"To sin by silence when they should protest -
makes cowards of men"
by Ella Wheeler Wilcox, (Nov. 5, 1850 - Oct. 30, 1919) 1914 from her poem, "The Protest"
Read the Complete Poem
Hear and Watch the Video of the Poem
2021-07-11 This Page and Site is Under Modification. It is following the laws of evolution
Note: This posting is not an endorsement or the advocating not taking the "vaccines" offered today in the United States. It is provided to give the opposing views by competent qualified experts. Censorship by the Main Stream Media (MSM) is massive. It leads to the question of WHY, in a country that prides itself on the right of free speech, there is so much suppression of other people's views. This suppression of opposing ideas and opinions was typical in the old Soviet Union. For it to continue in our country can only lead to tyranny in this country, and like the Soviet Union, eventual collapse as government and media lose all credibility that still remain. In a supposedly free country, all opinions should be allowed to be heard. Otherwise, it begs the question "what is being hidden from the American public?"
Return to Home Page
This transcript was created by using the services of Temi, https://www.temi.com I will go ahead and give them a plug. I have experimented with many different online audio to text (in English) websites over many years and theirs is consistently the best. I quit using them except for special cases, such as the present Mercola presentation because a year ago they raised their price by 150%, from 10¢ to 25¢. According to my hp 11c that is a 150% increase. Instead I now use Nuance Dragon Professional Version 15 because I translate so much from youtube.com and other sources to aid me in learning this stuff. But in my opinion, and only my opinion, it is mediocre compared to Temi. Now that Nuance has been purchased by Microsoft I am very hopeful that they will redesign the product to make it quick, accurate and less cumbersome to use (in my opinion). I believe they will find a huge market if they make it at least as equal to what Temi can produce from just the first iteration as you see here.
The transcription you see here, beginning at “Speaker 1, is the exact transcription produced by Temi from the audio. This is the downloaded .docx from MS Word. Bravos for Temi
I WILL BE EDITING THE TRANSCRIPT AS TIME ALLOWS BECAUSE OF ITS SIGNIFICANT IMPORTANCE TO EVERYONE. THIS TRANSCRIPT THEN IS Rev 0
Speaker 1 is Dr. Joseph Mercola, DO
Speaker 2 is Dr. Steven Quay, M.D., Ph.D (chemistry)
Speaker 1 is Dr. Joseph Mercola, DO
Speaker 2 is Dr. Steven Quay, M.D., Ph.D (chemistry)
Speaker 1 :00:08
SAR cup to the conventional narrative, is it, it came from nature that it wasn't a lab week in February of 2020. We disagreed now there's overwhelming compelling evidence. And Dr. [inaudible] has written 140 page paper that proves this definitively, how likely is our scope to, to be from nature? Well, that's about as likely it, first of all, imagined how many atoms there are in the universe. That's a big number, right? Well, it's more likely that you're going to pick the same Adam twice. That's more likely than stars. Cup two came from nature and Dr. Kuwait is going to show you improve.
Speaker 2 : 01:07
So I looked at the first 259 cases in, in China, um, of, of jumps, uh, looked all over China. And, and that was, that's all the patients from December 1st, roughly to about March versus 200, 259. Um, and I traced them back all many of the 259. Did you think I found that came from an animal zero. Yeah, Joe you're exactly right. This is the equivalent of going to going to Las Vegas, you know, and flipping a coin and getting heads 259 times, especially a festival it's absolutely possible. The virus has incredible, uh, capability of being the most aggressive human to human virus that's ever been seen in the history of neurology, but, but the, but it does not have the hallmark of how you would build that in nature, which is pre epidemic human contact. I am saying there's a one in 500 chance. He came from nature, but that means in my analysis, 499 times out of 500, it came from a laboratory once a year in Asia, a thousand times in the last five years in the us, someone is working in the laboratory with test tubes and pipettes and the Petri dishes.
Speaker 2 : 02:15
They get sick themselves. They probably don't know what they walk out the front door of the lab. They go home to their family, friends. They did the subway and the infect other people. That's the lab leap. I believe there's too much at stake here. Uh, I believe it was an accident, an accident, an accident leak from the lab. I think it's really important that we get educated here. If it came from a laboratory. I think for me, it's important that we, we change the kind of work we do in laboratories. Um, and, and so we can prevent it from happening again.
Speaker 1 : 02:46
Welcome everyone. Dr. Mercola, helping you take control of your health. And today we are joined with Dr. Stephen Quaye and we're going to discuss some pretty astonishing information with respect to making clear to you and everyone that this virus was not come from a zoonotic origin. It actually came from a lab origin. So Dr. Quaye has, uh, I think testified before Congress to this was before Congress that
Speaker 2 : 03:18
The last, uh, last week, uh, before a subcommittee of, uh, of the house. Okay.
Speaker 1 : 03:23
Yeah. So he's going to enlighten us on this and he's written a paper and most papers are 10 20, 30 pages. I think your paper was 130 pages. It was really a book about, uh, the, the origins of, of SARS cov two. So welcome. And thank you for joining
Speaker 2 : 03:37
Us. Well, they do. It's great. It's a pleasure to be here, but I follow your work diligently for over a decade. So, wow. What,
Speaker 1 : 03:45
What, what inspired your desire to do that? That's unusual.
Speaker 2 : 03:49
Oh, I, I, I'm a pretty holistic person. And so, uh, I'm, uh, I'm in the pharmaceutical business, but, but, but there's a lot of things that supplements and diets and macronutrients can do and, you know, you're sort of, you've been the go-to person on that for over a decade, so. Okay.
Speaker 1 : 04:04
Thank you. So why don't you give us a little bit about your history? You said you're in the pharmaceutical area. So
Speaker 2 : 04:09
Yeah, so look, I, I w I grew up in Michigan and got an MD and a PhD in Ann Arbor. Congratulations [inaudible] credentials. Thank you. Uh, went to, uh, went to do my residency at the mass general at Harvard hospital during the day. And then at night I was over at MIT doing a post-doctoral work with a normal, I started
Speaker 1 : 04:31
At MD PhD years, most prestigious institutions in the country. Well, then I
Speaker 2 : 04:35
Got a job and I moved out to the west coast and Stanford taught there for about a decade and then, uh, really had the bug to try to make a greater contribution by entering the pharmaceutical industry. So I invented the gadolinium that's used with MRI imaging it's oh, you, you actually invented
Speaker 1: 04:51
The process that that's used to image them.
Speaker 2 : 04:55
That's right. The, the, the gadolinium is really toxic, so yeah. Casing for it, uh, that allowed it to be safely administered. And I think about 60 million people have used it.
Speaker 1 : 05:05
Yeah. Well, there's still some challenges with it. I don't recommend people. You scheduling him for MRIs cause we've seen a lot of complications from people using. Yeah. Yeah. We can talk about that too, but yeah, it's a tangent, but anyway, so what, so what triggered your interest in investigating, applying your incredible, uh, academic credentials and the obvious intellectual skills to have that type of pedigree to analyze what was going on here? What, what was the motivation?
Speaker 2 : 05:32
So it was January, it was January 20, 20. No one was paying any attention, uh, because there was no need to, at that point, but I saw this virus coming out of China. I looked at the sequence of it. Uh, and I remember telling my wife, you know, I know what this thing is going to do in cells because, uh, for five years at Stanford, I was studying, there was a world's expert on the toxin Melton, which is a bee venom toxin. The thing that you don't, you get to be then, you know, and I would write these really deep papers that no five people including my mother would read. But anyway, so for five years, I kinda knew what this and Melton this, this toxin and B, then it has the same sequence. That's our SCOBY two heads. So I knew it was going to be the memory cells and everything.
Speaker 2 : 06:14
And so, um, I kind of, um, you know, I run a public company, so I actually went to the board a couple of weeks later. I said, look, I think we can come up with some therapeutics and some ideas around this. Uh, and we actually are in clinical trials with some products for therapeutics. And so for therapists for, I guess, our scope to, yeah. And then I started hearing some really crazy public health advisors around masks and, and social distancing and things. So, uh, I ended up writing a little book that it was a number one best seller for a few weeks called stay safe on Amazon. Um, and that took me through the summer. And then I started going back to something, I was very concerned about what I saw as properties, this virus, it had never been seen before. And I started looking at them, looking at them, looking at them, uh, it's not public knowledge that the government records identify one of my papers.
Speaker 2 07:04
So I was contacted by the state department in the fall, uh, and basically was, uh, was an advisor to their programs there, uh, including, uh, a three hour deep dive from all of the different committees or agencies, where are, I can't say all their names, but anyway, it was in vanity fair. So, uh, on the origin and, and I continue to, I continue to push this because it's, it's, it's obvious for many, many reasons, but if it came from nature, there are certain things we should do differently to not do this. Again, he came from a laboratory, this is a completely different set of things you need to do. And, and, and it's not a blame game, but, you know, knock on wood. I, I, my family and my friends and things made it through this many people didn't, um, but excuse me, I just published a paper that, that same laboratory is two years behind on working on a virus in the same way that has a 90% we validate rate it's called the NIPA virus. Um, and I found that on laboratory, correct? Yes, correct. I just published a paper. So they probably samples from COVID patients in the hospital showing they had Cyrus Colby too. And they published this. It's the most read paper about this. Um, I did a, I did a deep dive into their raw data. So the sequence is 30,000 nucleotides. The raw data is 55 million nucleotides. And what you can see in there is a fingerprint of everything they've been doing for the last two years. So, uh, they're doing a lot of crazy research including this.
Speaker 1 : 08:34
Why are the skills to understand and interpret this data? Or is that part of your training?
Speaker 2 : 08:39
No, I, no. I just picked it up a year ago. Right.
Speaker 1 : 08:45
The average person wouldn't be able to do that. I mean, what do you attribute your, I mean, that's a pretty tough challenge to analyze that 55 million nucleotides. Yeah. I mean, so how did you go about, I mean, you're obviously very motivated, but I'm just curious. Cause that, that is what seemed to me a big, uh, challenge to do well, it's,
Speaker 2 : 09:06
You know, I I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm really a nerd. So for 40 years I've taken an inch of science papers home on weekends by Sunday afternoon is, is thumbing through things. And I like to read a lot of diverse things. I mean, as a graduate student, I had this crazy habit of if I went to the library to find an article, I forced myself to read the one before. And the one after in the journals, there there's no relationship between the articles, but within a couple of months, all the graduate students were saying, Hey, Hey, quit. I got this problem. And, and I would have read an article, you know, two weeks, three weeks, four weeks before on a completely different topic. And so, um, after 40 years of that, you know, you kind of get some, I dunno, you get some skills and then
Speaker 1 : 09:45
I'm S I'm assuming that process occurred pre-internet or at least pre-application of pub med on internet. So yeah.
Speaker 2 : 09:52
Yeah. They weren't still tablets, Joe, but there was a zero,
Speaker 1 : 09:56
They were close. So they were playing these big telephone books.
Speaker 2 : 10:00
Correct? Correct. Well, congratulations.
Speaker 1 : 10:04
That's really hardcore. So anyway, it was, it was an interesting tangent from my perspective, but you, you, you, I interrupted you when you were in the process of analyzing this data. And you've mentioned that the, the researchers and Mohan, uh, virology Institute were also working on a more, uh, deadly infectious virus that was 95% fatal. Is that what you said?
Speaker 2 : 10:26
Did I miss you miss? Yeah. So just, just backing up a little bit. One is the reality is, is I want to say about 40 years old. Uh, and so they've been, they've been, you know, an existence like the pastor Institute, they're kind of parallel organizations back in the middle of the last century. Uh, and then about 15 years ago when SARS one hit 2003. So, um, they really, they really up their game. And in fact, the U S and the French, uh, sort of came into China to help them with this because, because the, the first stars one was kind of the first Corona virus that entered the human population and was, was deadly. That was about 30% deadly. We've had four coronaviruses in the thirties, forties, fifties, and sixties. We've all have probably had one. And they're just one of the many common colds you get. So this was the first one that was pretty nasty. And so, so that was when they really, they went to the next level. But now when is virality is the number one place where viruses are collected in nature. They're brought back to the laboratory, and it's also one of the three top a gain of function, synthetic biology places where people kind of play God and they go in and they, and they do, they do tricks inside the virus to see what it does. Um, mostly in the vein of making more infectious, more deadly, or
Speaker 1 : 11:40
The process, the actual gain of function, um, science, is it more related? Is it actually genetic editing or is it the passaging through different serum to, uh, encourage different different functions?
Speaker 2 : 11:54
Right. Great question, Joe. And this gain of function is in the community now, but we really have a good definitions around it. So taking from what you said, and which is exactly right, there's, there's three things you can do. If you, if you think, you know, what you want to change, you can, you can synthetically drop in a new amino acid. And if you, and if you're right, it'll do exactly what you thought it would. Um, the, the other is you don't really know what you wanted to do, but you don't know how it will do it, but you want it to go from bats to let's say, mice or bats to humans. Um, and what you do there is what you described serial passage, which is you take a virus, you take 20 mice, you give it to all 20, you take the sickest smiles, you take the buyers out of that one.
Speaker 2 : 12:34
You give it to a new 24 or five passages, and you're killing every mouse. And if the mouse has been humanized with human lungs, you've, you've effectively made a, uh, a lethal human pathogen. Uh, and then the third way is to drop big chunks of, of, of material in there. So for example, um, the, the part of the virus of Cyrus Coby, two that interacts with the cell is about 200 amino acids. So times three for, for nucleic. And so that's 600. So you can, you can just drop a big piece of 600 in and instantly go from an animal to humans or, you know, whatever direction you want. So those three, you know, knowing what to do with single spots, randomly letting nature do it in, in PA in serial passage, and then dropping big.
Speaker 1 : 13:17
Is there any strong evidence to suggest which, which, uh, method that was adopted for stars could do, or was it all
Speaker 2 : 13:23
Of them? Uh, no, they, they dropped, they dropped not a big chunk in, but, but, uh, but several chunks, uh, through a recombination laboratory, in my opinion. Uh, and then they did serial passage. Okay. All right. Was it, they taught at how to infect humans.
Speaker 1 : 13:40
So any other background information like to give us before we dive into your paper?
Speaker 2 : 13:47
Um, I, I don't think.
Speaker 1 : 13:49
Okay, good. So the, this paper, which is, I think that's a misnomer because the heart, it is a book it's really uncommon as you well know, to have papers over a hundred pages. So, uh, why don't you discuss it a bit? It, because it really, I mean, if, if you're rational and you understand the science, you read this paper, there's just no other conclusion. You can reach it. This didn't come from that. This came from a lab. So when you have to walk.
Speaker 2 : 14:19
Yeah. So I actually, I, I, you know, I probably standard 60 papers. They've been cited about 10,000 times. I'm in the top 1%, but this paper has been, it has been downloaded 170,000 times. So they're really, you know, they're really interested or they can't sleep and they need something to help them sleep. I'm not sure, but, uh, so, um, uh, Thomas bay is okay. Uh, maybe not a familiar name for everybody, but, um, the typical, you know, typical, you know, 70 18th century guy, you Presbyterian minister during the day statistician mathematician at night. Um, and he was, he was well-published while he, while he was alive and after he passed away, uh, his note, his estate was looking at his notes and he had done this incredible process of coming up with a way of, of, uh, understanding large complex events in a very simple, uh, straightforward fashion.
Speaker 2 : 15:16
I mean, the, the BA the Bayesean theorem and the Bayesean, uh, equation is eight times B divided by C. So my, my eighth grader is really good at that level. So you strip away all the, all the nuance of the statistics, and it's eight times be oversee. What does it mean? Well, it's exactly the same thing we do when we, when we, uh, have a favorite baseball team and we watch it during the season before the season, we know what they did last year. We know who the new players are, the new coaches all, and we come up with what we call a prior prediction. So we, we ranked the teams according to what we think will happen to the world series. Uh, and that's, what's called our prior our, our posterior probabilities. And then the season happens and you start winning games, losing games, people get injured, new players, transfers, and things.
Speaker 2 : 16:02
And you update that, you know, every, every week, every guy at the start of the world series, you're probably quite far from where you were at the beginning of the season, much closer, because you're now down to the two teams, but nonetheless, you still don't know the final analysis. So one of the caveats for this 140 page work is at the end. Although I say there's a one in 500 chance, it came from nature. I am saying there's a one in 500 chance. It came from nature. But that means in my analysis, 499 times out of 500, it came from a lab. So yeah, I
Speaker 1 : 16:35
Studied the base German in the past and familiar with it, but I'm curious with it, you gave a very good analogy, but I don't understand how that formula integrates into that many times B divided by C does it, where are the variables in that, that analogy.
Speaker 2 : 16:52
So, um, and, and, and now I'll get into the specifics of the third Cyrus Coby too. So a would be your, your prior, uh, estimate of the likelihood of becoming from the lab or from nature. Okay. D is the new evidence that, that then is the new probability. It came from a lab and then sees the probability it came from nature. Okay. So, and then, and then, and then you're, then you get a new way, you get a new,
Speaker 1 : 17:20
Okay. And you're getting, and then how, how does it did though that equation change through time, just from new data? I mean, it's a pretty shocking, uh, statistic. And I mean, just, I'm curious as to how 140 pages is all walked through the side. So, I mean, you've got plenty of time to walk us through cause it's, you know, understand how that evolved.
Speaker 2 : 17:45
So, so, so, so the first thing is what, w what did I assume the prior likelihood it came from nature or lab knowing nothing, basically knowing nothing, right? That's that has to be your starting point. Um, three papers informed that one paper says that eight times a year, there's a natural jump from nature to a human, uh, another paper that said once a year, there's a lab league in Asia. So eight to one, that's like 80, 85% probability from nature. I used three papers and I ended up starting. My starting point was a 98% probability. It came from nature with no knowing
Speaker 1 : 18:21
Nothing else. Well, let me just stop there. And I w I'm assuming that your growth is paper after the paper that was published in nature early last year, that was a use to support the thesis, that this was a hundred percent from the zoonotic and do now like origin and anyone else that, that said otherwise was a conspiracy hoax, uh, at which we said, we, we actually said that in February of 2020, that it came, did, uh, that I was engineered. And what didn't, it was elaborate, but, uh, is that the paper used to get it at 98%?
Speaker 2 : 18:54
No, I didn't. Because, because there was so much conjecture and speculation in that I didn't
Speaker 1 : 19:01
Flagrantly false. I know
Speaker 2 : 19:04
It's really, yeah. That's called the Anderson at all paper. Um, uh, Anderson is a, is a fellow down at Scripps Institute in California. So, um, there were, yeah, there were three or four serious misdirections that were published. One in Lancet, uh, one by Dr. Shea, the student and this, and this Anderson paper that set the narrative for the entire of 2020, um, where they were absolutely not talking from science, they had an agenda. Um, it's, it's remarkably disappointing as a fellow scientist to see scientists doing that. Okay.
Speaker 1 : 19:36
So that sets your, a variable. And then,
Speaker 2 : 19:39
So, so you walk. So I walked into the analysis 98% likelihood from, from nature. Um, and then the, and then the other beauty is, and then I entered 26 different pieces of evidence in the book, and you've got a book and in my analysis, 26 separate pieces, each one made a contribution to the change. So, um, the first thing I looked at, uh, I misspoke. Um, if you read the, if you read the book, the paper itself, you see, I, I go through this prior and I come to 98% and then I actually discuss the misinformation that was put out there in the Lancet paper and the paper you described by Anderson and the paper by Dr. Sheet. Basically, I do. Here's what they said. And here's why it's not science. Here's what they said. And here's why it's not science. Um, I didn't use that in the analysis, but I kind of, I said, anybody who's, you know, steeped in that literature, they need to be sort of brainwashed out of it back to a neutral position.
Speaker 2 : 20:34
Um, so I need to get rid of that bias. Um, and so, and so that's, so then, so then now we enter my analysis. What was my first point? And I think for many people, ma maybe Joe, you included, I mean, it was, it was okay. There's a new, there's a new virus in humans, in China. Okay. That's happened before, uh, it's happening in a city, Wu Han you know, you may or may not know much about Juan it's. Uh, it turns out to be a pretty big city, 1100 in New York. Yeah, exactly. 11, very urban, not much, uh, you know, man nature, contact there. And by the way, it has one of only three BLSA, four laboratories in the entire world. So it's, Galvins in Galveston, Texas, North Carolina, and one that, that is specialized in the last 10
Speaker 1 : 21:18
Years. We've focus board teacher BSL four.
Speaker 2 : 21:20
I'm sorry. No, I don't believe I missed no, no, no. The, the caveat is, uh, the BSA for doing coronavirus research, that comment, and, you know, we don't always know what four degrees doing do each other. So it might be a fourth. It might not, we just don't know. So, so it's what I call the location location location. So what you have to do is then do the probability is okay, there's, you know, you know, the area of China, you know, the population of China, you know, you, if the, if the virus happened randomly, what is the chance that would happen in move-on? And then if there's a laboratory in one, what is the chances? It would have escaped somewhere else in China and not appear to have one. So you do the flip. So if it gave from nature, why did it end up in Milan?
Speaker 2 : 22:10
And if it came from Wounaan, why, what was the probability it could have, it could have first appeared somewhere else in China. And that hits your, that hits your probability is pretty hard out of the box. Um, so that was, that was item number one, if I can call it that. Okay. Well, great. Um, then, I mean, and then, then you just work through the others. And, and as I, as I wrote the document for the state department in January, when the 140 page document, 26 evidences to the point when I testified last week, where they gave me a five minute opening, I asked permission for seven and they let me do eight, but, you know, I really had to narrow it down. I think probably now it would be best to talk about that. The key evidence that, that makes the big changes, if that's okay.
Speaker 1 : 22:54
No, absolutely not go point from point.
Speaker 2 : 22:54
So, okay. What is a zoonosis because this is, you know, we use this word and we're deep into it now, but let's go back to the beginning. It has three parts. There is an animal. And for the technical side, it has to have a vertebrae. So malaria and mosquitoes, no vertebrae, no zoonosis malaria is a vector transmitted disease. So it's an animal with a backbone that's infected with a micro, but doesn't have to be a virus. It could be a bacteria. It could be a fungus, could be any, any micro human comes in, contact catches, the disease gets sick. So there's an animal somewhere. There's a virus in this case, a virus. Well, when we talk about viruses that, okay, and there's a human, the key to the finding the origin is where the heck is the animal. If it's in the community, it's a natural process.
Speaker 2 : 23:45
If it's in the laboratory, it's a laboratory acquired infection. The, the, the, the, the Andersons of the world, the people that are trying to confuse us use this lab leak hypothesis, because I think it puts a, you know, a plumbing issue. Everybody has leaks in the kitchen, the bathroom, and that's, that's what they imply. That's not how it happens once a year in Asia, a thousand times in the last five years in the U S someone is working in the laboratory with test tubes and pipettes and Petri dishes. They get sick themselves. They probably don't know it. They walk out the front door of the lab. They go home to their family, friends, they take the subway and they infect other people. That's the lab lead. And it's kind of disingenious to talk about it in terms of piping and things. It makes it sound more conspiracy.
Speaker 2 : 24:27
So, so what you need to focus on is I'm going to focus on all three of those, but the answer is where, where is the animal? So let's start with the animal. We were told early on that, uh, that this was that the early cases. And it's still true, depending on what you look at it, 28%, 40% or 70% of the earliest patients had a relationship with one or more markets, uh, in, uh, in one China. And these are large markets. There's a lot of fresh vegetables, have a lot of fresh fish. Uh, this is called the, the, the Hunan seafood wholesale market. So, uh, in the English translation of it's Chinese, uh, and then there's sometimes they're live animals where, which will actually be butchered and fresh because these markets are hundreds of years old. And of course, before refrigeration, you you'd pick your, you know, you pick your animal, they'd slaughter for you.
Speaker 2 : 25:18
You take it home, you know, because you didn't have a refrigerator kind of thing. So we were told that started there. So, um, obviously that's the first place to look. So they looked in the market, they looked at over a thousand, uh, animal specimens that they had left no Cyrus Colby to, they looked at a thousand frozen foods because now there's a supply chain where things come from other parts of China on trucks or trains in refrigerated vehicles. They, you know, they're, they're frozen the whole time. And there's this whole story about it being on the outside of frozen foods, which is pretty crazy, but we all have to, we have to deal with the craziness sometimes. So they tested a thousand, you know, uh, frozen foods, no virus, they tested the environment and they found it in about 15% of the viruses. The virus is about 50% of the samples in the environment.
Speaker 2 : 26:05
And 13 people in the market have been documented who were in the market or worked in the market who got SARS, cov two. So they're not fine. They didn't find it in that market. And then they went to other markets in Wu Han. They went to all the other markets. They went to the entire Hubei province there. Now they're now at about 4,000 specimens. Didn't find it anywhere. They did a thousand bats and who they didn't find it in any of those bats. And the eventually went to every province in China and they tested 80,000 animals and they didn't find it. Now, we need to understand that. What, how do, what, what does that mean? If you don't know about prior ones, you may not know what that means, but SARS one, when they found people in the market getting sick, 85% of the animals had you need the test for animals, and you're gonna find it in an animal with mirrors, which came from middle east and was a bat to camel, to human, um, a virus in the markets where camels were being traded. It was, he was 90% in the animals. So, you know, earlier technology, two decades old technology, we found, uh, we found the host, the animal host, what's called the civic cat, or [inaudible]. We found the animal holster, the camel within four and 10 months, respectively, we do not have an animal host. And we're, we're a year and a half. The largest surveillance in the history of the world has been done in China, 80,000 specimens. And that not even one, uh, with SARS, cov two. Now, if the animal was in
Speaker 1 : 27:31
The laboratory, yeah. In fact alone should put a nail in the coffin of this. You without the base bears, Bayes theorem analysis.
Speaker 2 : 27:41
Yeah. So here's what I had to do again, uh, you know, people criticize this sort of thing because they didn't understand it, but in my base analysis, that's exactly right. Joe, each one of the three facts that I talked to Congress about by himself takes you from 90%, uh, nature to, to 98% lab. What I did was I said, okay, I'm going to throw away the excess statistical power here. Even, even though, you know, I should, I should drop 80,000 into the denominator of my equation. Get Joe was, I degraded it to the standard in clinical trials or biology of P of 0.05. So I said, I said, despite the fact that zero out of 80,000 had this, I'm going to treat this as if it's a one in 20 event. That's the only way I could keep doing the analysis. Otherwise I was done at the first I was done at the get-go.
Speaker 1 : 28:32
Yeah. So you gave them an unfair advantage in the end. You still won.
Speaker 2 : 28:35
Exactly. Yes. And I still won. So, so it's very clear in there every time there's something in excess of a P of 0.05. I just degraded it to be a 0.05, which my statistician from UCLA who helped me with this, um, uh, said, you know, there's no justification for doing that, Steve. I said, I know, but you know, I want to include all the pieces of evidence just to be, I have a complete record. So let's back up again. I'm sorry. I rubbed it. Yeah. I'm sorry. [inaudible] through my conversation. Zoonosis is an animal with a virus and a human, the definition of a zoonosis from nature. If you have just one word, Steve, one word to define it. It's diversity. Everything in nature is diverse, right? You picture a farm with every piece of corn, genetically identical next to a forest where every tree is different and there's, there's all this that's nature at work.
Speaker 2 : 29:28
And the farm is, is man at work. And the vaccines, you know, are, which are a hundred percent identical that's man at work. So diversity, any diversity I see is going to be a sign of nature, any what I call a singularity, um, where a single, uh, this is a singularity. So we have now how many people, 200 million, 210 million people infected. And this was one person getting infected. Once I'll tell, I'll tell you about why they went into line two of the subway system, uh, and in fact of the world from there. So we check the box. There's, there's no diversity in nature for this, for this virus. The, despite the fact that, oh, you know, Anderson, that Anderson paper that we talked about earlier, he said, given the unusual properties of this virus, it has to be in a high concentration in the population of intermediate spaces.
Speaker 2 : 30:18
So, you know, unfortunately I've used his quote because he, because this is how science works. Joan is so frustrating. You, you, you, you, you're smart. You have an idea, you predict something in the future, which is the cool part. And if your prediction doesn't come true, you have to say, no hypothesis is wrong. And that's the part that they don't do. Uh, he predicted it would be in a high population in the intermediate host. It's zero for 80,000. There's 209 species in that 80,000. So it's literally the Noah's Ark. Um, and so, you know, once again, the zoonotic people say, well, maybe it's this rare thing, you know, every time, sorry, I understand just at a podcast, I sent him an email. I said, you know, you say that they didn't test raccoon dogs, but on page 1, 1 0 9 of the WHL report, you know, they actually talk about raccoon dogs. So you might want to correct your incorrect statement. He hasn't contacted me back.
Speaker 1 : 31:10
Why would he, all right, so we'll continue or near analysis.
Speaker 2 : 31:14
So let's still, we talked about the animal, check the box. Let's talk about the virus, um, in SARS one and inside and in MERS, what you have to imagine is, okay, you've got, you've got this virus, it's in an intermediate host. What, uh, just before I go on from that, there's something called the reservoir host, which is, which is the definition of a host. And in, in, in coronavirus, it's always a where the, there there's this complete armistice between the two of them, the bad never gets too sick from it. The virus never gets killed. It just lives there for decades and decades, changing mutating, doing recombination. That's what Nate that's nature's reservoir for Corona viruses. So it has to jump into an animal, um, because that human contact is very, very rare. And then, and then, uh, and then it goes crazy in that adult population.
Speaker 2 : 32:05
And then it's, it's getting mutations, mutations, mutations, and then it will start to jump to humans, uh, at some point in the future. So when Mo when SARS, uh, came to humans, when Merz came to humans, um, the, the first cases were, were a mixture of human to human transmission. So, so on November 16th, 2000, 2002, yes. Uh, the first human case of SARS one occurred. And then from that point until February, many, many people were getting, getting the SARS one virus. But, but, but guess what, only about half of them were a human to human transmission. The other half were other animals, other humans coming in contact, because you've got this big population of animals. You've got all these people, and it's finally got the last mutation. It needed to jump to humans and it spread. So it's, uh, so the early cases with SARS one and with MERS are 50 50 jumps from animal to animal, to human versus human, to human.
Speaker 1 : 33:09
So with that previous history, it is rational to believe that it did come from, from animals or nature.
Speaker 2 : 33:18
That's right. Joel years with knowing nothing about it. It's, it's eight, eight times every year from nature versus one time from the labs. So until you start looking at data, which is what you should do eventually, uh, yeah, you, you, you and these people are stuck. They're like Groundhog day. They're like bill Murray. They're, they're stuck at the, at the, you know, eight to one ratio and they just will not look at the data. So, so I did so, so the background is SARS. One is a 50, 50, the first a hundred patients of Cyrus, 1 50 50 from an animal versus a human Merz, 50 50 from an animal to human. So I looked at the first 259 cases in, in China, um, of, of, of jumps, uh, looked all over China. And, and that was, that's all the patients from December 1st, roughly to about March 1st, 200, 259.
Speaker 2 : 34:07
Um, and I trace them back. Do they trace back to the first human or do they, do they have so much mutations that they, they look like they came from an animal there, and there's some math around that, which we can get into. Cause it's kind of cool. But anyway, um, how many of the 259 did you think I found that came from an animal zero. Yeah. Joe you're exactly right. So, uh, for the, for the folks in Congress who may not have taken advanced neurology, what I said is look at this is the equivalent of going to going to Las Vegas, you know, and, and flipping a coin and getting heads 259 times, uh, when you ask your statistician to do that, it's a p-value with 84 zeros and a number. So again, that one would just actually be possible. Yeah, exactly. Especially the festival it's absolutely possible. And, and the virologist will refuse to talk about the lack of what's called posterior diversity in the virus. Absolutely. We'll do it
Speaker 1 : 35:05
The second nail in the coffin. And you Ben, you probably still won't give a 0.05 value for that.
Speaker 2 : 35:11
That is correct. Joe. I only treat
Speaker 1 : 35:13
Instead of how many zeros was it? 18
Speaker 2 : 35:16
Zeros. 84, no, 84, 84 zeros. Okay. Yeah.
Speaker 1 : 35:18
That's like, I think there is, it's almost more numb nor Adams that's exceeds the number of atoms in the universe is that
Speaker 2 : 35:26
It exceeds it by, by 10 to the 30th. So yeah, it's extended. The three's worth of universes of Adams. So, okay. So it's not in the, in nature, it's the virus is a pure virus. Now, again, the vaccines we have by definition by the FDA and everybody you'll ever, they gotta be pure. So from this week to next week to this patient, to this patient of this state, to that state, that vaccine doesn't change by one nucleotide. And that's what we have with our SCOBY. Two, it hit the ground with, with one sequence and, you know, it makes a mistake every two weeks randomly. And if it finds a mistake, it really likes it keeps it. And then, and then that one, you know, it takes off, but you can trace you can I get the, oh, a little little detail, which is not science, but it's really curious.
Speaker 2 : 36:12
The first complete genetic patient is at, it was in December in UConn. It's at the people's liberation army hospital in one China, uh, about three kilometers mile and a half from the one is urology. This was known on January 20th, 20, 20, the whole, they told the world when they uploaded into a database, they tried to take it down in the database. Wouldn't let them, after I pointed out there was PLA hospital. But, um, the first patient that we know with a complete sequence, was it a, was it a PLA hospital? I'm not saying necessarily that's the fairest, but I'd sure, I sure would like to ask them why, what was the circumstances of a military hospital having the first complete sequence, please tell me. And maybe there's an innocent answer. I don't know, but it's the question nobody is asking. Okay. Um, I can then take that patient. And every patient in the world, all 200 million are traceable to that patient. So when president Trump got in whatever October, November, he had, he had about 20 mutations cause he was every two weeks. And in fact, his virus was traced from a white house in the Connecticut, into Europe, back to China by that process. So this is, this is the hallmark of a laboratory acquired infection where the virus is pure. Hmm.
Speaker 2 : 37:32
So you nailed it. This is it. We'll talk about.
Speaker 1 : 37:41
Okay, go ahead. Talk about people.
Speaker 2 : 37:43
I'm sorry. I just, I just, I just want to be complete. So, um, again, SARS one, MERS, one, every other. Zoonosis when it jumps into humans, it's a two-step process. Um, it's not trying to hurt humans. It's just opportunistic. It goes wherever it gets a chance to go. So initially it jumps into humans. It doesn't have all the things it needs. It can't make very many, you know, baby viruses, et cetera. And so it burns out, uh, and then tries again and tries again and jumps back to the it's, the camels, that sort of thing, SARS one. And then eventually, I'm sorry. Eventually it gets all the mutations that needs to support human to human transfer. And then you're then you have the foundation for an epidemic. Okay. But that's a long process with SARS one. It took a year and a half, uh, with MERS.
Speaker 2 : 38:26
It took two and a half years in the camels before, before. Okay. What does that mean though? Every time a human gets an infection, even if they don't know it, uh, and even if they don't know, or if they know it or they go to the doctor and they don't know what it is, there is a record in their blood, right. They make antibodies to the virus. Once, you know, that a, that a, a zoonosis is going to jump into humans and leave a record in the hospital specimens. And you have a test from the epidemic of, of, of the virus itself. You can go back into the hospital and find specimens. And typically it can range from one to four to 70, almost 20% of the specimens. Uh, from, for example, people working in the market will have evidence, uh, antibody evidence that they had the infection, whether they knew it or not.
Speaker 2 : 39:17
And this is a very powerful tool. Um, I, I hate to pick on our friend Anderson, but he also predicted it even because of the unique capability of this virus to really hit human to human transmission from the get-go from the beginning, he predicted that there would be a lot of what's called pre epidemic, zero conversion, fancy words for going to a hospital, take samples out of the refrigerator, test them and find a high percentage. So of course people, because he's because he's authoritative people, took him up on that and he tested 9,500 bank specimens from December and before in Wu Han, going to ask you again, Joe, how many do you think they found that were positive? She's throwing
Speaker 1 : 40:01
Me some difficult question. It's clearly going to be zero.
Speaker 2 : 40:05
Yeah. Um, so again, my statistician says, you know, they should have had 100 to 400, they got zero. You run the crank on that. And that's a one in a million probability. So the virus has incredible, uh, capability of being the most aggressive human to human virus that's ever been seen in the history of neurology. But, but the, but it does not have the hallmark of how you would build that in nature, which is pre epidemic, human contact. You know, you can't have both, if you take a mouse, that's been humanized in the laboratory to have human lungs and you serial passage there, uh, that, that is, that is an effective way to do it. And amazingly two months after the epidemic, we're, we're February, March now, Dr. Sheath went into reality and Dr. Barrack in America, the number one synthetic biologists in the world in North Carolina, publish a paper saying, Hey, if you grow this virus and transgenic mice, it chills the mice. And by the way, they get brain infections, which is really unusual. And I'm saying, yeah, that's experiment that was done in 2019 that led to the spill.
Speaker 1 : 41:13
Yeah. And Barrack was probably highly likely part of the whole process. Um, so I, that,
Speaker 3 : 41:22
When was your paper published?
Speaker 1 : 41:24
Was it like, was it last month? Yeah,
Speaker 2 : 41:26
The, the, the, the long paper is January 30th of, uh,
Speaker 1 : 41:31
2021. All right. So, so you mentioned it was downloaded 170,000 times. Yes. Okay. So I'm assuming from the number of downloads that the reception has been pretty well accepted, and there's not a lot of opposition to the evidence that you're providing
Speaker 2 : 41:53
Joe. The remarkable thing is I cannot, I, for the most part cannot get a virologist to engage me, especially in a, in a public forum, which I've I've offered to do under, under, uh, you know, uh, under, under oath I've often do without, oh, um, I did a debate, um, sorry. I did a debate on, what's called the Munk debates. I think it's UNK, it's Canadian group. They, they, they actually have some pretty amazing debates with Henry Kissinger and all these people in their history. But anyway, we about four hours notice I did a debate with a virologist from, uh, infectious disease doctor from Columbia. And we agreed ahead of time, Hey, let's both not pick on each other, but let's educate the public and that sort of thing. But, um, it, it, wasn't pretty, I guess, is the best way to put it too. I mean, I was as gentle as I could be, but, uh, I presented nothing but facts. He presented nothing but speculation. And, uh, it was, it was surprising, you know,
Speaker 1 : 42:52
W take on the, uh, adoption of this shift in understanding of the origins within the conventional, uh, mainstream media have, it seems like there's been a trend towards, at least considering it, do you feel it's gone even further than that? And, and the likelihood of it coming from nature is pretty much a radically decreased, almost nothing as it should be based on your analysis.
Speaker 2 : 43:20
Absolutely not, Joe, this is the most, I mean, this is, this, this story just keeps being remarkable at every turn. So, um, there's a lot of evidence out, you know, my evidence is out there. My testimony helps, you know, get your credibility around that other people are speaking. Uh, I'm part of a group called the parents group. I don't speak for the parish group, but it's important thing I have to say there, but, you know, we put out, we put out four, four open letters that have been widely, widely used to fast for a further investigation. But the remarkable thing is, uh, Monday, Monday the Lancet put out a second letter by the same people as the first letter, minus three of the most prominent relatives. But nonetheless, instead of 27, it's 24 people saying, stop speculating, dah, dah, and then, and then a who's who will live in, or who's who of virality on Tuesday, put out a pre-print on the same place.
Speaker 2 : 44:10
I quit lines in ODA. Um, basically laying out saying they're doing scientific work, laying out why it came from nature, but, uh, I'm in the process of writing a rebuttal to that because they've, I, Joe, I don't, I, you know, I don't want to be too strong with, with words, but they sing. They say things that I know they know on true. And I know they know that people aren't going to look behind them if they're not, you know, if they're a casual, they're just going to, okay. They say that because it will not infect wild type mice. And that's what people often use in the laboratory. That equipment come from the lab. And of course, everyone talks about nothing but humanized mice, which are not wild type mice. So why, why they would, why would they do that? And I don't know how they don't have the shade of the mirror in the morning to do that. This is not
Speaker 1 : 45:05
Your first rodeo. You've published many times. You're, you're a veteran of the industry you've, uh, been around for decades. So what is your speculation as to how the reputable scientists, uh, and researchers committed to science and supposedly, or could ignore such strong scientific evidence,
Speaker 2 : 45:24
But not ignoring a joke? There's there, there, I believe there's too much at stake here. Uh, I believe it was an accident and an accident and accident leak from the lab. There's lots of things that need to be done to kind of reduce it from happening. Again. I have lots of ideas I shared with Congress on how Dana function could be. It could be done a little bit, but it could be better controlled. I mean, I I'm trying to solve solutions and, and what they're doing is, um, they're so scared of, of, of a potential really big outcome that they're creating. Um, there's a lot of Chinese money in the laboratories. So as part of it, I mean, I mean, it, you know, China's is great to collaborate with. You get to go there. They're nice to trips, tours of the great wall, um, karaoke, uh, you know, it's, it's a wonderful place. I live in Taiwan. My wife is Chinese. I mean, uh, I, I, I
Speaker 1 : 46:16
Lived or you lived or live in Taiwan.
Speaker 2 : 46:19
We live back and forth. I'm in Seattle right now, but, um, but I'm going to go back. My, my 14 year old daughter was at school there. Um, my mother-in-law, uh, was ill with, uh, uh, some dementia issues. She just passed away. But, uh, I really like, I like Asia and, you know, and, and I wanted to say at the, uh, at the testimony around this, you know, look at, I mean, I I'm married to a Chinese, so I, it's not, this is not a racial thing for me, but by the way, you know, in 15 years of marriage, we actually haven't ever had bat soup or we haven't had panic, pangolin stew. So, um, I mean, I actually think some of the, some of the zoonotic theories require quite an unusual, uh, stereotype of, of what, what may be going on. Uh, you know, as you said, one is three times bigger than the New York, and it's more modern than New York and the people there, uh, you know, it's very, very modern. So, you know, accusing them of, you know, eating bad soup is kind of an unusual thing to do.
Speaker 1 : 47:18
Yeah. Yeah. But you know, the, the mass understanding of the details of the Chinese cities in the U S minimal, we just don't have any understanding of most of us don't ever say Chinese geography. So, um, you think a part of this might be saving face that they came out initially and they just don't want to be embarrassed that they were wrong.
Speaker 2 : 47:42
Yes. And I gave them an out show. I mean, I kind of play chess and can think ahead variously. So, um, although doctor, she mentioned this in an interview in July of 2020, it wasn't widely known. I knew it than other people knew it, but she did all of her research at what is called BLC level two BLC level three for, you know, for all of us, I think the best way to think of BLSA level two is that your dental office. Okay. So she was working with Corona viruses that can affect human cells in a dental law. Um, and so Ralph Barrick, actually, he, he, well, I shouldn't say he has, he has lit on that as saying, Hey, I didn't know they were doing level two and three. I thought they were doing level four and that's crazy. And therefore the lab, the lab leak is, is maybe more possible. A couple of other prominent radiologists have also done that. I'm not gonna accuse them of knowing it and ignoring it and now coming to, to, you know, coming to believe in it. But, um, you know, I, that would be, that would be a nice pivot for people who have got themselves stuck, uh, saying things that weren't scientific. They could, oh, I just learned, I just learned that it was at a very low biosafety level, so of course a leak becomes more possible.
Speaker 1 : 48:57
Okay. All right. So in some ways the, uh, the origin, I don't see it as hugely important other than it gives us, uh, information as to how to prevent these types of occurrences in the future, but it is less important than the other issues that evolve from this, which is this massive vaccination campaign to hundreds of millions of people, the, uh, crushing of our personal liberties, the tyrannical interventions, the authoritarian implementation of emergency emergency measures in most countries and states and localities. So do you have any speculations as to beyond the origins as to why this might all be occurring in the comments on the vaccine program?
Speaker 2 : 49:49
Yeah. So let, let, let me go back and unpack that because you said a lot of things in it. It actually was part of my segue into my first book on stay safe, which was February. I want to say the end of February, maybe it's the second or third week of February, 2020 now. So nothing's happening in the S us, right? Chinese put out, uh, just a, uh, Massey paper on 80,000 patients with SARS. COVID two, all, you know, all, all the demographics, male, female age, you know, occupation, all these sorts of things. Um, and 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes with that table in that paper, you can see, look at, this is serious for people 70, 80 years old, maybe 60 with, with, you know, other diseases, diabetes, or, or especially lung diseases. You know, you start to go down. This thing is, is, is a trivial and maybe less than a seasonal flu for children or for teens, or for maybe people in their twenties.
Speaker 2 : 50:42
So if you're going to do public policy, you of course, want to use the lightest touch possible. Right? So, uh, a very simple process would have been, let's really focus on taking care of our, of the elderly folks, uh, you know, 70 and above let's really take care of people 45 to 70 with, uh, with, with, uh, other conditions. Let's, let's, let's pass laws and say, look at it. They want to work from home. You can't fire them. I mean, th th that's kind of a useful thing to do, but let's let's then, you know, not, not do these draconian things with, with the, with the young kids, with the kids and that sort of thing. And certainly don't lock down the whole society. Um, it's now absolutely proven that if one person in a building gets our SCOBY two, and everyone else is inside the building, they all get it from that person.
Speaker 2 : 51:30
So lockdowns, especially like in Italy, Italy, Italy has a self locked on, right? So that's a wonderful, wonderful culture where you have three generations, maybe in the house with the kids in the family, and then the grandparents upstairs. But it's, that is, that is unfortunately a perfect setting for one person coming in the house and spreading it inside the house. So locking everybody inside is the worst thing in the world. I mean, the other paper in February, 2020 Joe was 200 cases retraced as to where they came from two out of 200, came from outdoors and 102 hundred more from indoors. So, you know, you got to take these two pieces of science, the age, the strong age effect, and this indoor outdoor effect into account. And then, um, you do, you do some sort of airflow in, and it doesn't take much dynamics to look at the typical surgical mask and imagine what its impact will be. It probably is measurable. And, and, you know, I, I had some friends forced me to look at, well, how bad is it to wear a mask? And I couldn't really find a lot of issues around it. So it's kind of maybe if you wear it for 1% and there's no downside, but so what happened in my opinion is we, we got a lot of misinformation going very quickly and it really snowballed. It really snowballs.
Speaker 1 : 52:45
Yeah. It sure dead. And, uh, we don't know the outcome because, uh, these emergency authors use authorization vaccines. They're, they're essentially no safety studies ever proven. They've, it's not that they haven't been trying to have messenger. RNA vaccines have met, or before they've tried for a lot, many, many years and failed miserably. They've never been able to do it. And now they do it under the coverage, under the cover of emergency use. And we've got 200 million Gilt, Guinea pigs, probably more worldwide, maybe three or 400 million, half a billion. Yeah. So
Speaker 2 : 53:23
In my book, I talked about that. I, I said one of the challenges for coronavirus vaccines, which had never been developed before is something called Adam antibody dependent enhancement, where if you get the wrong antibody on the spike protein, the virus says, okay, I won't go into an ACE, two cell I'll go into a, uh, an immune cell that has an FC receptor for the antibody. So you confer the good news is you're not going to get pneumonia. The bad news is you're going to get an HIV like infection in your immune system. And in fact, we saw CD four cells going down as if that was going on. Um, so I, I was quite worried about that. I don't think I seen much of that, but the flip side is you're, you're absolutely right. We've never used a therapeutic that asked the body to make a protein in excess, uh, like this. Um, we, we
Speaker 1 : 54:11
Wouldn't see ADE yet, at least in United States. I, I think it may see it in the Southern hemisphere and Australia and New Zealand. Um, but I, I don't, haven't seen any evidence in the literature coming out of those countries that they're having bleeding ADE, epidemics, which is somewhat reassuring because that's the biggest concern. I mean, we've got, we've got probably hundreds. You can make a pretty strong, compelling argument. There's tens of thousands of people who've died from this vaccine. I mean, even though there's only 7,000 reported in the barest data, it's probably much, much higher than that. And then we have reports even Victor's, Alenka, who's tried to put in two dozen reports and they wouldn't let them in. These are documented deaths from the vaccine. So we know that it's happening all over suppression. So, um, that's still relatively small doses administered as a percentage, but, you know, the big challenge is going to become when we have these re-exposure to the Corona viruses in the winter, which hopefully mirrors what happened.
Speaker 1 : 55:12
What's happening in Australia, New Zealand and falling like flies from ADT. I deeply appreciate it connecting with someone with your academic credentials and credibility and the educating us, um, uh, really providing the solid scientific proof. And I will put proof in quotes. I mean, solid proof, authoritative proof, virtually irrefutable to level P values that are beyond really, if you, if you apply a base there and correctly, it would be, it would be more likely to find the right molecule and molecule, right Adam and the entire universe. I mean, it's just basically impossible that this could be anything other than a lab leak virus. So I thank you for your work and your effort in creating your book to prove it 140 page paper, but there's not many. I remember reading my first hundred 40 page pager as well. One of my passions was on at the time was, uh, uh, the, uh, uh, the reactive nitrogen species, which is, uh, no, no, no, no, no. It's, uh, I'm forgetting what it is. No Polly begins with a, uh, I'm just, I'm having a brain lapse at this point, but, um, it was written, it was, it was a massively good paper. It was 140 pages it's like, but I remember reading. It was just like a book. You couldn't wait to turn the page and see what the next part of the story was. So congratulations.
Speaker 2 : 56:39
Well, good. So I am going to write a book about this and maybe at some point I'm trying to, I'd like to come back and talk to you about that. I remembered
Speaker 1 : 56:44
It proxy nitrite. So yeah,
Speaker 2 : 56:50
That's a freeway. This is a stable free, radical, right,
Speaker 1 : 56:54
More stable. It's actually more damaging than hydroxyl radical, which is generally recognized as one of the most dangerous, but reality is probably more dangerous than hydroxy because it's, it lasts about a million times longer radical. It lasts a millionth of a second. It can only travel like a distance of approaching or to proxy know nitrites less than so much longer. It actually travels between cells into the nucleus, out of the nucleus, into the mitochondria. So it's far more devastating and just causes [inaudible] free radicals. So our carbon deal, uh, so, um, yeah, but it was a hundred pack. Was the author from the NIH. It was just a really brilliant paper, but he had 1400 references in years. How many references do you have in your page paper? It must've been hundreds 500.
Speaker 2 : 57:37
Uh, yeah. I, I don't know that, but I want, yeah, it was over a hundred. It was over a hundred.
Speaker 1 : 57:43
Yeah. Well, congratulations. It's a labor of love for sure. And, uh, thanks for sharing your insight. And is there any closing, is there anything you would like to reinforce or emphasize or something else you'd like to share?
Speaker 2 : 57:55
Oh, well, no. I mean, I think I appreciate the opportunity here. I mean, I think it's really important that we get educated here. If, if it came from a laboratory, I think for me, it's important that we, we, we change the kind of work we do in laboratories. Um, and, and so we can prevent that from happening again. Um, and so, uh, thank you.
Speaker 1 : 58:17
Okay. Thanks
Speaker 3 : 58:19
So much for watching. Remember hit the like and subscribe button so you can get more videos that can help you and your family take control.