Vladimir Zelenko and Del Bigtree interview

 

https://thehighwire.com/videos/a-doctors-grave-warning-for-israel/

Interviewer is Del Bigree, a well known anti-vaxxer.  Bigtree has no medical training, yet has become one of the most prominent voices in the anti-vaxxers movement.  

Vladimir Zelenko is a well known anti-democratic political campaigner.  In the early days of the pandemic he posted on his twitter several memes ridiculing the new virus, calling it the “dem panic”, and another that featured Hillary Clinton on a list of “things more likely to kill you than the coronavirus.”  So that sets the tone of where he’s coming from.  He was early in making advice, with no clinical trials to verify this, to use Hydroxychloroquine and zinc to combat Covid-19.  

He says: 

• “If we follow the advice of the “global leaders”, let’s say like Bill Gates said last year, 7 billion people need to be vaccinated, the death rate will be over 2 billion people.  So wake up, this is world war 3.“

• “This is a war for survival and survival of the soul of humanity and ultimately it’s gonna have to take people ready to sacrifice everything to bring the truth to the world”

• “World experts, not me, real world experts in immunology and vaccinology they’re screaming that this is a potential cause of genocide”

• “I feel we’re on the verge of a genocide”

These are outrageous statements that are totally unsupported by any line of evidence or reason.  

Zelenko recommends a medicine (Hydroxychloroquine) that is relatively untested, and what tests have been done show mixed results, so there is likely no real benefit.  If it was a miracle cure, then this would be clearly evident in the research.  However, it stands in contrast to one of the most thoroughly scrutinized treatments available, which has shown time and again to be highly safe and very effective against the virus - the covid vaccines.  There doesn’t seem to be any logical reason for this love-affair with Hydroxychloroquine..  Why go with the untested probably not effective treatment option, and avoid the more effective and more tested treatment option?  

The two frequently quotes these guys as expert authorities:

-Robert Malone

-Geert Vanden Bossche

-Michael Yeadon

Except these guys are all discredited as authorities on this matter.  I’ve watched their videos, they are, in my educated opinion, utter nutcases.  What they say are false statements after false statements and they should therefore not be trusted.  I’ve written about Michael Yeadon previously and it doesn’t take long to realize he is utterly clueless.  So they keep quoting these three guys calling them world health experts, yet these really are the only few voices I know with any sort of perceived clout they can cling to.  On the other hand, there are thousands and thousands of far more qualified researchers who are disagreeing with the nonsense conspiracy rubbish they are sprouting.  And when you look at what these 3 guys are saying, it’s little wonder they are considered to be unreliable, it’s because they keep stating untrue things, and are deliberately misleading people.  

He mentions that animals died during the vaccine testing.  Yet this is false, animals did not die as a result of Covid vaccine testing.  This statement is simply false.  He states that it is fact, yet this is simply not the case as far as I can tell.  

He complains that the Jewish leaders in the video don’t quote any studies, yet this entire video he’s in he doesn’t quote any studies, so he’s hypocritical.  

He mentions blood clots (something that has been observed in a few rare cases and so measures have been taken to prevent this risk), yet he makes it sound like this is a frequent occurrence.

He mentions miscarriages, but we know there is no increase in miscarriages in vaccinated women.  Again, just a blatantly false statement.  

He claims people who are in fear and in isolation are not capable of rational thought.  OMG.  Has he listened to himself recently???

He says that people will gravitate to any false promise that will reduce the emotional pain they are in because of the fear.  This is actually true.  And it is exactly what is going on with him.  He’s scared, he’s concerned, he latches onto the promise that Hydroxychloroquine can save you.  And furthermore, studies of conspiracy theorists show that they latch onto conspiracies because it makes them feel empowered when they otherwise feel disempowered or out of control.  It seems to me that is likely the case here given his bizarre and outlandish claims of 2 billion deaths etc.  Which is just ridiculous.  

He claims that zinc kills the Covid virus.  https://www.nationalacademies.org/based-on-science/covid-19-zinc says there has not been enough research specifically on how zinc affects coronaviruses and that if you get sick, zinc will not cure you.  Again, why go with an untested intervention and oppose the vastly more effective and thoroughly tested interventions?  

Del Bigtree says “I think that we’ll see one of the great human die-offs because of this vaccine”  To which Zelenko says “I feel that we’re on the verge of a genocide”.  He says he hopes he’s wrong.  Well he is.  He says some say as high as 90% of vaccinated people will die.  Ridiculous.  He says that if properly treated the global death toll of Covid would be about 5 million people.  This is ridiculous.  There have been 220 million cases, and 4.5 million deaths globally.  We’re already just about at his magic 5 million number, with only 3% of the world having caught this virus.  

He says Bill Gates is a sociopath and that we’re all suffering because he couldn’t get a girlfriend in highschool.  How ridiculous.  Furthermore, it’s not even true, according to Paul Allen who wrote a bout about Gates and went to high-school with him, he did date often and wasn’t socially awkward.  

Zelenko says Bill suggests we should reduce the global population by 15%.  This is factually false, and once again shows how these two guys are happy to deliberately and maliciously misrepresent another person to push their own agenda.  It’s a false statement, and Bill Gates has never said we should reduce the global population by 15%.  He did say that with good economic policy and social programs we could reduce global population growth by 15% which he says is critical to combatting a range of social issues including climate change.  He said the fastest growing countries are also the poorest countries and so they need more help, since population growth is closely linked to economic poverty and poor health care.  And Bill Gates is right.  With proper health care, economic policy, help from other wealthy nations, the poorest can be brought out of poverty and reduce the explosive population growth we are being burdened by globally.  Bill said at the current rate we will grow to 9 Billion from the current 7 billion, but that growth could be reduced by 15%.  

Zelenko says the World Economic Forum (WEF) wants to enslave you by making you codependent on all these government forces.  That’s not true.  The WEF seeks to encourage the more powerful entities around the world (nations, countries, businesses, banks etc) to engage in ethical behaviour for the betterment of all humanity.  

Zelenko says the WEF wants you to “own nothing and you’ll be happy”, which is again not true.  This has never ever been an agenda of the WEF. This in fact seems to come from an analyst who noted several trends in society and wrote an article based on those observations outlining what life might be like in 2030.  In that article, it was noted that people are tending to own less things, and instead rent or lease them.  EG we don’t buy music, we pay a subscription.  We don’t buy new cars, we often lease them.  We don’t own DVD’s, we often subscribe to video services instead.  We don’t buy software, like Adobe Photoshop, we often subscribe to get a license.  We don’t buy computers, we lease them, or put them in the cloud.  Etc etc etc.  It’s a pretty obvious trend, and this author noted it, and predicted that by 2030 that could become more prevalent.  And he noted that people are happy with such services as subscriptions.  

During this interview, he said all sorts of false statements which I’ve not listed, such as that the USA is 70% zinc deficient (false), but which is not worth mentioning them all.  

All in all, this is simply another propaganda piece by the anti-vaxxer movement, which actually contains no useful  information, just rhetoric. What was said was largely fallacious, or fabricated, or deliberately misleading.  This is pretty typical stuff from the anti-vaxxer movement.  It’s a shame that they are so popular, since they are actively misleading many people, and causing great harm to the world as a result.  They should not be trusted.

Context is irrelevant?

I recently had these two videos shared with me, obviously with the intent to show how bad and nefarious these two world leaders really are:

First clip:

https://youtu.be/M11z5ZEs7o4

In the first instance, Barack Obama is presented as if he is saying that “ordinary men and women are too small minded to govern their own affairs”.  In actual fact, the context is that he’s giving a speech in Europe praising them for their shared ideals that through conscience and free-will we each have the right to live as we choose and that power is derived from consent from the governed.  He said that this is in contrast to other countries with an alternative vision (probably directed at Russia) that argues “ordinary men and women are too small minded to govern their own affairs” and that order and progress can only be accomplished when individuals surrender their rights to an all powerful sovereign often is rooted in the notion that some people are superior to others.  

You can see his full speech here: https://youtu.be/B8Mrt4fsD8E

In other words, what he actually said is the complete opposite of what the clip sent to me tried to make him out as saying.  The original clip was carefully and deliberately edited to misrepresent what Obama actually said.  And people all over the internet take the bait hook line and sinker because it confirms the beliefs they already want to believe.  

Second Clip: 

https://youtu.be/Hz2tOIz3yUA

The second clip is from the Premier of Victoria Daniel Andrews in which he is discussing electronic devices to track you and monitor you.  Sounds dastardly doesn’t it.  The truth is far less interesting though.  The context is that Andrews is in a press conference, and a reporter asked (at about the 35 minute mark) whether the Australian National cabinet meeting was discussing an electronic device for returning overseas visitors to wear during the required 14 day quarantine period, and asked Andrews to go into some detail about it.  Andrews answered that he doesn't know if they discussed it because he missed the National Cabinet meeting last week, but that he's aware that there are some devices that can do this and other countries are looking into it, and outlined how such a device could potentially work.  

That's pretty much a nothing statement.  It's not nearly as draconian as careful cropping of the context would suggest.  He merely said he didn't know the answer because he missed the meeting, and then outlined to the best of his limited knowledge how such devices could work. 

The full transcript of his speech is available here: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/dan-andrews-october-19-covid-19-press-conference. 

Conclusion:

These are classic examples of the deliberate misinformation campaign going around.  They are very easily debunked, but for many people, these clips are proof and evidence of a nefarious plot to control the populace and limit our freedoms and whatever other nonsense they want to believe.  The distribution of this misinformation is so nefarious given the misinformation surrounding us all the time.  

Yes, these are dangerous times we live in when people will simply believe anything that tickles their ears and suits the beliefs they want to be true, regardless of whether they actually are true.  

Michael Yeadon video

See the Michael Yeadon video here: https://youtu.be/pENijjYcwBw 

Mr Michael Yeadon is one of a few scientific minds speaking out against the Covid vaccine, and the virus in general.  Despite there being a few similar minds besides him, they are all in the vast minority in the scientific community, and for good reason as we’ll see in his video.  

He’s famous for his unsubstantiated and false claims that the Vaccine will cause infertility in women or cause problems for pregnant women.  These have since been proven false.

He was also famous for his statement in October 2020 that the UK covid death rate would fizzle out and so lockdowns should stop.  Since then the death toll has quadrupled. 

He has encouraged people to not wear masks and to not socially distance despite these being common-sense and proven ways to reduce the spread of air-borne diseases. 

Early in his twitter profile, he seemed supportive of a covid vaccine saying “Covid 19 is not going away until we have a vaccine or herd immunity”.  

What he says in this video:

Lockdown - isn't going to work. Reason: only people who are ill and have symptoms and really strong infectious risks. And if you're ill you'll stay home. He says he's sure that cutting contact will not reduce spread of disease. He doesn't give evidence to support this claim, and this claim is contrary to the mounds of evidence that show asymptomatic can easily spread the disease. (CDC shows that 50% of transmission happens BEFORE people develop symptoms, and 30% of people infected stay symptom free).  He repeats that it's a myth that there is asymptomatic transmission.  He says if it occurs at all it's under 1%.  Obviously, this is false as the research all over the globe shows that asymptomatic people are contagious, and that you can be contagious for several days before the onset of symptoms.   

He says he knew he was being lied to by the govt, though doesn't give any evidence to support his claim.  But the reason becomes clear later in the video - and that is because he is a nutter.  

He is critical of the Covid PCR tests. He says we don't know how many false positives there are and therefore we should ignore completely any infection rate stats.  However, there are plenty of studies on this, they all show low rates of false positives, with most of the studies giving ranges from <0.4% up to 4% false positive rates (depending on region, brand etc).  

He claims most of his colleagues agreed with him.  Yet later he explains how most of his colleagues are distancing themselves from him.  So he contradicts himself.  

He claims we've never used lockdown before. To hear him say something that is so easily refuted is shocking. Social isolation or "lockdown" if you will, has been widely used for millennia. This statement of his really reveals his shocking ignorance on the subject. He's just factually wrong.  (see here)

He says without evidence that lockdowns don't work because he says someone needs to be symptomatic to spread the virus.  This simply repeats what he said earlier, and it’s incorrect.  He says our intuitions are enough to tell us if someone is infected. This is not true, people can present with no symptoms at all and still spread the virus to you unwittingly.  

He says the tests don't work, which is factually false.  They work quite well.  They are particularly specialised for accurate positive results.  False negatives are very rare. 

He says wearing masks have never been used and doesn't work. Which is again just stupendously false. They have been shown time and time again to limit the spread of a respiratory disease, and it’s why they HAVE been used in many countries for decades.  

He claims Covid is less of a threat than influenza. Which is false.  There are many complications with Covid, including long-term taste loss or sense-of-smell loss.  Also lungs, heart, kidney and brain damage can result from severe Covid infections.  These long-term complications occur in about 30% of infection survivors.  Aside from being vastly more contagious than influenza, the mortality rate is also about 10 times more than influenza (see here).  

He repeatedly says governments are lying, without any evidence to substantiate that.  All he has actually done is show either his own ignorance, or else spread outright untrue things of his own.  

He says "if you want to check any one of the things that I've said you'll find it is true", yet so far the number of false statements is huge and I'm not even half way through. He then says if you find even one thing false being said then you should no longer assume what you're being told is true. Ok - sure - I no longer assume what he is saying in this video to be true.  

He says we should not trust the people who are in the scientific professions because they are being paid and so will simply say whatever they are told to say.  He says we should rather trust people like him who are not in the scientific community anymore. Hahaha I kid you not.  

He says immunity to viruses doesn't depend on antibodies at all. He later says that he's not saying antibodies play no role. He says the emphasis on antibodies in respect of respiratory viral infections is wrong. I’m not sure what he’s specifically responding to here.  I haven’t heard an emphasis on antibodies with respect to viral infection immunity.  Antibodies are merely the things the body makes that attach to the pathogen marking it for attack.  Antibodies are produced in the body and part of what vaccines do is teaching the body how to make those antibodies so that the rest of the immune system can respond to the pathogens they attach to and help prevent the virus from entering our cells.  

He says if you're over 70 and already ill it's a slightly bigger risk than flu. And if you're under 70 and healthy it's less of a rush than influenza. This is demonstrably false. The rush is actually massive. Huge. What a barbaric statement.  So he says it's absurd to let the economy and civil society be smashed for a far less risky thing than influenza. Again, as said above, this is false.  Covid is far deadlier than Influenza, and in those that survive about 30% have long-term effects that persist even after the infection is long gone.  

He says we didn't need to do anything. This is obviously false. The wave of people hitting hospitals and dying was overwhelming and would only get worse. Honestly, this advice is murderous. 

He says there are multiple drugs at least as effective as vaccines such as inhaled cortico steroids reduced symptoms by 90%. This was found by one study so much more testing is needed.  Currently though the WHO does not recommend any specific drug as a Covid treatment.  

He says ivermectin is effective, reducing fatality by 90%.  This is false, but there is ongoing study into the efficacy of this treatment.  So far though, the results are not supportive that it does anything at all. 

Even if both of those medicines prove effective treatments, that’s still not an argument to produce a vaccine.  For starters, at least 30% of covid infection survivors present with long-term symptoms and complications.  It’s like saying we don’t need seat-belts in cars because now we have air-bags.  One doesn’t negate the need for the other.  

He says slight variations don't present as different viruses. But this is obviously false. EG Every year we have different varieties of influenza and they all have their own vaccine even though they are nearly identical.  That’s why each year the specific variants in the flu vaccine are different year by year. So once again, he's not telling the truth. 

He says that this is an attempt at mass depopulation.  So basically a wild conspiracy theory.  Yet there is no evidence of this at all, and given the level of untruth in the speech so far, there is no reason to believe this.  

He says that the virus only kills people who are elderly or ill.  This is false (I’m tired of saying this).  Getting covid is far more likely to be lethal the older you are, true, but that doesn’t mean those under a certain age are safe.  30% of deaths were under 64 years of age.  

He says it’s an illegal thing for your government to force any medical treatment.  This is false at least in Australia, but also many other countries.  The Government has some ability to override an individual's wishes for the greater good when there is an urgency to do so.  But generally, free liberal democratic governments are not in the business of overriding the wishes of the people who can elect them out.  That’s why it’s called representative government after all. 

He says it’s against the Nuremberg Code to coerce people to take experimental therapies because now it’s them taking part in a medical experiment against their will.  This is false on multiple accounts.  Firstly, it’s not experimental, Eg Pfizer has passed all phase three clinical trial data points that are required for a treatment to go to market, and it completed them last year!  The technology is not new, it’s been under research for decades, and because of the nature of the treatment, it’s safer and faster to manufacture than other vaccines.  Secondly, it’s not done on people unwittingly, all the test subjects were volunteers and fully aware of what they were doing.  This ties back to my previous article here. 

Next he outlines a bizarre doomsday scenario (including mass executions!!!)  about vaccine passports, again, completely without any evidence to support these outlandish claims.  It’s simply a figment of his imagination.  He’s clearly delusional and simply using his status as a former scientist to prop up his credibility as he spews some of the most incredulous and ridiculous lies I’ve so far heard.  

He claims that the Covid vaccines are not approved.  He says that they are approved only for emergency use.  In actual fact, the vaccines have passed all the standard clinical tests - the Phase 3 trials - that are required for a treatment to go to market.  Phase 4 is simply monitoring the treatment once it has gone to market.  The approval was simply an exercise in red-tape which many governments sped-up.  And in fact, Pfizer is now approved even apart from emergency use.  

This speech from Michael Yeadon contains misleading and false information about Covid and the vaccine.  Despite his former credentials, he demonstrates a profound ignorance of even the most basic principles of pandemic management.  His predictions of mass executions and that this is a mass population reduction exercise are not only unfounded, but they are ridiculous fabrications of his own imagination.  

His misinformation is dangerous because it will cause many people to not take the vaccine, and thus increase their risk of death or permanent side effects from Covid.  The reason this is important is demonstrated by this video I encourage you to watch.  https://youtu.be/pd8P12BXebo

Covid Conspiracy Theories

Someone has shared with me a few things that were quite startling to me.

It boils down to the notion that there is a greater agenda in the global pandemic than meets the eye, and that there are voices that aren’t being heard (ie suppressed).  In particular to do with the Covid vaccines as being harmful.

To support this view, a video from Dr Ryan Cole was shared with me (https://rumble.com/vkopys-a-pathologist-summary-of-what-these-jabs-do-to-the-brain-and-other-organs.html?fbclid=IwAR26FiUBr1ZO1J99L5qcT_mlkQUuN8zNzxaJm-04cxENIu6HEUTQ7MrTRMc) which contains his views on the pandemic and in particular the vaccines.  

A quick listen and it became clear he was making unsubstantiated and false claims.  This was later confirmed when I checked https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/scicheck-idaho-doctor-makes-baseless-claims-about-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/

I asked i this person if they had heard of factcheck.org (going to steer them towards a site that would reveal some substantiated claims), and yes they said they had, and revealed to me that the site is funded by the pharma companies profiting from Covid, and George Soros, and Bill Gates, and so therefore can’t be trusted as it's biased.  As evidence for this, I was pointed to https://www.australiannationalreview.com/state-of-affairs/george-soros-and-bill-gates-funding-facebooks-fact-checkers/ 

I had never heard of the “Australian National Review”.  A quick poke around the site was not promising, with conspiracy theories about chem-trails, anti climate-change and anti-gmo propaganda, among others.  There was surprisingly little on the web about the site, however mediabiasfactcheck.com review site classifies the ANR as a site as being “a strong conspiracy and pseudoscience source based on the promotion of false or misleading science claims”.  (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/australian-national-review/).  It is highly dubious that it’s in any way reliable as an information source.  I also asked my Facebook friends, none of the responses were positive to say the least. One person even said it was the epitome of a fake news site.

The author of the article, Baxter Dmitry, is a pseudonym of an author who has been widely criticized for deliberately false news articles put on the internet by extremist right-wing propaganda sites - particularly peddling conspiracy theories and blatant lies. EG https://sciencefeedback.co/authors/baxter-dmitry/

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-bill-gates-vaccinate-childr-idUSKBN22B26Z

Anyway, Baxter Dmitry says in this article that sites like factcheck.org are linked to the poynter organisation, which is funded by George Soros and Bill Gates.  

Even if true, why would that discredit them on its own?  Soros is a frequent target in multiple bizarre conspiracy theories, and Bill Gates is starting to be equally attacked.  It's quite telling that they are being targeted again, as if the mere mention of their names is enough to invalidate anything they are involved in.  

He mentions that Bill Gates and others also donated to Hillary Clinton.  Okay?  Even if true, what does that about factcheck.org?  

He quotes "It gave me goosebumps to hear those names because they have actually a very strong political agenda", the hypocrisy here is galling.  

Fact is, the code of conduct for fact checkers is very reasonable.  Look at it yourself and tell me if any of these are unacceptable to you.  https://www.ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org/know-more/the-commitments-of-the-code-of-principles

Dmitry then goes on to quote a Danish "pro-Russian" named Thranholm.  Why this is relevant I have no idea other than the quote fits his narrative.  Thranholm is very outspoken, and often branded a Russian propagandist.  She apparently often speaks of Vladimir Putin as “saving Christianity”, which is just bizarre.  The EU has apparently targeted her for promoting pro-Russian propaganda, with the intent of destabilizing Europe.  So quoting this person, someone who is known to be spreading misinformation, is a bit silly.  I guess he hoped no one would check.  

Dmitry concludes with "Welcome to 1984’s Ministry of Truth, where only selected facts are allowed to exist while other facts that don’t fit Washington’s neoliberal narrative will be labelled “fake news” and suppressed." Yet he provides no evidence of this in the article.  He hasn't shown how fact checking organisations only select certain facts to exist.  In fact he hasn’t presented any actual evidence at all, only his own personal opinions.  

Of course conspiracy theory websites, and websites promoting propaganda and misinformation would try to undermine anyone who can so easily disprove their wacky conspiracy theories.  After all, that's the exact thing that these fact-check organisations actively work against.  It's the whole reason for their existence - to check claims and report on accuracy with high levels of transparency and high requirements of verifiable evidence.  

In conclusion, he gives no reason whatsoever to mistrust factcheck.org.  factcheck.org openly reveals their funding sources, they provide all the evidence for their conclusions in their articles, 

Which brings us back to Dr Ryan Cole and his dubious claims.  A quick google reveals multiple independent websites evaluating his rather unique claims.  Such as that Covid is a seasonal virus (false), that ivermectin has been proven an effective treatment (false), and so on.  He apparently did respond to one site with an explanation, apologizing for seeming dismissive of the deaths from Covid, and explaining that he is definitely not an anti-vaxxer (see https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/local/208/garden-city-doctor-reacts-fact-checking-his-statements-lawmakers/277-6d4ba8c6-3eb7-4334-bfe2-2052c57a7e0e).  

The most concise is the factcheck.org investigation linked above and again here which deals with his many baseless and false claims: https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/scicheck-idaho-doctor-makes-baseless-claims-about-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/.  

Which brings us all the way back to the start with the notion that that there is a greater agenda in the global pandemic than meets the eye, and that there are voices that aren’t being heard (ie suppressed) and that Covid vaccines are harmful.  So far, the evidence supporting this claim is non-existent.  Thus, I remained concerned for my friend who is using this as ‘evidence’ to support the conspiracy theory claims being made.