Covid 19: The Transparent Fraud - Interview with Dr. Peter A. McCullough

01.02.2024 | www.kla.tv/28055

Kla.TV: Okay, we're back with Dr. Peter McCullough. Series of questions now. Doctor, given that the fatality and severe morbidity rates of COVID were so low, even before adjusting for iatrogenic harms and misattribution of deaths, do you think the WHO was right to declare a pandemic? Dr. McCullough: Yeah, that's a difficult one. That was an illness that was spreading around the world. People didn't know all the planning for this, and we were all caught by surprise. I think a pandemic, global and national emergencies, it lasted certainly the first year through 2020, once we got a grip on it with early treatment. Remember, I testified in the U.S. Senate November 19, 2020, and told the world we had early treatment. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons had a home treatment guide. Largely high-risk patients were treated from that point forward. The real squeeze on hospitals ended in January/February of 2021. So I think pandemic declaration, emergency declarations through 2020, and then dropping them early in 2021 would have been appropriate just because of the unknowns. You're right. The overall case fatality ratio came down as more healthy people got the illness. And we got through it just fine. But there always was a worry about our seniors in nursing homes. What disappointed me, though, is how the focus was quickly taken off the seniors and then hyper-focused on young people and even babies. And to this day, even with the vaccine campaign, we never hear about high-risk seniors. We only hear about young people being mandated to take the shots. Kla.TV: Okay, next question. And this is a question I want to get a doctor's point of view or advice on how to deal with those who seem to be really resistant to any information, any useful information about the vaccine. So I'm from Seattle, and whenever I go home, which is a couple times a year, it's pretty much every time now I hear a story about a sudden unexplained death in someone someone knows. And if I point to the vaccine, it's tinfoil hat time for my Seattle family. Now you, as a doctor, dealing with people... Here's another case. A friend of mine in Montana. Hadn't seen him for a long time. He was telling me about the previous year. And he said, I was feeling a little short of breath. I was feeling a little under the weather, not too much energy. Went to the doctor. They said I had some heart problem, and I couldn't believe it. They didn't know why. And it ended up, I had clots in my legs. And I just looked at him. I did this. And he says, What's that? I said, Dude, it's the vaccine. And again, glazed eye. I'm coming from space with this. How do you deal with this? How do you begin? Is there a baby steps way to bring people into the light? Dr. McCullough: Well, let me just tell you the rules. The FDA has guidance on genetic technology transfer products like Pfizer, Moderna, messenger RNAs, and the Janssen adenoviral DNA products. They say the window of concern that a new medical problem could pop up from these shots is five years from the time they took the shot. And I put that in the congressional record. I testified in Congress on January 12th, 2024. And the representatives were stunned. I said, yeah, this is the guidance. This isn't over with yet. The vaccines install messenger RNA, which is synthetic. It's long lasting. There's no evidence that it ever leaves the body. It looks to be permanent. It's producing high quantities of the spike protein, the spine on the surface of the virus. The spike protein is circulating in blood. And at least half of people who take the shots at six months or longer, the spike protein directly causes blood clotting. It's found in the blood clots. It's irrefutable that blood clots are due to vaccination. And so as we move forward, the challenges are for people to wake up and ask themselves, what did they do to their bodies? And I think the problem is people, when they take the shot, they say, listen, I can't do anything about it now. I don't want to hear about this. People actually don't want to hear about a potentially costly or lethal health mistake. Doctors are basically gaslighting patients. They're telling patients, nope, it's not due to the vaccine. When there are over 3,400 peer reviewed papers in the literature saying, yes, these complications are due to the vaccine. The doctors took the vaccine themselves. And again, they don't want to face reality. Kla.TV: Right. And speaking of gaslighting, what do you think about the latest narrative that came out this fall that is going to explain away these heart problems and clots, when they came out and said the new variant will cause heart problems. That was a laugher on our side. But how did they get away with that? Dr. McCullough: Well, how did they know? What we're seeing is a cover-up, a dramatic, you know, conceived and widespread coverup of a biological safety disaster with these COVID-19 vaccines with all kinds of storylines, like papers that are published saying safe and effective when the data shows that it's not safe and effective. You know, I did a Twitter poll and I asked the public, I did it across three platforms. I said, would you trust a manuscript published by vaccinated doctors from an institution that mandated the vaccines, knowing the institution has to sign off on the manuscript? No, the manuscripts are going to come out and actually promote the false narrative of safe and effective. They're not trustable. And so we have this persisting at this point in time. And doctors are slowly waking up. I don't want to see every doctor get a blood clot or myocarditis before they wake up. But sadly, that's what my office is like right now. Patients come in and they look back with a tremendous amount of regret and say, listen, you know, I remained willfully blind to what was going on. Kla.TV: And when you say crisis, I think we can say manufactured crisis, can we not? Dr. McCullough: It's true that, you know, there's a manufactured crisis, that virus was manufactured. The cover up is blatant. You know, when in under court order, Pfizer was forced to release their 90 day dossier for safety, you know, they didn't release it voluntarily, which they should have to the FDA and the public. The FDA fought the courts to not release the Pfizer documents. And the judge heard arguments from the lawyer, from the FDA said, listen, we don't want to release it for 55 years. Turns out Pfizer knew about one thousand two hundred and twenty three vaccine deaths within 90 days of their product being on the market. It's a wide open cover-up at this point in time by Pfizer, by the FDA and the medical community. Kla.TV: Within the medical community, what percentage of people do you think are aware of the cover up, but silent versus people who actually still believe the narrative? Dr. McCullough: It was an older Texas A&M survey asking doctors, I believe it was 2021. And as I recall, four percent of doctors did not take the vaccine. I'm one of them. I didn't take the vaccine. I never thought it was safe mechanistically. And publicly I was the, I'm the only public figure who put it in writing in a widely read op ed in the Hill that the vaccines were a gamble. I'm the only one. It wasn't any of the other media commentators you saw on TV. It wasn't any public health officials, wasn't any department chiefs at universities. You're talking to the only public figure who questioned the vaccines in writing. And to this day, it's on the Hill's website. Then anybody in the world, no one in the world actually thought to question these and actually write about it. Really, it's an amazing observation. But what we know is that of this four percent, just a tiny number have actually spoken out with great concern that the population’s been damaged. So the rest of the four percent is silent. Now, among that 96 percent who took the shots, I wonder how many really now understand and are no longer taking them. We're not getting any reports on how many vaccines doctors are taking. I did a Twitter poll and I asked the public, I said, do you know anybody at the time who's taken seven shots? Right now, doctors who are actually following the guidance should be on their 12th shot. But at the time I asked about seven shots and I was shocked to find out. I think the answer was about nine percent said, yeah, I know somebody. And you know who it was. It was health care workers and doctors in Canada. Kla.TV: Right. Now when you say you were the only public figure, maybe there were some doctors out there, not exactly household names and public figures, but kind of became that way when they did make these predictions early on. I've done interviews. I did an interview with Carrie Madej, did one with Andrew Kaufman, and they were waving that red flag quite early on... what's the word? ...getting ready for all this. The word escapes me right now. Predicting. Dr. McCullough: Right. There may have been an unreferenced video ahead of time, but you'd be hard pressed to find anything, to be honest with you, outside of my editorial. Even others who have testified in various settings who make the claim, oh, I saw this coming all along. Just check out what they were writing in 2019 and 2020. So, one for instance, one person who testified with me in the European Parliament, he said, I saw this coming and the WHO is corrupt. And he went on and on. So I went back and checked out his investment newsletters. And in 2019, no mention of the WHO in the pandemic, even the first quarter of 2020, no mention of the pandemic. So, investors weren't warned about this. I think people look back and they may have wished they would have made the claim, but I have it in writing. It's still up on their website in the Hill. It's an op ed, August of 2020. It says the great gamble of the COVID-19 vaccine development program. And boy, am I glad I made the call because I made it before the clinical trials came out. And it was just based on the fact that the vaccines were genetic and they were going to install the genetic code for the lethal spike protein that would be produced for an uncontrolled duration and quantity. It was just the worst idea ever. Kla.TV: Now. Speaking of genetic, what about the idea that the mRNA can alter your DNA? Dr. McCullough: There's been one paper, Marcus Aldén, first author, Yang De Marinis, senior author. They used a human hepatoma cell line. They did show that these rapidly dividing cells took up Pfizer and installed the genetic code, the center portion of it called the amplicon, into human DNA. Now, we don't know what happens from there. Is it edited out? Is it permanently conserved? There is a region of DNA called the HERV region that conserves foreign DNA. About 10% of our DNA, by the way, is not human. It's carried forward. We know that, for instance, whether you get chickenpox or take the vaccine, that there's installation of the varicella zoster virus. The same thing with herpes virus, Epstein-Barr. These are now kind of endogenous parts of our DNA. But it is disturbing to think that people who took the vaccine may have incorporated the reverse code of Pfizer or Moderna into our human DNA, and then they could pass it on to their progeny. We simply don't know if the human body is going to produce a foreign protein indefinitely as part of their own DNA. As a doctor, I can only predict that this is going to cause more and more chronic disease. Kla.TV: Okay, on that note I do want to reference an article you wrote in April 19th of last year. I'm going to quote you. But there's no doubt that the first use of mRNA on a mass indiscriminate scale has been a disaster with the COVID-19 vaccine campaign. I think you imply in the article that there might be future positive uses of mRNA. But I think it's a little late for a large chunk of the public that isn't going to trust this stuff at all. Especially considering that there's a possibility of altering the DNA. Dr. McCullough: Oh, for sure. I think the messenger RNA platform now with this disaster has to be suspended. Kla.TV: Get in the water. Dr. McCullough: Yeah. Messenger RNA. Right. This is what we need to know, is a paper by Lalani and colleagues, British Medical Journal, indicates that the United States has had a love affair with messenger RNA since 1985. The government's invested tens of billions of dollars in this. So has big pharma. Multiple companies involved. You know, a paper by Lee and colleagues indicates there's 9,000 patents on messenger RNA and the lead patent assignees are Sanofi, CureVac, BioNTech and the U.S. government. So I can tell you that this love affair of producing designer proteins easily from genetic code that can be drawn up on a computer screen is just irresistible. Now, if the messenger RNA was coding for a deficient protein like insulin in type one diabetes or alpha galactosidase and Fabry's disease, that would be a different story. But to install the code for a lethal protein. I mean, what if we install the code for the staphylococcal toxine, for instance, or enterotoxin? You see what I mean? You can't install the genetic code for a dangerous protein and get away with it biologically. It's a disaster. Kla.TV: Next question. Many of our German listeners want to know what the zeitgeist is like in America currently. I was just reading a Mark Crispin Miller substack, and he says, quote, U.S. Vax rates dropping overall. U.S. Public trusts no scientist or group promoting vaccination. Is this your take that the public has lost trust in groups promoting vaccination, especially in response to a pandemic? Dr. McCullough: It's over half, for sure. A recent Rasmussen poll that did come out January 12th, 2024, indicates 53% of Americans think the vaccine is causing serious adverse events and leading to large numbers of deaths. That's 53% of the nation. FDA not pulling the vaccines off the market. The FDA is actively advertising vaccines. Our FDA has become a pharmaceutical advertising unit. Commissioner Robert Califf is making false claims. He says vaccines reduce mortality. They reduce long COVID. These have never been demonstrated in large scale clinical trials. These are benefits not even listed on the consent form. So our FDA has gone rogue. The public is furious. And I agree with Crispin Miller. They, you know, people don't trust those who say the vaccines are safe and effective. And it's 53%. Now, it means the 47% still don't know. And that's the reason why the independent media is playing such a huge role in bringing this other side to it. We still haven't seen a major exposé on 60 Minutes or CNN or Fox or Newsmax on vaccine safety. We haven't seen it. The most outspoken media anchor on vaccine safety was silenced. And that was Tucker Carlson. Kla.TV: Yeah. Well, he lost his job because of it, correct? Dr. McCullough: In part. I mean, I interviewed with Tucker early in 2021. I was the first. He was blown away when I started giving him the data and citing the sources. And he literally said this. He said, I'm blown away. I wasn't expecting this interview. And he went on a tear for two years to expose this. And in the end, Fox is still paying him, but they're paying him for his silence. Fortunately, he's gone over to Twitter. He's just had a very popular Canadian tour and he's taken on other issues, not just the vaccines, but he brought this to public attention and he gets great credit. Kla.TV: You mentioned the FDA going rogue. I think you could say that for the entire government, or at least any part of the government has anything to do with the pandemic. So given that they are in the pocket of big pharma, as RFK junior points out, we can't really expect them to do much on their own. You were mentioning about a year ago that Ron Johnson was getting things going and the Republicans might be... we can look to the Republicans to start hearings and prosecutions and stuff. None of that has happened. I don't expect it to happen, frankly. So, but what do you say about 53 % of the public being awake on this, is there some watershed moment where enough of the public is fed up and angry that the government starts taking action? Dr. McCullough: It's not at 53%. We don't know where the tipping point here is. And there's an important concept that we don't know how it's going to play out. And the concept is water under the bridge. How much of this will the public say, listen, this is horrible, but it's already happened. And there's nothing we can do about it and how much it will, there'll be persistent outrage. And we simply don't know, the legal cases really are slow to be grinding through the courts. They don't appear to be going anywhere. They're not getting much news. We're down to three major presidential candidates. Biden, Trump and Haley, none of them are mentioning the vaccines as a major issue. Yet when there's an open mic, that's the first question that comes. The first open mic that Trump faced, it was about vaccine deaths. And so, you know, the candidates not making this a platform, we know Robert F Kennedy and an independent candidate is making this and other issues on the platform. You know, if this doesn't rise to the level of scrutiny for the next commander in chief, you know, I think the future certainly could be still dark. Kla.TV: It's a broken record for me, I always like to mention it in my interviews, but for those people out there who are still concurrently rabid Trump supporters and rabidly against the pandemic or plandemic measures, it doesn't seem to bother them that Trump continues to trumpet his status as captain warp speed, you know, and that it was his doing, we can thank him for it. What do you think about it, I mean, shouldn't there be some cognitive dissonance here? Dr. McCullough: It doesn't reconcile. And I can tell you, if I was in the oval office, starting in 2016, A) I wouldn't have selected Anthony Fauci. I would have had a team of doctors, working in four different areas. And I published this, this became the centerpiece for 2022 Senate deliberations. I would have had a team on contagion control to see what's the best way to reduce spread. It turns out nothing stopped it. The virus affected 97% of us. So everything they tried to stop the virus, failed. I would have a second team on early treatment. That'd be most important, treating people in the home, preventing hospitalizations and death. A team on hospital treatments. I would have asked the hospitals to come up with the best protocols and let's compete for the best outcomes. Do you know, to this day, there's still not a US News and World Report on best COVID hospitals? No hospital claims to be any good at treating COVID? I mean, this is a stunning revelation. And then the fourth area would have been vaccination. And if we would have had a safe and effective vaccine, I think the scope of vaccination probably should have been nursing home patients and those in congregate settings. So, I would have had a four-pronged approach. I would have used teams. I would have had people who are directly facing the virus. And then we would have moved things forward. Mandates would have played no role whatsoever. We should have never had government guidelines, never. You know, the government never leads with an innovation. In medicine, it always comes independently. And you know in cardiology which is my field - when new guidelines come out, when they finally come out and they're usually summarizing the prior year's experience and making recommendations, immediately they're debated. Immediately. We have meetings. Oh, I disagree with the guidelines, what have you. Here, when the NIH guidelines came out October 8th, 2020, if one disagreed with them, they could have their medical license threatened. And this was memorialized in attempted legislation in California. You know, it happened in Canada. Doctors who disagreed with the government stance, they actually were stripped of their professional status. It happened in France, Australia, New Zealand. Kla.TV: Hence, you could argue that that's why the doctors were doing this thing that, where I'm from, they call it the death protocol, the whole Remdesivir treatment and things that I think led to the death of people, almost intentionally. Do you think the Remdesivir program, and in England, they had another drug, I forget the name, that was supposedly very lethal. I don't know if you can remember the name of that one, but was this actually a death protocol at the hospitals? Dr. McCullough: I simply don't know. I can just tell you, the hospitals ignored the WHO's declaration in November of 2020. It said, do not use Remdesivir in hospitalized patients. It doesn't reduce mortality. The WHO solidarity group, the research group, revisited this in May of 2022 and said, were we wrong or right? They reviewed more data and they said, we were right to begin with. Remdesivir doesn't work. And in some people, it leads to kidney damage and failure and liver damage. In some people, the renal failure actually becomes hyperdominant and is in the causal pathway to death. So Remdesivir, which was administered to about a quarter of Americans hospitalized, had never had a role and our National Institutes of Health has never budged from the recommendation on Remdesivir. Neither has the Infectious Disease Society of America. This is a stunning revelation. Why would they continue to use a drug that a worldwide agency says, do not use? Kla.TV: Okay, I'm going to read a comment I saw after an article and give you a chance to defend yourself against it. „McCullough recommended shots for elderly and immunocompromised until long after the injections were deployed.“ Do you still? Is that true? Dr. McCullough: No, it's not true. I never recommended Pfizer, Moderna, Janssen, or Novavax for the elderly. I was a co-principal investigator on an original application to Operation Warp Speed, the NIH and FDA, but that was for the iModulon vaccine. That was a cellular-based vaccine similar to BCG. And it never got funded. We never were able to do the trial. But I did sketch out that if we were going to use a safe and effective vaccine, it would only be in about the 2.7 million elderly in senior homes and congregate living. And that was about as far as I went. No, I never supported the vaccines. In fact, I was the first public figure on national TV to say that we shouldn't vaccinate individuals. And I made it very clear as the data came out. At first, listen, nobody under age 50, should take a vaccine, period. Said that on Fox News, Laura Ingraham. Kla.TV: Right. At one point, you said that Omicron was kind of like a common cold. A lot of people had been saying that and have said since that the whole thing is like a common cold. It's more or less the common cold or seasonal flu. What are the chances that not only Omicron, but Delta and the other variants are also like the common cold? And the deaths can be more attributed to stuff like Remdesivir and intubation and the reaction that they came up with. Dr. McCullough: There's enough peer-reviewed literature demonstrating adjudicated COVID deaths with the ancestral strain, the Alpha and the Delta variant. There's no doubt about it, they were lethal. And the lethality occurred in those who were very frail, susceptible, elderly. About 40% of the deaths occurred in people who were living beyond their life expectancy, believe it or not. Now, when we got to Omicron, there was a giant drop-off in mortality. It broke through natural immunity. And then an important paper was published in October of 2022 by Chin and colleagues. And it was from the US prison system, 59,000 prisoners, 17,000 staff. And they were carefully chronicling all these infections. Once someone got through Delta and Omicron, the next Omicron infection had a zero percent risk of hospitalization death, zero. And these prisoners would do anything to go to the hospital and get a break from prison. So let me tell you what, I am convinced that Omicron is like the common cold. I don't even test for it anymore. Patients every so often will do a home test. It's treated with over-the-counter remedies. It's simply not a concern. The only time I've been concerned is if I have an elderly frail patient who's having their first infection with Omicron. Kla.TV: Got it. Okay, our time is about up. So I'll ask one last question. As Nick Hudson and others have pointed out, the January 2020 timeline of events is implausible. With so many false elements of the COVID narrative being established in that period, asymptomatic transmission as an epidemiological driver, for example, do you share his opinion that the contentions from that period were all A) premeditated and B) false? Dr. McCullough: He's right that they were premeditated because you can see this come out in the Johns Hopkin’planning seminar as well as the event 201. Asymptomatic transmission never occurred. There were papers publishing modeling. And if you remember on national TV, the University of Washington had a model that was being put out there and it was completely wrong. It was saying that the virus was going to be spreading across the United States like a tidal wave. I wrote an op-ed in The Hill on this. I said, no, it's not spreading that way. And this was going on real time in 2020. But papers by Cao and Madewell essentially disproved significant asymptomatic spread. It was only sick people spreading it to other sick people. And it's just a matter of who was kind of starting to turn sick when they passed it to someone else. So Hudson is right there that asymptomatic spread didn't occur, but the virus was real. Patients really did get sick and they died. And you know, I'd be cautious about any contentions that the virus didn't exist because it created a new syndrome where people died of blood clots. There aren't other illnesses that do that. So I've always asked people who say, well, the virus doesn't exist to say, listen, you just tell me what's making people sick. It's not the common cold and it's not flu. Kla.TV: Okay. Well, Dr. McCullough, we've reached the end. I want to thank you very much again for coming on for this interview. Dr. McCullough: Thank you.

from dw / Dr. McCullough

Sources/Links: www.mcculloughfnd.org
More informtion on the Covid19 fraud and coverup: https://www.kla.tv/Coronavirus-en