immunity and cause the infection to go uncontrolled. So there is a particular point at which steroids become vital, and I needed to make that determination.
Now seeing patients present back on the eighth day with this sudden onset of breathlessness, it gave a point in time to initiate steroids. And so with the first few patients I initiated steroids. And it took three days, three to four days, for patients to show signs of good recovery. And the first four or five patients within a week had all recovered. These were the patients that presented back on the eighth day. From looking at, I knew the time to recovery, the speed. It was two to three days on a dose of steroid.
So understanding that this is type-one hypersensitivity, I decided to treat as such, and so the next patient that came in was a 40-year-old female, diabetic and hypertensive, and obese. And she presented to me on the eighth day with a saturation of 80 percent, very breathless. She was perfectly fine the day before, had a history of having a flu exactly– that started exactly a week later. So again, a very typical presentation of a sudden deterioration on the eighth day.
So with this patient, I… understood that the steroids were going to take two or three days to get her to feel better. But if it was a type-one hypersensitivity reaction, then I thought the addition of an antihistamine would clarify that, by giving me a quicker speed to recovery. And so I put her on a kiddy’s dose of promethazine, which is a first-generation antihistamine, an essential drug, an emergency medication that’s sanctioned by the World Health Organization and should be in every doctor’s emergency kit.
So I gave her a kiddy’s dose of this medication, and asked my staff to phone her the next day and check on her improvement. And I did this with every patient — kept in touch with them to plot the recovery. And the very next day, she was perfectly fine. Her saturations had improved to 100 percent. But I had just given her one day’s worth of medication. And when you treat allergic reaction, it’s got to be suppressed till your mass cells actually calm down. If you withdraw treatment too quickly, you will have a rebound.
And that’s what I expected with her, so I asked my stuff to inform her that if the breathlessness comes back, she needs to report back immediately. And the following day the breathlessness resurfaced. She came back to see me. She was started on a full course of antihistamine, and she promptly recovered. And that drew my attention to the fact that I’m dealing with a type-one hypersensitivity reaction. Now when you have a type-one hypersensitivity reaction– this is old science– we all have seen people having anaphylactic kind of reactions, and we know clearly what needs to get done with that.
So that is how my protocol of treatment evolved. From that patient, I was under the impression that we are not dealing with a covid pneumonia; we are rather dealing with an allergen-instigated hypersensitivity pneumonitis. Now if you look at those two conditions — covid pneumonia versus hyper-sensitivity pneumonitis — the presentation of hypersensitivity pneumonitis is a sudden, quick onset of breathlessness, without the other symptoms of a pneumonia.
So the patient’s not acutely ill. It is due to the exposure to an allergen which triggers the severe allergic reaction in your lung, a sudden, severe allergic reaction. And that leads to the sudden onset of breathlessness. Now, on high-definition CT,
and on X-ray, which is the standard of looking at pneumonia, these two conditions cannot be told apart. If you do a high-definition CT or an X-ray on the these two patients, they look identical. You get the ground-glass appearance, you get all the same markers.
So you cannot tell them apart solely by X-ray or CT. So I’ve been under the impression from the start of this pandemic that the globe has mis-diagnosed this illness as a covid pneumonia. It is… more likely to be a hypersensitivity pneumonitis, from the speed to recovery of my therapeutic clinical trial. Now looking at the mediators released when you have an allergic reaction: the four main mediators that get released in any allergic reaction are histamines, leucotrines, prostaglandins and platelet-activating factor. So my protocol of treatment followed that very early on. To the antihistamines I added monteleucost to deal with the leucotrines. I added platelet-activating– for
platelet-activating factor I added an anticoagulant. It was aspirin. Or Clopidogrel added to those who are already on asperin. So the anticoagulation was well documented, and I needed to address that.
And so from the very start with using this modality of treatment, I saw great results. The dose of steroid: if you’re treating a pneumonia, you’ve got to be very cautious. However, if you’re treating a hypersensitivity pneumonitis, the high dose of the steroid is vitally important. You have to turn the reaction around before it spirals out of control. So in the first wave itself with older patients that I’ve seen I had improvement in oxygen saturations or improvements in hypoxia within a day. It was actually within hours that I saw patients’ oxygen levels returning. So I knew from that point that I’m dealing with a hypersensitivity pneumonitis triggered by an alleregen. This was too sudden an onset of the second phase to be anything else. There was no progression. And if not treated on the eighth day, it relatively quickly would spiral out of control.
So what we were seeing were people on the eighth day that were allergic to this allergen, having a hypersensitivity reaction. That reaction could be either mild, moderate or severe, like any allergic reaction. And it’s dependent on your genetic predisposition to allergy, rather than any co-morbidity. Now those that had mild symptoms on the eighth day, like a bee sting, they had transient irritation in their lung, and that would resolve reasonably spontaneously. And that’s what we saw. Some patients recovered relatively quickly on treatment.
The second subset would be those that would have moderate reactions, like a bee sting that caused a rash throughout your body. And if you left that to be settled on its own, it might take a very long while for your body to rectify that. And that was what we saw as long covid. Long covid, in my opinion, is just a moderate allergic reaction triggered on the eighth day that has been inappropriately treated and left unchecked for too long. And so it spirals out of control.
The third subset are those that are severely allergic to this allergen and would have a severe reaction. That would spiral very quickly and would result in severe edema and inflammation in your lungs, and if unchecked would result in a cytokine storm that would put you on a ventilator relatively quickly. So the modality of treatment followed that perspective. Every patient that came in was educated about their respective eighth day and what to look out for. So I think the education is vital early on. Every patient that came in on the eighth day was assumed to be having this kind of reaction and started on a quick, aggressive treatment. The dose of steroid in the first wave had to be titrated up. I came to an average dose of about 80 milligrams of prednisone as the minimum effective dose. Anything below that didn’t seem to work.
And so in the first wave, I had no deaths, I had no hospitalizations, and I hadn’t found the need to get oxygen into my practice for breathless patients, because everyone seemed to, no matter how severe the presentation, recover by the next day. Quick speed to recovery. When we got into the second wave, I had now the opportunity to examine long covid patients from the first wave, not treated with my modality.
In the treatment that I did in the first wave, I had not a single patient develop long covid. Neither did I have a patient develop any complications of covid. So I think if you catch this early and treat appropriately, you don’t get the sequalae. When I treated patients with long covid, approaching the second wave, I took the opportunity to do certain biomarkers. To prove my theory of type-one hypersensitivity, I needed to either show on the eighth day the release of histamine or triptase. These are the common markers, or an elevated level of immunoglobulin E, which is the immunoglobulin that is involved in allergic reactions to allergens itself. However, triptase was an expensive test to do. Histamine required a 24-hour urine sample to be collected, and, of course, while that sample was being collected, I had to defer treatment. And if I deferred treatment, that could be dangerous to the patient, because the… progression could be very rapid in this illness.
So I couldn’t do those tests to prove the eighth day. However, with the… long covid cases, I knew that they were exposed to the allergen for long enough and to have been given sufficient time to have elevated IG E levels. And so I tested them. And every single one of them had elevated IG-E levels, elevated to the point where– the normal values ranged up to 100. I’ve had patients come to me with long covid with values in the 5000s. And I used that as a marker of severity. And, of course, a marker for recovery. Those patients with long covid were treated in very much the same way, as a mass cell degranulation, or a mass cell activation syndrome that seemed to be self-perpetuating.
And so they were put onto a dose of steroids, antihistamines, monteleucost, anticoagulant. And all of them within the first three to four days, irrespective of how long they were suffering with long civid, showed signs of good recovery. However, when you treat long covid, because of the length of the injury, some things– there will be some irrepairable damage because of it. And so with long covid cases, we do get good recoveries, but we do see some sequalae that need to be addressed. And those are simply because of injuries because of the deferment of treatment.
When we got into the second wave, we had the notorious South African variant. And so I took the opportunity to understand that. The eighth day remained exactly the same. Patients that deteriorated started that deterioration on the eighth day. The first seven days was exactly the same. We had patients who had a sore throat for a day, recovered, spent the rest of the week perfectly fine, and on that fateful eighth day, suddenly noticed new symptoms and started to deteriorate.
However, in the second wave, there were a few nuances. I was seeing a lot more gastrointestinal symptoms– runny tummies, cramping, nausea, vomiting. I was also seeing that on the eighth day, it was no morel breathlessness that presented as the symptom of the onset, that heralded the onset of the second phase. It was more
re-emergence of diarrhea. And, of course, we saw fatigue. Patients would come back on the eighthday with this overwhelming sense of fatigue, whereas the previous day, again, they were perfectly fine.
So the education changed a little to… enlighten patients that fatigue is now the… presenting symptom on the eighth day, and if they noticed that they must come back immediately. In the second wave we had a lot more– it was a far more severe variant. But on– from examining the mutations that made the South African variant, the mutation only caused a change in the spike protein. And so I looked at the presentation. We were dealing now with a far more contagious variant, which ties in with the change of spike protein. We were dealing with gastrointestinal symptoms, which again ties in with the change of spike protein and increased affinity for ACE receptors in the gut, rather than the lung. And, of course, on the eighth day, I was dealing with a far more severe hypersensitivity reaction. And so that clarified that the allergen triggering this process was actually spike protein. After all, it was the only thing that changed on this variant, and it caused those three symptoms to actually change.
Now I’ve always had one eye on spike protein as the culprit for this trigger. Spike protein is what gives a virus its affinity for a particular host. Now as we were initially told, we have a bat coronavirus that had jumped species to a human being. And that would be the result of a change in its spike protein. And, of course, we’ve been exposed to coronaviruses through history, and it’s the first time I’ve seen this kind of presentation, an allergic kind of presentation. And so usually when you are exposed to new environments there’s a risk that you will be allergic to something, seeing that it is your– seeing that it is a new exposure, an unusual exposure.
And so spike protein was always at the back of my head as the culprit triggering this allergic reaction. And in the second wave, when we noticed the increase in severity of the hypersensitivity triggered on day 8, it brought to the fore that spike protein was actually the culprit. In the second wave, the treatment modality remained exactly the same. We treated the first phase of the illness as an ordinary viral illness. Patients were treated symptomatically. The aim of early treatment was to get the patient to the eighth day having completely recovered from the first phase of the illness.
So symptomatic treatment for a majority. In both waves, those that presented with signs off high vital loads, severe body aches and pains, spiking temperatures, looking acutely ill– to those patients I added plasmaquin, a subset from Hydroxychloroquin, just to– as an antiviral, and it worked well. I had those patients out of that illness within two or three days of initiating that treatment. But that was kept, that was reserved for a few patients that seemed to have high viral loads.
The rest were treated very symptomatically, and in anticipation of what might transpire on the eighth day. So the…treatment modality through the four waves that we going through now has not changed. Every patient is taught about the eighth day. Every patient is meant– is to understand the severity of symptoms at the presentation on that day, and the importance of timeous presentation back if that occurs. After all, with an alergic reaction, quick, aggressive, timely intervention is the most vital thing. And so if a patient understands when the deterioration is bound to occur, if it does, they can present back timeously.
In the third wave of the… illness, with the delta wave, we saw exactly the same with the changes in variant. We found slight changes in the initial presentation, changes in the severity of the hypersensitivity reaction triggered on the eighth day, and, of course, changes in the symptoms that heralded the onset of that hypersensitivity. But the timeline remained consistent throughout irrespective of which
variant I was dealing with. Viruses tend to have a very set pattern when they infect a human, but– in their replication cycle, unlike bacteria.
Bacteria can grow indefinitely. Viruses run through so many cycles over a period of so many days, and then they eventually are self-limited by an immune response. Like measles or chickenpox, there is an evolution to the illness, from a fever to start with, through a rash with that, blisters, through crops, and to an eventual recovery. And that chicken pox illness has a finite time and can be plotted.
So you can plot the symptoms as they evolve through the illness. And that was my aim: to plot how this virus actually infected the human body and led to the mortality and morbidity that we see. So–
Viviane Fischer [2:51:44]
Could I ask you a question?
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:51:47]
So if you had– because the coronavirus has been around for about– I mean, like the normal or at least that’s what we hear, like the normal or other types of the coronavirus. And have you ever noticed such a pattern before, like that on the eighth day, like with an influenza situation, that some… people can get these infect– allergic reactions? And is… this, has– do you know, is this the first time you see this, or is this also possible with other viruses?
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:52:17]
It is the first time that I’ve noticed that trend. Other viruses, if they infect, they tend to be self-limiting. Those that have co-morbidities tend to get more severe infections, and those infections progress to a pneumonia. I’ve never seen a patient completely recover with other respiratory viruses, and then suddenly on the eighth day take a turn for the worse, even after considering to be fully recovered.
And that’s what drew my attention to this being a separate pathology starting on the eighth day itself. But I’ve never seen that before. In fact, there’s… a few other things that I think were very telling in the first wave, when I realized that I’m dealing with a hypersensitivity reaction. Hypersensitivity reactions are very typical. You have to have a genetic predisposition to a hypersensitivity reaction. So it tends to run in families. Like a dad that’s allergic to penicillin, his son would probably be allergic to penicillin also. And that’s what I was seeing in the community. I was seeing father and sons that were severely affected, but moms that tested positive and had no second part to this. They never had the reaction. I’ve had moms get acutely ill and recover by the sixth day. And fathers and sons have a transient sore throat, and suddenly on the eighth day, presented with new symptoms and ended up critically ill.
So I could clearly see the genetic predisposition there. And, of course, they wasn’t this correlation with co-morbidity that you would expect in a pneumonia or a worsening illness. This was something new, and in the first wave, we were– it was reported around the globe that people over the age of 55 seem to be at much higher risk of mortality and morbidity from coronavirus illness. Now, all the mortality and morbidity of covid illness lies in the second part of this. Nobody dies from the first seven days of viral exposure. It’s those that have a severe allergic reaction post eighth day that are at the highest risk of mortality and morbidity. Those are the ones that would end up in hospital itself.
So looking at that, I have started to wonder why would it be that over-55s are more prone? And the simple explanation would be that over-55-year-old patients had been previously exposed to something very similar to this coronavirus. Now to put that into perspective, if you’re allergic to a bee sting, the first time– that’s a genetic predisposition– the first time in your life that you are stung with a bee, you will not have a clinical reaction to it, because you don’t have the antibodies that would trigger that allergic reaction. But on that first exposure you could use a specific subtype of immunoglobulin E for that particular allergen. The second time you are exposed to it, you now have the immunoglobulins to mount an inappropriate allergic response to it.
So coming back to what we were seeing, I was under the impression that people over the age of 55 in the first wave had developed these inappropriate IgE molecules due to exposure previously to a similar kind of allergen. And that’s the reason they were pre-disposed to having the reaction on the eighth day, not younger people. And that’s what we saw throughout the first wave. But understanding that theory, it’s simple to postulate that people below 55, were not reacting in the first wave, simply because it was their first exposure to an allergen.
However, during that first exposure, people below 55 would likely be sensitized, those that are allergic, and would have a severe reaction with subsequent exposure. So in my article that I wrote after the first wave, I postulated that the second wave will bring mortality and morbidity in a far younger population group, irrespective of the severity of the illness, just from the fact that they were more likely now to have been sensitized to be allergen in the first wave.
And that’s what we saw around the globe, that from the second wave, it was a far younger subset of population that were dying. But this is simply because now they were primed or sensitized to have this allergic reaction from an exposure in the first wave.
Viviane Fischer [02:56:55]
And how is that, how do you see that in connection with the vaccination? Because that’s also a priming, because you have the spikes now in your blood. And do you see a difference because we have all these, like, what’s the term in English for the “impf durch bruch,” Reiner?
Reiner Fuellmich [02:57:13]
…this vaccination breakthrough. And that’s maybe like a– so… some of the vaccinated people also get a very strong reaction. And that’s maybe because of the… priming or do you see that? Or how has your observation changed like, after people got vaccinated?
Dr Shankara Chetty [02:57:30]
In the… third wave, you I was exposed to vaccinated patients, so I could understand what was going on. But if you understand the underlying pathology, then you can postulate what might be the case. Now what I’m seeing in vaccinated patients this is with the messenger RNA vaccine, the Pfizer vaccine, I noticed that once the vaccination program had started, I was seeing patients presenting to me, a large subset, 7 to 10 days after vaccination, with the onset of illness, presenting 7 to 10 days after vaccination with either a sore throat or the onset of breathlessness.
And so these pa– there were too many of these patients presenting after vaccination testing positive for covid, for it to be just a coincidence. So I looked at that, and in that subset that presents soon after vaccination, there were a few patients who, on the second, third, fourth day of illness suddenly deteriorated and the oxygen dropped. And that has never happened with the unvaccinated patients, irrespective of the variant.
So I looked at that, and I thought, well I am dealing with spike protein illness. Now what I classify on the eighth day is spike protein illness. It’s an illness triggered by spike protein. An allergic illness, but it can be other. So I testified it early on as spike protein illness, the second part of the… presentation. Now I was under the impression that these patients presenting to me very soon after vaccination were actually presenting with spike protein illness. They had missed the vital phase of the illness completely. The vaccine had caused their bodies to produce spike protein, and when it reached an appropriate concentration, it triggered a reaction.
So these patients on the first day of illness were actually on– already into the hypersensitivity pneumonic phase of this illness. They had missed the vital phase completely and likely to be shedding spike protein or messenger RNA, for the PCR tests to be turning positive. So I did now in the– with the unvaccinated patients on the eighth day, I do a few biomarkers: your interleukin-6, your D-dimer values, your CRPs. And those give me a good indication of the second phase. They tend to be slightly elevated in the first phase of illness, but from the eighth day, take off exponentially.
And so if I see those elevated markers I’m 100 percent sure that this patient has gone into hypersensitivity phase, and of course I use those markers to gauge the recovery. The aim was to get them back to baseline as quickly as possible. Now with these patients that presented after vaccination, I decided to do the very same bio markers, but do it on the day they present with illness. And I saw the elevations, which clarified for me that they were already into the hypersensitivity phase and had missed the viral phase completely.
So those patients on the third or fourth day of illness that were deteriorating and having hypoxia and the rest– they were not actually on the third or fourth day of illness. In the plot of the next illness itself in an unvaccinated patient, these patients with starting illness on the eighth day. So on the third or fourth day when deterioration occurred, yeah if you looked at that from the natural course of the infection, it was actually the eleventh or twelfth day. And it’s at that point that you see people that are unvaccinated with a natural infection present to hospital.
And so that made me understand that these patients that were crashing two or three days into the illness were those that were the most allergic to spike protein. And of course, the vaccine takes a little while to build spike protein in your body, so it looked like there was a 7- to 10-day-odd lag between the injection and thereaction to spike protein. And that lag would allow IG-E to actually develop. So in those patients that presented early on with these kind of vaccine reactions, I did IG-E levels on them. And every single one of them that had a severe reaction had drastically elevated levels of IG-E. So IG-E in that subset of patients that presented early after vaccination became the marker as… to the severity of the reaction that might occur. So those that had high elevated IG-E levels needed to be watched very closely. They were the ones that could deteriorate very rapidly. And the treatment of those patients that presented a week after vaccination was exactly the same as I use from the eighth day– steroids, antihistamines, monteleucost, anticoagulant– and all of them showed signs of recovery.
So when I look at the vaccines itself, we’re dealing with a few different mechanisms The… immunity is different from the allergy. So the vaccines itself are meant to stimulate an immune response which supposed to bring you immunity against infection and transmission. However, the vaccine as well exposes you to spike protein which is an allergen. And so the vaccine has the ability to develop a measure of tolerance to an allergen. And I think that is where the vaccine gives us the benefit of improvements in severe illness and death, compared to any immune-mediated resistance to a virus itself. So I’ve seen breakthrough infections constantly. I’ve had [that] subset of patients who presented early after vaccination with what we suspect is covid illness but clearly is spike protein illness.
And then I’ve had the subset of patients who presented a month or two after vaccination with covid. Now those patients are truly having breakthrough infections. We’ve given them sufficient time after vaccination to develop a robust immune response to the virus, and if they develop infection subsequently, then that’s a breakthrough infection. And in those patients that present more than a month after vaccination, they have the typical evolution of the illness. They have the first seven days of viral illness, and then on the eighth day, show signs of worsening, typically like we’d see in unvaccinated patients.
So I’m of the opinion that the vaccines itself provide us no immune benefit, because I’m seeing patients– just today alone, I must have seen about eight patients already that are fully vaccinated, that presented with covid– with this new Omnocron variant. So clearly the vaccine does not stop infection. Neither does it stop transmission. So as a vaccine, It has failed. It does not do its job. But– where we See the improvements in the clinical outcome– nowadays this claim that vaccines prevent severe illness or death: that is due to the vaccines being able to stimulate a measure of tolerance to an allergen, or what we would call desensitization.
So when a patient is exposed to spike protein, if they are allergic, that low dose of spike protein that they are exposed to will give them a measure of tolerance. So that when they are exposed to the allergen through a viral infection, they do not develop the same severity of hypersensitivity reaction. And that is where the benefit is, in the decrease of severity of symptoms, due to desensitization to an allergen, not to any immune-mediated benefit itself.
And that desensitization will only persist for as long as there is exposure to the allergen. So we’ve seen three or four months post-vaccination that vaccinated people start to have severe illness again. That’s a good indication that they are no more exposed to spike protein. So the desensitization has stopped, the tolerance has waned, and so on exposure they will have a severe reaction.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:06:18]
Isn’t.. sorry, we don’t know each other. My name is Wolfgang Wodarg.
Dr Shankara Chetty
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
I have a question. Isn’t it very important which way you get the contact with the allergen? So with the spikes whether you inhale it or whether you get it injected, I think this is one thing. And when you get it injected, isn’t there a big big– because we don’t aspire when you inject– is there a big chance that [in] the acute cases, that it happens when you get an intravenous– accidental intravenous injection, which you have with other allergens, too. You have a very sudden reaction then, and it’s– very often, it’s the heart, and it’s the lung. So where it goes first, where the blood goes first after the shot is set. So what do you think about that?
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:07:10]
I think that what we see as vaccine side effects needs to be classified accordingly. Remember that the vaccine does not have spike protein. It’s a messenger RNA that gets your body to make spike protein. So the exposure to spike protein post-vaccination will be delayed, in that you’ve got to wait–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
How long? How long?
Dr Shankara Chetty
Yeah, if I’m seeing patients 7 to 10 days after vaccination triggering this reaction, then I would suspect that it takes 7 to 10 days to build the spike protein and your body.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
I’ve seen that it goes very, very fast when… the nanoparticles, the mRNA enters the cells, for instance the endocart, the epitail, then it’s… very fast, it’s… hours and it started producing and ex– and showing the spikes to the blood. So that the reaction could happen within one day.
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:08:06]
Yes. Look, when you talk of hypersensitivity and an immediate reaction the immediate reaction can occur to messenger RNA, it can occur to polyethylene glycol, it can occur to graphene oxide– all the adjuvants and additives to the vaccine itself. So hypersensitivity can occur to a wide diversity of ingredients. However allergy to spike protein will be restricted to those patients who are allergic, and would be reasonably dose-dependent. Now when you look at the myocarditis and all those kind of side effects that we are seeing with the vaccine, that are very immediate effects, those might not be related to hypersensitivity, but more related to the biologic effect of spike protein itself. This has been a push from the start, that I wanted research to stop focusing on the virus and start focusing on spike protein, and for us to understand its biologic effect on the body.
Now since, there’s a lot of information that’s come out about this biologic effect on– of spike protein. We’ve seen the endothelial injuries the affectation to the myocardium in the heart. We’ve seen the similarities to other pathogenic proteins like prions. And so the understanding that we should see a host of neurologic illness because of that– a host of increase in Alzheimer’s and dementia we’ve also seen similarities to other pathogenic proteins related to HIV. And so we expect this to have an immuno-suppressive effect, subsequently causing a re-emergence of latent infections or viruses, and, of course, the re-emergence of cancers that were in remission. We’ve also seen that the spike protein has the ability to enter a cell nucleus, and with its inhibition of the Bakker enzyme, can actually prevent DNA repair.
And that has some grave long-term consequences in the inability of cells to repair. And, of course, those that survive damage would likely form cancerous growths. We know, of course, that spike protein is… a membrane protein, and so it should be expressed on the cell that produces it. That cell will be recognized as foreign to the rest of the body. And that would trigger a host of auto-immune responses, dependent on the tissue that’s actually making despite protein, and depends on where it was actually bio-distributed.
So we know that spike protein has a wide diversity of toxic biologic effects on the body, and any one of those effects can come into play at any point in time. So from the perspective of hypersensitivity: yes, they are immediate responses to hypersensitivity, but if it’s an immediate response it’s very likely to be an immediate response to one of the adjuvants or the messenger RNA. Because I’ve seen 7 to 10 days, like I said, after vaccination that I’m seeing this allergic propensity show up. So I’m of the opinion that it takes 7 to 10 days for a sufficient amount of spike protein to be built to trigger this allergic process.
If I had to put into a little bit of context how I see this pandemic– If you looked at another… chemical like… penicillin– Now penicillin’s biologic activity on the body is that it’s an antibiotic. To get that biologic effect from penicillin, you need to have a full course, a certain length of exposure to have that biologic effect. Now, if I, like the virus does, gave everyone on the planet to single dose of penicillin. And then I isolated all of them for 14 days, I would not see the biologic effect of penicillin. So it would not act as an antibiotic, because it was a single dose. However all those that are allergic to penicillin, due to
non-treatment would die.
And I think that’s what’s happened with the virus. People that were allergic were isolated, not– without understanding the illness, and because of the delay of early treatment and intervention, have demised. Now, when you take a vaccine, you are exposed to spike protein for a longer length of time and maybe at higher dose. And so you would see its biologic effects, like a full course of penicillin. And so the need to understand the biologic effect of spike protein on the human body.
And so I’m… happy that research is taking us down this road to understand what the potential of spike protein is. And if we look at the VAERS system, and of course long covid, those would be the two reportings where patients were exposed to spike protein. We might not see the numbers, the… absolute values, because of the under-reporting and non-reporting of symptoms and deaths. But we can look at the spread of pathology that we see. And if you look at all the reports on the VAERS system, the prediction of what spike protein might do biol– as a biologically active substance is exactly the spread of pathology that we see in the VAERS system. we see the endothelial injuries resulting in strokes and heart attacks and blood clots and emboli. We see the myocarditises, we see the neuropathies, we see the increases in Alzheimer’s and dementia. We’ve seen the immunosuppression, the emergence of latent viruses, the emergence of cancers the… spiraling of auto-immune conditions, Gillian Barré. We’ve seen CJD [Creutzfeld-Jakob Disease] showing up. So some very unusual conditions have now become the norm. And so it shows that spike proteins’ biologic effect is the likely culprit here. Whether it’s reported, whether the figures are accurate is irrelevant; the spread of pathology is what I’m more interested in. And that spread of pathology is dictated by the biologic activity of spike protein, and that pans out.
So I think that with the vaccines itself, we’ve got to be very cautious of under-reporting of side effects.
All-cause mortality is vitally important to look at, and of course excess deaths. If we don’t know what’s in the vaccine, then every single side effect is considered to be a vaccine side effect until we prove otherwise — not the other way around. So no cherry-picking side effects. I will never figure that out.
Viviane Fischer [03:14:46]
And can I ask you, like, when you see, like, people who are, like, one-time vaccinated, two times vaccinated, and maybe even with a booster shot, so, like, the people who got this allergic reaction, you would expect to have, like, maybe even stronger or another or could– I mean, do you see that? That… it happened again, and then again, so what would be the perspective for these people?
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:15:11]
That is… something that– I found it very strange. In general, people that have had a severe reaction with covid itself tend to have a severe reaction with the vaccine. The first dose of vaccine is a mild rection and the second dose a far more severe reaction. However I’ve had patients that have had severe reactions with natural infection, who have no reaction to the vaccine. And I found, find that very confounding and confusing. But, of course, we also aware that there is inconsistency in the vaccine itself. The doses of the vials are not the same. Some were found to have just normal saline in them.
And so I think that’s– that is likely to be due to the inconsistencies in the vaccine, rather than in– inconsistencies in the illness itself or the response to the illness. So I… think as well that the… first does is a mild dose, and you’re not… sure what patients are actually getting in their first dose. And the second dose– in all patients, the second dose seemed to be far more severe reactions.
I’ve had many patients demise with the vaccines. I’ve seen a lot of neuropathies, a lot of strokes, a lot of cardiac issues. Unfortunately the medical fraternity refuses to accept that. I’ve had patients being told that it’s not the vaccine, even though the side effects occurred a day or two after the vaccine. So I think that the information that we collect from this is never going to be good information, good data. Because we’re not looking at every case, and we’re not looking to understand every case. I think we’re just trying to justify the vaccine by brushing a lot under the carpet itself.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:16:59]
I have a question, another question. I’ve heard that despite all– hepatitis-B is similar a little bit to the spikes of coronavirus. And have you heard about that? They are similar proteins. Half of the spike is said to be similar. Could it be that those people [who] haven’t been vaccinated against hepatitis-B react differently than those who are not?
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:17:26]
I think with the… spike protein and its ability to suppress immunity is where the problem lies. There are a lot of latent viruses in our body that are…
suppressed by a good immune response, and that immune response tends to be right now. However, if you suppress that immune response, these latent viruses are going to show up. India at the moment is having an outbreak of dengue. That is very strange, strangely after a
mass-vaccination campaign. So we are seeing a lot of latent viruses coming to the fore. I am actually looking to see by HIV patients, and I’m watching closely CD-4 counts and viral loads to see whether those that are vaccinated have any worsening. A majority of my HIV patients are very well controlled, and so any change in that control would be obvious.
However, a lot of the patients that I have that are
HIV-positive are very skeptical about the vaccines, and I think a majority of them have refused to take it. So in the few that have taken it, I’m waiting with bated breath to see what the outcome might be.
Reiner Fuellmich [03:18:40]
What about the omicron variant? We have heard many stories from people, both Germans and other people, who have been living in South Africa for a long time. And one of them– I think we’re going to show a short video at the end of our session– one of them traveled from one hospital to another in order to find out if the hospitals are really overwhelmed with victims of this new omicron variant. In particular, if there are so many children. And… each and every one of these hospitals was almost completely empty. How can that be?
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:19:18]
Reiner, I think there is fear-mongering. I’ve been seeing a lot of the omicron variant. I’ve seen hundreds of children through this pandemic. I’ve not had a single child progress into the second phase of the illness. And seeing that the second phase is where all the mortality and morbidity reside, it’s clearly understandable that children are not at risk of mortality and morbidity. Their immune systems are not mature enough for them to develop this kind of hypersensitivity response. It is almost a protective mechanism. So children being exposed to new environments at the start of their life are given a bit of latitude to tolerate them. So the immune systems are learning. So you don’t have this
over-reaction. But once a child reaches maturity, I wouldn’t say a specific age, but once a child reaches maturity, the immune system changes. And then they are at risk of having hypersensitivity reactions. Now understanding that, children are not at risk. So I don’t see the need to be vaccinating children. Children have a robust innate immune system, and they have the ability to learn. And I don’t think that children were ever superspreaders, will ever put anyone else at risk.
So the campaign to vaccinate children needs an irrational push to fear-monger parrents into thinking that their children ARE at risk, so that it would justify the vaccination. Now with what I’m seeing with omicron, there are a few changes that have occurred. Patients are not having the typical upper respiratory symptoms that we see with the other variants. They are presenting more with fatigue and with the headaches, some of them with the gastrointestinal symptoms again. But from all that I’ve seen, and all that I’ve endevored to look into with omicron, it is a mild variant. There is no hospitalization, there is no critical illness that seems to be associated with it, and even those patients that turn on the eighth day, it is a very mild turn, that can be easily suppressed with the right, appropriate medication.
So this is a very mild variant. This is what we would expect from a pandemic like we did with the Spanish flu. Viruses that have no… will to kill their host. A dead host is of no consequence to a virus. So as the pandemic evolves, there’s an expectation that viruses, the variants, would become more contagious but will become less the pathogenic and cause far less illness. And that is the trend in general infections. And so when omicron surfaced, it was expected. I would have expected that the first and second wave would have been the most severe seeing that patients needed to be desensitized– or sensitized to respond. The third wave would be the building of tolerance, and the fourth wave would drive thes virus into endemesity, so it will become an indepen– endemic pathogen that we all learn to live with and be well-planned to do that with our natural immune response. And so that is what omicron actually is.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
I have a question–
Dr Shankara Chetty
…I was cautious, because we know… the virus is man-made, and so if omicron was another one of the variants that they made, there might be a sting in the tail– so, cautiously optimistic.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:22:52]
Another question: you– there are fruits we never ate in Europe many centuries ago, but now we have import them, like Kiwi fruit or such fruits. And there was lots of allergy against those fruits. How many generations does it take until it’s a fruit you are used to and no more diseases appear? What do you think? How many, how long does it take to adapt?
Dr Shankara Chetty
Look, I think that’s… a genetic predisposition, and I think it’s dependent on the type of allergen and how severely it triggers a reaction. If you look at penicillin, you would’ve expected that people who have been allergic to penicillin would’ve become tolerant by now, but I think it is dependent on the exposure. So if your dad was allergic to Kiwi fruit, but he kept eating it in spite of that, then there’s a higher propensity for you to become tolerant to it, because it would become part of his genetic makeup, and he’d pass that on to you. But if he’s allergic to Kiwi fruit and stays far away from it, you’ll probably still be allergic to it, too. So I think the process of learning is important here–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:23:57]
We think– we cannot afford to contact with corona viruses. We cannot afford contact with viruses, but Kiwi we can, yes.
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:24:05]
Look, with omicron I…– when it… came out, the whole world jumped up and decided to ban South Africa from travel abroad. And I thought that was the most nonsensical thing anyone could do. At the start of the pandemic, I was asked what would be the best way to make a vaccine. Because I thought that messenger RNA was the stupidest technology to use to make this vaccine. Just to put context to that: we’re taking messenger RNA, putting it into a cell. That cell has to make spike protein, which is coded for by that messenger RNA. that spike protein must be recognized as foreign and trigger an immune response. That immune response is meant to build specific antibodies to that spike protein. And if those antibodies are neutralizing, and if you are exposed to a variant that has the same type of spike protein, then those neutralizing antibodies will kill the virus. And that is the… way in which the messenger RNA is meant to work. So I asked a question: messenger RNA needs to be stored at minus 90° Celsius. We’re not sure of its biodistribution in the body. We’re not sure how long lived it’s going to be. We’re not sure how much of spike protein it will make. We’re not sure how long it will make spike protein.
So we have all these variables that make the vaccine difficult to xxxxx. But the end product is a… neutralizing antibody to spike protein. So why didn’t we inject people with spike protein directly? We would have got to the same end point. The spike protein would have triggered an immediate response, and that would have caused the development of antibodies to spike protein, which would have given us the same endpoint without the messenger RNA involved. And nobody can seem to answer that. It’s with– the spike protein would be easier to manufacture, it wouldn’t require a specific minus 90 degree Pfizer fridge. We could dose it absolutely perfectly, dependent on patients’ body weight. We would know its half-life and exactly how long it would be eliminated from your body. So it’s something we could control far more effectively. So what was the need to use messenger RNA to make spike protein?
And coming back to the vaccine: he best vaccine would be a live attenuated vaccine. So I said, look, take the mildest variant of coronavirus and use it as a candidate to make a live attenuated vaccine. That vaccine would cause mild illness, and you would develop natural immunity once you recover. And seeing that it caused mild illness, it would be self-spreading. So you would not require– you won’t be required to vaccinate the entire population. Wherever you vaccinate, just advise them that when they develop symptoms, they must go play in a crowd.
And they’ll spread that vaccine to every personaround them. so we create an artificial mild pandemic that would spread very quickly, and we develop natural immunity without the mortality and morbidity. Now with omicron, God seems to have given us that. We have a mild variant that’s highly contagious, without the mortality and morbidity. And I can tell you
omicron is better than the vaccine in many ways. So it should be the replacement for mass vaccination. We should all get omicron and get natural immunity. And the natural immunity would be better than any vaccine-conferred immunity.
So closing our borders is the most nonsensical thing to do. Closing your border and trying to vaccinate the population out of delta is stupid. Open your borders, let omicron come in, and it will displace delta without a second thought, and you’d have a pandemic of omicron that’s mild without any consequence, and we’d all get to herd immunity without lifting a finger. And I think people need to decide–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:28:16]
We will have the– immunity in the right place. We won’t have it inside somewhere–
Dr Shankara Chetty
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
We will have it in the right place.
And can I ask you–
Dr Shankara Chetty
Omicron is fear-mongering, nothing more.
So if you say that for the… what’s your explanation that for the Pfizer vaccine that all of a sudden, the 90– minus 90° Celsius is not necessary any more, but it can be stored in the fridge I think that with, like, normal– How is that–
Dr Shankara Chetty
It’s just spike protein. Why… need the mRNA? Manufacture spike protein use it as the–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Very good question.
Very good question. Maybe the… mRNA is just a distraction from the main danger which seems to be highly toxic–
Dr Shankara Chetty
It has a purpose.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
If you have a vector, you don’t need such a low temperature, I think. Yes, you can have… more normal temperatures. So this is the difference between those two?
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:29:16]
Well, when I look at covid, the illness itself, covid illness is not caused by coronavirus. A corona virus causes pathology, the viral illness, but that’s
self-limiting and transient. And, of course, leads to no consequence in a lot of people. So the primary pathogen of covid illness is actually spike protein. Spike protein is what leads to all the mortality and morbidity in covid illness. So corona virus is just a vector. It’s a vector that brings spike protein into your body and exposes you to that allergen. Just like the viruse is– vaccine is a vector for full spike protein. So we are dealing with two vectors.
You going to– you know, it’s… joke amongst my patients here in South Africa. From the start of the pandemic, we’re dealing with an airborne virus. We’re dealing with a faulty PCR test that could never allow me the latitude to isolate it effectively. And so covid spread. It’s like trying to find the pee in a swimming pool. You don’t have something to differentiate the water from the pee.
And so I tell lots of my patients, I… told them from the start that the likelihood is that you are going to get corona virus at some point during this pandemic. So choose your variant carefully.
Reiner Fuellmich [03:30:37]
Shankara, I’m really impressed. This is the first time that I understand a medical lecture. And I’ve listened to quite few, because I’ve … Great, great. And… it’s important to understand these things. It’s also important to to expose these things, to make people understand what the real dangers are. It’s not– it’s, it doesn’t seem to be– it’s the spike protein, obviously. It’s the spike protein, and everything else is just– well we don’t know it yet, but it does look as though there– everything else is a…
Dr Shankara Chetty
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:31:21]
Another question: what do you think of the fusion without, induced by the spike protein?
Dr Shankara Chetty
Sorry, I didn’t get that question, Wolf–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Have you… heard about it?
Dr Shankara Chetty
I didn’t… hear your question.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:31:32]
Is the fusion without– So the… spike protein makes a cell fusion. Is inducing… a fusion of cells, so that several cells go together and have multikaryate– multiculate cells afterwards. We were… discussing that with Mike Yeaton. It was just a question because–
there’s a synsitine-like a mechanism in which… could be– there could be anybodies against synsitine, and we were afraid– there were no experiments to exclude infertility after this vaccine. And this is a question of fertility being… influenced by getting vaccinated, which takes a lot of time to notice.
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:32:20]
Yes, especially when you’re going to vaccinate children. It might take a long while to realize that it’s affected their fertility. Look, with spike protein– I had a discussion last night that– I was I was taken to task for calling it a toxin. I was taken to task for calling it a poison. But if I had to understand what I see, the facts are the facts, and I will go to take these facts and try and understand and make logical sense of what’s transpiring around me.
Now from what I see, I’ve got to draw a picture as to what’s going on around me. Now I asked simple question. I said, if you got up one morning and found someone in your home and mainstream media told you that he’s there to visit you and keep you company, and so you believed that. And when friends come by, you tell them, no this guy’s here to keep me company, and he’s here just to… visit. But that doesn’t explain your missing television, and the car missing from the garage, and the front window broken in your house. And so, as much as you wish to accept that, tell everyone that he’s there for a visit– you might start to justify the missing TV because you start to realize he’s probably a burglar, but it makes you look like a fool to admit that.
So once you do admit that he’s probably a burgler, then all the facts fall into place. That’s what I have to do with the facts that are in front of me. So when I llook at spike protein, I know that it’s an engineered protein at, of… the receptor on the virus to cause it to move from a bat to a human being. So I’D expect that that was a feat of engineering, to get the receptor changed. But when you look at the complete protein structure, and you start to realize the pathogenicity of this protein, I don’t think nature will conspire to find all the bits of protein around us that would probably kill human beings, and then in one mutation put it all together from the spike of… a new virus, that miraculously jumped from a bat to a human being and became the most infective human virus we’ve seen in a long time.
So I’m of the opinion that spike protein is likely to be the most well-engineered human poison ever made. And that’s what it looks like. Now a can of insecticide on my desk is toxic, but it’s a can of insecticide. The day I decide to force my family to drink it, it becomes a poisoning. And so when I look at what’s going on around the world– the mandating of vaccines, that whole game– I think that’s– that this is a global mass poisoning. and until I have any other evidence that points– or paints a different picture, that’s what I suspect we are dealing with. Because the vaccines have absolutely no scientific basis. Yet they’re being [hunted] as a health intervention.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:35:22]
I just use the chance, you are here. And what do you think about this technology of Novavax, with all those spikes on some nano-cylinders. And they’re… doing it to RSV, respiratory syncytial virus. They have the spikes, and they have the spikes of the coronavirus, and they put it in some nano-particle, and they want to inject this. What is– this is… the new technology. Many people hope that we are… they don’t want mRNA. They… are looking forward for this. What do you think about that?
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:35:55]
Wolfgang, whether it’s mRNA technology, whether its nano-technology, it is absolutely wholly unnecessary. We are spending our time chasing bees and killing bees, and we’re not treating people who are allergic to the sting. It’s a complete waste of our time. If we concentrated solely on the mortality and morbidity, like we should have done from the start with early treatment to build understanding about this pathology that we see, it would make vaccines unnecessary.
Now I wrote an article about this, describing from the Spanish flu all the way to what we are going to see and how we would get to tolerance. And it became one of the most controversial articles written at the time, simply because there was a line in it that stated that if we could curb all the mortality and morbidity of covid
illness with early treatment, it would completely negate the need to rush a half-cooked vaccine to market on a global scale. And, of course, I think they thought that was a dig at vaccination before vaccinations we even thought, or… on the agenda.
So it became controversial, just for one line. So I think vaccines are completely in the wrong direction when you talk of covid illness. I’m not an anti-vaxxer. I have all my vaccinations. This is inappropriate science, and I cannot justify anything that would injure my patient. It’s– the first principle is: do no harm. So as long as I see a vaccine ability to cause injury, I’ve got to weigh that risk up against the benefits it might provide to that patient, and quite frankly, with early treatment, no one is really at risk. If you… do not treat, then everyone’s at risk.
So yeah, when you look at the comorbidities as well– a bee doesn’t actually care whether you’re fat or thin or whether you’ve got diabetes or high blood pressure. All it cares is that you’re allergic to its sting. So yes, the comorbidities do play a part, but they do… They play a part in the recovery from the illness, not in the pathology of the illness itself. So if you’re diabetic and you have a bee sting, you have more risk of severe illness. But you– you’re not– the bee sting is not going to kill you because you are diabetic; it will kill you because you are allergic to a bee sting.
So I think a lot of this needs to be brought in. If you look at the vaccines itself– the vaccine should stop… infection and transmission, and that’s what gives the vaccine a group benefit. So if you take the vaccine and it stops infection and transmission, you actually protect me, and that’s the population benefit of the vaccine. So it either stops infection or transmission. We don’t talk about decrease. Infection and transmission of variables that have many factors that play a part. So a vaccine either stops it, or it doesn’t. If they have this claim that it decreases transmission, that’s… dubious. If a person is highly infectious and across the road from me, it doesn’t affect me at all. If a person, the person is mildly infectious standing in the middle of a crowded dance floor, he’ll probably infect everyone around him.
So it’s either it stops infection and transmission or it doesn’t. Now clearly Pfizer and the rest have acknowledged that this does not stop infection or transmission. So quite frankly, that means you haven’t proven a group benefit to your vaccination. Now saying that it prevents severe illness and death is a therapeutic benefit. My treatment prevents severe illness and death, but I don’t expose the entire planet to the side effects of my treatment. It’s limited to those that are unwell. I don’t go around giving people paracetamol in anticipation of a headache tomorrow, and when that wears off, give them another in case the
hasn’t shown up just yet. They would experience side effects from that, and that’s where we’re going with these vaccinations– repeated doses to try and prevent you getting a severe reaction… to spike protein.
So you haven’t yet proven a group benefit. The prevention of severe illness and death is also an individual benefit. So if you take the vaccine, you might not be severely ill or die when you get to covid illness. But that benefit is not transmittable to me. It has no bearing on me whatsoever. So if I treat you for the flu, I can’t expect your neighbor to improve with your treatment. And I can’t understand without this population-based benefit the justification for mandating it globally.
Unless you’ve proven a population benefit, there is absolutely no logic to mandating something for a group– you haven’t shown a group benefit.
Reiner Fuellmich [03:40:49]
It makes perfect sense to me. It all ties in with what everyone else has told us, except this is the most comprehensive lecture I’ve ever heard on this, and it makes perfect medical sense, even to a lay person like myself.
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:41:04]
Reiner, I pushed on the stops. When I wrote this article, I got a lot of flack. And I knew that I’m dealing with governance structures that are… about– are suppressing information, that are coercing people. I knew from the start that I’m going to be dealing with this problem. So my push has always been to educate doctors and to educate people. If the doctors know what to do and the people know what to look for, I don’t need anyone’s permission to save lives. And so I knew from the start that patient education is vitally important. It is how they have coerced the population, through the fear and the rest.
So getting people to understand what’s going on is vitally important. The lay man on the street is who is important. You know I… put the vaccinations into– I… gave an analogy that made a huge impact on people around me. I said, look the vaccine provides you with an individual benefit. So if you looked at the vaccine, it’s akin to skydiving. An individual risk[?], an individual benefit and an individual choice. So when I skydive, if I have to die, there’s no collateral damage to people around me. So I have the choice to skydive.
Now the vaccine is someone telling me that I should skydive to protect the person next to me. I ask about the science: how does me skydiving project this guy next to me? And you say, well, follow the science; but you can’t show me the science, because you’ve got no group benefit. After a few months and you getting annoyed with me, you say, okay if you don’t want to jump, I’ll give you a beer and doughnut. Why don’t you. And I don’t want a beer and doughnut. I just want to know how it protects the guy next to me. After all, I… like him, and if it protects him, I’ll probably take the plunge. But give me the information that shows me that I’m going to protect him by taking this risky act, and you haven’t.
Now humanity is at the point where you’re threatening to push me out the plane. And you still haven’t shown me how it protects this guy next to me. And of course, I become very suspicious of your motives, because you offered me a beer and doughnut. Now, when I look at the parachute you’ve provided me, it’s leaking — it’s got too many holes, and it doesn’t look very safe. And when I look at the spot on the ground where I’m supposed to land, it looks like a few dead bodies down there. And when I ask you about it, you say, no, nothing’s wrong. don’t look there, just jump.
Now, if I suck you on the edge of an aeroplane with a leaky parachute and a few dead bodies on the landing spot, [you’d be reluctant, too.] I think vaccine hesitancy is warranted. You’ve got to be an idiot to do that. When I look at it sometimes, I think, you know, it’s just a play on words. It’s just fear mongering. And I– I’ve looked into the entire psychology of what’s happened around me. And yes, it is mass formation. It is… an opportunity that they are taking to reset society. It’s economic agendas and social agendas.
And people are so hypnotized that they don’t actually see it. They were convinced about a foe that you couldn’t see. We were told the safest place for us would be in jail, so we gave up our freedoms, and our businesses were closed, and we went and sat in jail, hoping to be a little safer from an airborne virus– I can’t understand how that works. But we’re at the point now where we want our freedoms back. And to get those freedoms back, we have to take the vaccine. So we weren’t put into jail for our safety. We were put into jail to curtail our freedoms. And so we were herded like cattle into a pen, and the only way out is through a dip. So… vaccination, or you stay in jail.
So I think the society doesn’t realize that this has more to do with the curtailment of individual freedoms, than any health care intervention. And… unfortunately, it’s brought out a lot of pre-existing prejudices in people. So suddenly now, you take a vaccine and you think it gives you blue blood. You’re allowed to sit at the front of the bus, and I’m relegated to the back. But I guess in six months time, and your vaccine has expired, you’re going to have to come sit at the back of the bus with me, with your side effects in tow.
So I think people… are just being coerced, and they don’t realize that this is something that has grave consequences for their freedoms in future. If we bring out the digital passport system– Look, the passport is illogical in any way. We’re giving a vaccine passport to people where we haven’t actually clarified that they’ve had an immune response to the vaccine. So we should be giving out immune passports. Every patient, whether they have immunity that was come to through a natural infection or vaccine-induced deserves a passport to be free in society, are immune to the illness.
Now we don’t want to acknowledge natural immunity, and we’re handing out the passport without testing for immunity conferred by a vaccine. Now I think the reason for that is: if we developed a test to show who is immune, we would probably find that the vaccines have failed, and very few people that are vaccinated are actually immune. So it’s a shot in the foot. So–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:46:33]
I think they… do something else now. They’re analyzing our genome, worldwide. And they find out who will be allergic. So they can focus– the next… time they fear monger, they will very, very intelligently focus on certain groups of people–
Dr Shankara Chetty
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
…whom they know are to be targeted and where they can reach something.
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:46:56]
Wolf– coming back to that, I did a submission to the king of Malaysia about the side effects of the vaccine. I was hoping that on… religious grounds, he would declare a fatwa, and I would be able to influence the Arabic world from taking this vaccine. And part of that was to look at the trend around the world. And if you remember, in the first wave in America, it was mostly the black population of America, the African American, that was affected. They thought that it was because of lower socioeconomic group, lack of access to medical care and all that kind of thing.
But here in South Africa, I saw exactly the same thing. The first wave was majority if not all black patients. I had not a single Indian or white patient in the first wave. And of course, I looked at that and thought, well maybe it’s because a black clientele, being of a lower socioeconomic group, didn’t have the ability to institute lockdowns and isolate, and so it ravaged the black community.
In the second wave, I noticed that it was mostly Indian patients, and Indian patients of Indian origin, not the Muslim community. And that ravaged– that was the second wave. When we got into the third wave, it seemed to be primarily the Muslim community and the white community that was affected. So it seemed like the different variants had an ethnic propensity.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:48:29]
Do you… remember–
Dr Shankara Chetty
A bad omen.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Do you remember this: WHO recommending very, very high dose hydroxychloroquin, a toxic dose of
hydroxychloroquin, and you know that there is a– that favism is very, very spread among black people. So if black people got hydroxychloroquin, almost up to one-third of them would react, because of favism, with dyspnea and all this. What do you– it may be they stopped it after the first wave. It was… published then that it is dangerous, so they stopped the high- dose hydroxychloroquin. This may be one reason why in the first wave, there were many black people dying and many people– black… people were hurt. I just want to mention this.
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:49:15]
Yes I think… that’s the powers that be. We are dealing with a well-engineered virus and a mandated vaccine. So again, looking at this stranger I found in my home, I would say that the person that made the virue is the same person that made the vaccine. And they understand full well what the effects are going to be. And remember that when you engineer a virus, you don’t only– you don’t have to only engineer its effects. You can also engineer in a pattern of mutation. And so after every so many cycles, the virus would change or mutate, according to predetermined parameters.
So the mutations affecting different subsets of community might have been pre-planned. This might be a kind of ethnic cleansing, in that different variants have a propensity for different populations. Here in South Africa, I saw the Indian population affected in the second wave. And if you remember, the second wave in India was the most deadly. So… it looks like that viviant had a propensity for that ethnicity. So I think there’s a lot more going on than meets the eye. But I think if we understand we’re dealing with a burglar, we’ll figure it out a lot sooner.
Viviane Fischer [03:50:42]
But can I ask you, like if you think it was like a natural… mutation. Is it kind of realistic that this natural mutation would have these ethnic, you know, preferences? Or would we rather need to think that there was like a new virus then, for instance, like put out, if we if you follow that the train of thought? Like in South Africa, for instance, targeting the… Indian community. Or like if… it comes from India, and then moves over. But do you see what I mean? Like is this like, is it realistic to think at all that it can be by a natural selection this virus, all of a sudden becomes more toxic to white people or to black people or to the… aborigines? Or–
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:51:28]
When you look at the original virus, we know that it was made in a lab and that it has no ancestry. So you can’t trace back the mutations that occurred to bring it to that point. Yet we’ve got inventory of coronaviruses through the… ages, and we can see how they have changed and mutated and evolved. And suddenly you have this virus that doesn’t have an ancestor, so it’s definitely made in the lab. Then when you look at mutations– Mutations tend to be very… definite in time, a process. So we know that it takes so many years fora mutation to occur in certain species, and we use that when we analyze genetics, to work back in time to see when divergence of species actually occurred.
Now– so we understand mutations, but we’re dealing with a virus where, in one fell swoop with omicron, we have 18 mutations in spike protein and nothing leading up so it. So usually when you look at mutations, they occur one at a time. You get one mutation. That becomes the dominant strain if that mutation gave it a selection advantage. And then you get another mutation. And so you can look at these mutations evolving over time.
Now, to suddenly have a variant that has so many mutations in one spot that gave it a selective advantage and of course no mutations elsewhere, is very unusual. If you had a high rate of mutation, the high rate of mutation would influence the entire virus, and that high rate of mutation would lead to a lot of variants that are actually– they actually don’t have the ability to infect. But that’s not what we see. We’re seeing variants that have changed drastically and have an even better ability to actually be contagious. And that I find a little strange, that we have this level of mutation with this virus. It can be that the new variants are simply put out there. And they split. They are, again, lab made. And that’s the reason I say with omicron, we need to be very cautious.
Omicron might have been– yes, with any virus, man-made or not, there will be a process of natural selection. So let’s pray that omicron is a natural selective process of a man-made virus that has taken away its pathogenicity and will give us long, robust natural immunity. however we got to entertain the thought that omicron might be another man-made variant. And if that is so, then I guess we’ve got to try and understand what the long-term effect of that is going to be.
So with the milder variant, we might… drop our guard and allow it to spread worldwide. But we might in a few months time realize the gravity of and omicron infection. My concern is that there’s been some mutation in the xxxx and cleavage site of this new variant, and that might give it to the propensity to spread into different tissues and, more importantly, breach the blood-brain barrier. And if that occurs, I would expect to see neurologic effects. But those neurologic effects might be deferred. They might only become clinically apparent a few months down the line. And so we’ve got to be very cautious about this being a mild variant or classifying it as a mild variant. We’ve got to understand the entire ambit of what this new type of spike protein can actually do.
And so I think that caution is always warranted. I examined the patients with omicron very closely, understanding that perspective. And the patients that– Look, everyone talks about headaches and fatigue, but I’ve noticed that the headaches that present are atypical. Patients complain of this vibrating sensation in their head with the headache. I have also started to see patients complain of strange visual symptoms, the sensation of a fan blowing on your eyes. It’s– that’s how best I can describe it for now. But these are the kind of symptoms we need to interrogate a lot more closely to get an understanding of what truly is going on. And it’s only time that will tell us that we’ve completely recovered from omicron and it has no long-term or delayed effects.
So I think we need to be cautious. We are dealing with an engineered pathogen, here. And we need to keep our eyes open.
Viviane Fischer [03:56:23]
And I have one more question. Like when we’re looking at genetic differences between people, and if they can be classified you know like say like even like, also within Germany there might be certain types like, if you’re looking at one village you know, it’s all white people for instance who gets one village, and maybe they have a different genome like, I don’t know, for what could be the… variations but you know, that it’s possible to then target is do exactly that do you know. does need to be like a different big variants like it didn’t thanks to save people from Africa and people white people. So but it can be like small– maybe you could target even like little tiny things that could be like, it’s like two thousands of families in Germany something that–
Dr Shankara Chetty [03:57:08]
You’re looking at… better ways to risk stratify. To see who is at high risk before they actually get the illness. Now to do that– I mentioned it in the
article that I wrote– if this is a hyer– Look, hypersensitivity has been conclusively proven. Marcus Sanchez and Kenneth Day wrote an article in August or September last year that postulated that this is hypersensitivity immune mediated pneumonitis rather than a covid pneumonia. And I contacted Marcus and I told him that that was exactly the article that I wrote, but I have proved it on a clinical basis.
And so we’ve been collaborating ever since. We’re looking to publish comprehensive article bringing the science and the clinical and observation, theraputic trial together. Subsequently, I think in August this year, I think it was in China, that a research paper was published where they looked at the exact immunoglobulin-E. subset for spike protein. And they found a correlation between those levels and the severity of the illness. So clearly, that’s how it works. The higher the level of IG-E, the more allergic you’re likely to be.
Now IG-E testing is done commonly for other allergies, [mold] and gluten and the rest. So my aim was to push to have the development of a specific subtype of IG-E, spike-protein specific subtype. And if you identified that subtype, then you could do a quantitative test on every patient to see who, first of all, has the subtype and the levels. And so those that have the subtype are prone to having a reaction on the eighth day, and those with high levels of the subtype are prone to having a severe reaction. That would be one of the most important risk stratification tools we could ever have, more than whether you’re fat or thin or diabetic or hypertensive. That would tell us exactly who’s going to react on the eighth day.
And of course, everyone’s being distracted by the virus. And so it’s been a bit of a push to get science to look in that direction. This is something I wanted to do in June last year, when I realised hypersensitivity. But I’ve contacted quite a few universities for assistance, but I’ve got no feedback from any. After all, their funding– or their funders would push them to investigate vaccine efficacy, rather than anything that would solve the problem.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [03:59:49]
Is there any chance to have a scratch test?
Dr Shankara Chetty
That’s what we’re going to do. We were going to– you see, they’ve got mRNA vaccines. If they had spike protein vaccines, that would be a simple thing. But it would be simple to scratch a patient on the skin and put some spike protein on it and see if it flares, like a Mantoux test that… we do–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Dr Shankara Chetty [04:00:07]
…for TB. Yeah. It’s simple to gauge allergy, so I don’t think we need to go through the genetics of things. We need to just understand who’s going to react. And to do that, every time the spike protein changes, we’ve just got to make sure that we test, so who is allergic to the new type of spike protein. But what I’ve seen so far is that it seems to be the same kind of subset. So I think it is– It’s almost like a mixed bag of nuts. If you’re allergic to nuts, then some are allergic to walnuts and some are allergic to peanuts, but… you’re allergic to nuts. The different types of nuts might trigger different severities of allergy, but you’re allergic to nuts.
Now just in that perspective, the mixing of vaccines is a dangerous thing, because you might be allergic to peanuts and not allergic to walnuts. But a bag of mixed nuts poses a unique risk to you. So… would a mixture of vaccines pose unique risk to you, as well. So yeah, I think we need to be cautious about mixing the vaccines.
Reiner Fuellmich [04:01:18]
So if we’re lucky, if we’re lucky, Shankara, then the omicron variant will lead us out of this catastrophe without them, the other side, even wanting this to happen. But if we’re lucky, this is a– as you described it, let me read it: it’s a natural… selection process of a man-made virus, so that it more or less eliminates itself, right?
Dr Shankara Chetty
Yes, it eliminates the… illness.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [04:01:52]
It’s very much contradicting what Mr Vanden Bossche always is telling. Vanden Bossche. And I think he is just sent from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to fear monger again, I think.
Dr Shankara Chetty [04:02:11]
Now look, I think we’ve got to understand that we’re dealing with two types of people, yeah? Vaccinated and non-vaccinated, even though I… hate to distinguish. But the unvaccinated, when they get this infection, they will develop a wide, robust response to the Omicron variant, which would hold them in good stead in the future. However, those patients that are vaccinated, whether infected before not, we know that the vaccine damages your immunity and so the question is– that needs to be asked is: do vaccinated patients when they are exposed to a natural infection, have the ability to develop a robust, broad, natural response? And if not, are they going to be the subset of population that are going to be prone to re-infections?
Because developing a vaccine that gives you a non neutralizing antibody response is almost a distraction to a good immune response. So when you are in contact with the virus, your immunity looks out and sees that you have soldiers fighting this, even though it does not recognize that the soldiers are ineffective. And because it thinks you’re fighting the virus, it won’t mount a full, robust response. And so vaccinated people may be compromised in our aim to get to herd immunity. And I think that’s a big issue.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [04:03:46]
Yes, it is.
Dr Shankara Chetty
That’s the reason the pandemic of the… vaccinated. Besides the side effects and things we see, they might be the subset of population that leads to the perpetuation of this virus. In any event, coronavirus will become endemic. It will become endemic, and we’ll never eliminate it from our environment. It has other animal hosts, dogs and cats and other vertebrates. And so we’ll never eliminate it. We’re not going to go vaccinating every animal on the planet to try and eliminate this. It doesn’t need to be eliminated. It will lead to– it will… become endemic. The problem is that with the vaccinated forcing selection away from the vaccine, we might see more severe illness. There won’t be the general trend towards milder illness. You can have a vaccinated patient incubate the virus and have a more severe variant suddenly become more contagious, because it’s not the natural selective pressure that you put on a virus.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [04:04:52]
You know, there are two… variants of vaccines now in clinical studies that are self-spreading.
Dr Shankara Chetty
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
They produce… two vaccines that they… are said to be self-spreading, because the virus is amplifying, is replicating, and so you can just infect your neighbor with a… vaccine. And what do you think about that?
Dr Shankara Chetty
Again Wolfgang, now we’re building beehives. It’s… crazy. When I look at I think, do we actually need to go … don’t we have better things to do with our time than to be chasing these bees around, when…
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
This is this a fantastic time for people who are thinking 10 years about– have ideas about vaccines and about interfering with our immune system. They all… want to have to patents, they all want to earn money, and now this is the time they can try it out. And nobody says no, because we are threatened so much and we need to find something to fight it.
Dr Shankara Chetty [04:05:55]
You see, this is… the issue as well. The fact that I understood that on the eighth day we’re having hypersensitivity; and the fact that the rest of the world was chasing a virus– that tells me that very few people on the planet actually understand the immune response to a natural covert– coronavirus infection. And that is where we failed in trying to treat them. Now if we do not understand the body’s natural response to the virus, what right do we have to influence the immune response of a planet through a vaccination program?
We are running blind with that. It makes no sense at all.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
I can– you can– I compare it with… language. When you… invent a new language, and you spread it,
some understand it, some don’t, it’s like Babylon a little bit. It… crashes. Nobody will understand anybody any more, because it’s all mixed up and, all the– the reactions established for centuries, or for thousands of years and the communication established is just confused by all this
Dr Shankara Chetty
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
…which is suddenly happening.
Dr Shankara Chetty [04:07:09]
You know, I think that– I think a lot of it has been science going in the wrong direction over the past 50 years. And I think that direction has been too greatly influenced by finance. Discovery is stifled by big pharma itself.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Just forbid the patents, and everything is solved.
Dr Shankara Chetty [4:07:32]
Yes, you see when you… look at scientific discovery– If you’re testing a drug which you know nothing about, against a population that is diverse then you will get– in examining the effect, you will get a bell-shaped curve. A majority will have what we see in the center, the effect of the drug. You’ll have a tail on one end with side effects, and a tail on the other with no effect. But our focus is always on the center of the bell, because we’re trying to understand what this drug does.
And that is what randomized clinical trials are meant to do– show us the consistency. But that doesn’t give us any new information. It just clarifies what we want to understand. Now when we look at corona virus, here we’re dealing with the effect of a virus against a population. But it’s not that we have no knowledge of a virus. There is a huge amount of knowledge surrounding what a virus does. This is not the first respiratory virus in history. So again, when you look at how this virus influences this variable population, you will get a bell-shaped curve. A majority have the symptoms that are grouped in the center, and you have a tail on either end with the unusual kind of symptoms. Now where scientific breakthrough lies is not in the examination of the center of this curve, but in the understanding of the tails. So the greatest scientific discoveries throughout history were made by doctors coming together either in the doctors’ lounge or the pub at the end of the day, discussing the unusual cases and trying to make sense of it. And that is where new discovery lies, not in any randomized clinical trial.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg [04:09:12]
Dr Shankara Chetty
But unfortunately, that’s a… construct of the pharmaceutical industry, and they’ve transferred that to the medical profession, very illogically. So, unfortunately, like we have seen with the vaccines, it’s a comment that sounds crude, but doctors have been well trained by the pharmaceutical industry over the past 50 years on how to shine shit. And that’s what they tend to do.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Reiner Fuellmich [04:09:38]
Yeah. We have to… have the ability– Most people do not have the ability to set priorities. They… are chasing everything at the same time. It doesn’t make any sense. You have to set priorities, and the most important priority thst we can see right now is probably the spike protein. Many of the other things may be worth chasing as well, but not now. Let’s first go for the real danger that we can see. I think that’s the most important thing, and that’s the most important thing for people to understand.
Dr Shankara Chetty [04:10:12]
Reiner, that is the focus of my work right now. Covid is no more a challenge. I don’t have patience that demise any more from covid. But the spike protein is what’s going to cause all the– the pathology I’m expecting to see over the next five years. And so the understanding of that spike protein and how to negate its effects is going to take center stage whether we like it or not.
But unfortunately, this is man-made. Remember that the only way to have been exposed to spike protein prior to vaccination was through exposure to a coronavirus. And when you got that virus and got over that infection with eary treatment, you would now be immune to the vector, coronavirus. And so being immune to the vector would prevent you being exposed to spike protein in future, because the vector can’t get into you.
Unfortunately now we vaccinated a large proportion of the planet, and that large proportion is walking around with spike protein. And so they are the new vectors of spike protein. So I guess the vaccinated are now the new coronavirus, that’s exposing us to spike protein. And so we’re going to have this long-term exposure, and the understanding of its biologic effects short-term, long-term, is vitally important. The diversity of what we see with spike protein is mind boggling. I don’t think that there will ever be a pharmaceutical intervention that’s going to solve this problem, simply because pharmaceutical interventions are far too narrow in their target. A diversity of injury that we see requires products or chemicals that have a broader diversity of action and have the ability to get the body to self-correct. I as a doctor would not be quick enough to tell you what’s wrong with you, when there’s this diversity of things happening in your body. But I’m sure your body knows what’s wrong.
So the nutraceuticals are going to prove to be the next big thing, in that if we understand the biologic effects and how they will influence the pathways that spike protein damages, they would be the next best thing in trying to solve the problems with spike protein. And that is the kind of research I’m being involved in with a few researchers and pharmaceuticals around the world, to try and figure out the right mix that would actually help us negate the effects of spike protein.
But it’s a difficult task, in that if the poisoner realizes that we can fix his poison, then he might change the poison. And if humanity [starts] deliberately poisoning itself, it makes my job that much harder. So yeah, tough times.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Reiner Fuellmich [04:13:03]
Okay. well again I can’t thank you enough, Shankara. As I said, this is the first time I really have an overview of what’s going on. I can see all the little dots, and I can even connect them from this medical perspective, which makes it a whole lot easier for me to analyze it in a legal manner. I think we are– because it’s– this is always the most important thing for a lawyer: to find out what the real facts are. You don’t learn that at law school, not in Germany. You do learn it in the Anglo-American system, but not here. But your lecture gave me a… huge step forward in that direction, getting all the dots… connected so that we have the real facts, which we have to then analyze in a legal manner thank you very much again, Shankara.
Dr Shankara Chetty [04:13:51]
You’re most welcome, Reiner. If there’s anything I can help with, please I’ll be more than… willing.
We will definitely–
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Thank you very much.
…stay in touch. I think there’s going to be more to talk about very soon.
Dr Shankara Chetty
You’re more than welcome, more than welcome.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Dr Shankara Chetty
Thanks so much.
And have a great weekend.
Dr Shankara Chetty [04:14:10]
You, too. You, too. I’m going to have a busy one. God has delivered omicron for my Christmas, and the world wants to know what’s going on. So I guess I’ve got my Christmas cut out for me.
Dr Shankara Chetty
Enjoy. I wish you well, and thank you.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg
Dr Shankara Chetty
Reiner Fuellmich [04:14:28]
Thank you. Bye-bye.