American Thought Leaders - Dr. Malone, mRNA inventor

[Dusty Britches]

Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA Vaccine Inventor, on the Bioethics of Experimental Vaccines and the ‘Ultimate Gaslighting’

“What would happen to the entire vaccine enterprise—I’m talking about pediatric vaccines, the fundamental bedrocks of public health—if we basically validate the criticisms of those that have been labeled anti-vaxxers?”

In this episode, we sit down with mRNA vaccine pioneer Dr. Robert Malone to discuss questions surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines and repurposed drugs, as well as the bioethics of experimental vaccines.

He talks about all of the pros and cons of the various treatments that are out there then gets into the seriousness of the side effects of mRNA.

[Dusty Britches]

Oh, wow! So around the 40 minute mark he brings up the full disclosure of adverse reactions, which is required by federal law. Everything has this full disclosure - aspirin to fiber. Full disclosure of adverse reactions on the vaccines has been deleted and is not accessible.

And, it is against the law to use any form of coercion to get people to take it - offers of lottery tickets, ice cream, etc. is against the law!

And, he also talks about at the 45 minute mark about WHO recommending that vaccinated people wear masks because they are spreading the disease. Wasn't that in the media, I don't know... yesterday?

[Dusty Britches]

The Code of Federal Regulations, it’s referred to as the Common Rule. So this is actually Federal Law. It’s not just words that academicians agree to. So the first thing is that an emergency use authorization product, which is what all these vaccines are, and many of the drugs, is an experimental product. It’s not yet licensed. So that’s point number one. They’re all experimental products.

Point number two, if you’re going to be administering experimental products to patients that falls under clinical research, medical research. And so, you have to follow the guidance for medical research. And I mentioned the Common Rule is codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.

The first clause, importantly in the Common Rule, is there has to be complete disclosure of risk. You know, intuitively what that means because when you buy a bottle of aspirin, you pull out this little piece of paper, and you look at that, and you go, “Holy Moly, this aspirin is going to kill me.” If you read all the way through, it could cause heart attacks or gastric erosions, or whatever. And you look at that, and you say, “Oh, I don’t know if I want to take that aspirin.”

But the truth is that the ones that are common are up at the top, and we all take aspirin or Tylenol or some version of that. That’s the level of disclosure of adverse event risk that must be provided to patients participating in clinical research. That level of information, as we’ve just been discussing, is censored. It’s not available. So we are not meeting the criteria for full disclosure of risk.

Second key principle is that that full disclosure has to be comprehensible and comprehended. Earlier on, I referred to thrombocytopenia, and you were like, “What the heck was that?” And I said, “Low platelets.” That’s a great example. The first one was scientific jargon that was incomprehensible to you. The second one you could understand. So these risks have to be conveyed using language that people can comprehend.

Third key principle, you cannot coerce. You cannot entice. The patient or the subject has to freely accept the experimental medicine of their own volition. All these messaging about, “You must take the vaccine. You must take the vaccine because otherwise and aunt Mary could get infected.” All of this messaging that the vaccine is safe, et cetera, all the peer pressure that’s happening around the vaccine, that’s coercion.

[Shane]

Every bit of that is clearly obvious to anyone who has paid at least a mediocre amount of attention during this whole fiasco. Fear often leads to willful ignorance and blindness though.