PERSPECTIVES ON THE PANDEMIC XV
A Conversation with Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi, M.D.
Kiel, Germany
March 29, 2021
Interviewed by John Kirby
Research: Evan Dominguez
With thanks to Oval Media
TRANSCRIPT:
[00:00:26:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: My name is Sucharit Bhakdi, and I’m a physician, a trained microbiologist and infectious disease man, and I’ve worked all my life in the field of infectious diseases and immunology. I chaired the department of medical microbiology and hygiene at the University of Mainz from 1990 to 2012, after which I am living in retirement. And that’s, I think, all I have to say.
[00:00:59:0] JOHN KIRBY: On February 28th you and eleven other prominent scientists, including a former Vice President of Pfizer, sent a letter to the European Medicines Agency highlighting seven chief concerns surrounding the agency’s recent authorization of the experimental COVID-19 vaccines. Can you summarize your concerns, the concerns that you raised in that letter?
[00:01:23:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Well, the bottom line of this letter was that we were concerned that the dangers of thrombosis, clot formation, intravasal (intravascular) clot formation, had not been sufficiently addressed by the EMA, and we asked them to supply evidence that this danger of clot formation had been considered, and that there was evidence to exclude that our fears were founded. That is the gist of the letter, based on what is known in medicine. One would have to fear that people--especially young people, by the way—who received these gene-based vaccines, would develop clotting abnormalities.
[00:02:18:0] JOHN KIRBY: Did you receive a response to your letter?
[00:02:20:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Well, we asked them to respond within one week. We did not receive a response within that one week, from the first of March to the eighth of March. But in that one week, ironically enough, reports came in from all of Europe of young people who had coagulapathies, that means clotting abnormalities, with a series of deaths. And this caused fifteen countries to suspend their vaccination program with AstraZeneca vaccine. So obviously the EMA was forced to provide an explanation, and that … they didn’t provide an explanation, but they released news at a press conference on the seventeenth of March.
[00:03:18:0] To reassure everyone in the world that there was no certain connection to the vaccination. Now, I want to go into this because this has become a very, very important issue. They said that these deaths had been due to one of two very rare clotting abnormalities. One was the so-called called DIC, disseminated intravascular coagulation. That is a condition that arises when you have so many clots forming in your body that your clotting system is exhausted and so you start to bleed. This is very paradoxical, and it’s extremely rare. The second was the formation was the formation of blood clots in the veins of your brain.
[00:04:20:0] So to cut a very long story short, what they said was, “we had five cases of DIC in individuals under fifty, and twelve” (it’s now become thirteen, by the way) “cases of intracranial, intracerebral, blood clot, and this was very unfortunate, but considering the benefit that we’re getting, the risks are miniscule because the numbers are so small.” So if you ask me what normal numbers they quoted, I will tell you. They said, “Normally, one would have expected around 1.3 cases of cerebral venous thrombosis. That’s what it’s called, CVT, alright. Every condition, every case, suspected case of CVT is an emergency.
[00:05:22:0] You’ve got to go to the emergency department, you’ve got to have your head scanned, and you’ve got to have your blood taken to see if there’s a clot, and if there is you’ve got to get your therapy immediately. And they said, “Well, we had twelve cases, the expected number was 1.3, which means that we can’t totally exclude it, but the numbers are so small on an absolute basis that they should be accepted because the benefit is so great.” With regard to DIC, the number was five. Five. The number to be expected was below one. Quote, unquote. Below one. And when I read this, I said, “You guys have to be taken to court.” How can you say this to people who are simply unknowing?
[00:06:20:0] Say, “Okay, five cases bad, but the benefit.” So, now let me tell you that nine to ten people lost their lives under sixty, they were under fifty five. Up till then they were completely healthy. If, upon vaccination of ten million individuals under sixty,--because AstraZeneca said “We vaccinated twenty million, and saved twenty million lives”—if ten million were under sixty and you lost ten lives, how lives you be expected to lose, alone because of these two extremely rare conditions, if you had vaccinated the sixty million Germans under the sixty to save their lives. Sixty would die, because of the vaccine, okay?
[00:07:16:0] Now, in the first six months of 2020, during the first wave of this so-called pandemic, how many Germans under sixty lost their lives because of or because … with this virus? Question to you, the audience. The number, according to the official statistics, is fifty two. Fifty two people living in Germany under sixty lost their lives because of COVID-19. So how in God’s name can the benefits outweigh the risks? The formation of clots in the brain veins is something so horrible to think of. And I told you that you need emergency care. What are the symptoms of brain … of clot formations in the brain? The first symptom is a splitting headache. The first symptom is a splitting headache.
[00:08:21:0] Then lots have nausea, vomiting, then they have dizziness, or let’s say their consciousness … then they start to have paralysis, they become hard of hearing, blurred vision, all of this. You know, clot formation in brain veins can give you any symptom you want. And that is why, I think, that is the reason why the symptoms of these people who are getting their second shot of the vaccine are so diverse, but they would all fit into that. Even these people who have, you know, jerking, limb movements that they can’t control anymore. This can be one of the consequences of clot formation in these vessels.
[00:9:14:0] JOHN KIRBY: Dr. Bhakdi, what do you say to people who say, “Well, that was just the AstraZeneca vaccine, why are you so concerned? Maybe it’s not the Pfizer of Moderna.”
[00:9:23:0] ] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Well, the principle is the same, you see? The reason why this is happening--that’s what I believe--is that these vaccines are being taken up by the cells that line the vessels. So so-called endothelial cells. You know, it’s like the tapestry on the wall. And the spike protein is being produced by these cells of the vessel wall. Now this is a disastrous situation because the spike protein itself is now sitting on the surface of the cells facing the bloodstream. And it is known that these spike proteins, the moment they touch platelets, they activate them, alright? And that sets the whole clotting system on, it just is a press button.
[00:10:18:0] The second thing that happened is that—should happen, according to theory, according to what I used to teach—is that, you know, the waste products of this protein that are produced in the cell, are put in front of the door of the cell, which is all toward the lumen, towards the opening, where the blood is flowing, and is presented to the immune system, and the immune system, especially the lymphocytes are there that recognize these cells, they will attack the cells because they don’t want them to make virus or virus parts. And the virus parts are now being made at locations the virus would never, ever reach. You know, the vessel wall in your brain. The virus doesn’t got here. But if that vessel wall, if that tapestry, is then destroyed, you scrape on the wall, that is the signal for the clotting system that it should go. And then you’re going to get a blood clot, okay? And this happens with all the gene-based vaccines because the genes are being introduced to cells of the vessel wall. That’s what we think.
[00:11:32:0] JOHN KIRBY: Dr. Bhakdi, could you explain to people as best you can first of all, what are these mRNA vaccines designed to do? Should they even be called vaccines, or are they more like gene therapy, as some of their patents state? What are they designed to do? And how do they work? When you say they’re going to teach cells to produce spike proteins in places they ordinarily might not, how does that happen and will it last? How long does that last, that process?
[00:12:04:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Alright, so we go back a bit. Now, the conventional vaccines are composed—conventional vaccine against flu—are composed of the spike. The spike is that part of the virus that clutches the handle of the door to your cell, opens it, so that the virus can enter the cell. Now, an antibody is created, or is made, when you inject the isolated hand of the virus into your body. The immune system then makes antibodies against this hand, and the antibodies are there to stop the virus from getting to the handle of the door. And it could work, if the antibodies are where the door is. In the case of the mRNA and the AstraZeneca vaccine, one is not injecting the dead limb, the arm, into the body.
[00:13:06:0] One is injecting the gene that encodes this limb into the body; you get the shot in your muscle, those genes enter the bloodstream, and those genes will enter the cells they contact, alright? And that’s why we thought, you know, if the substance enters your bloodstream that is rather large—not sugar, that’s a gene, alright?—it will never leave the bloodstream again, there’s no way out … to get out. The walls of your vessels are closed. You can’t seep out of them.
[00:13:48:0] JOHN KIRBY: So Dr. Bhakdi, let me just pause you for a second, let me just see if I understood this. A normal vaccination inserts inert or attenuated virus into the bloodstream. This causes the cells to create the spike protein or whatever will inspire the production of antibodies. In the case of the mRNA vaccine, the mRNA is instructing … you’re not putting in inert virus, what you’re doing is instructing the cells to create the spike protein on their own. And are you suggesting that the mRNA vaccines will instruct more cells than ordinarily would, in fact cells all over the body, to create the spike protein, and what’s the danger of that? What’s the danger in having many, many cells that ordinarily might not, create the spike and create the waste products that result? What will the lymphocytes do, what might our lymph nodes do in response to this?
[00:14:55:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Well, you see, the trouble is one doesn’t really know where these genes are going because it’s never been looked at. And this is one of the questions we posed to the EMA: Where are the data? Where are the experiments that tell us where this is going, and can you exclude that what we are thinking has been excluded? Because, it’s so important, what we think, what we proposed to them is going to take place, is that these genes that are injected into the muscle are going to reach, of course, the lymph node, but second, and more importantly, they’re going to get into the bloodstream. Once they get into the bloodstream they are captured within the vessel system. It’s a system of pipes and little canals going through your whole body into all organs.
[00:15:55:0] But what is in the blood vessel doesn’t contact the liver cell, it does not contact the brain cell, it doesn’t contact any other … it contacts just the cells that line the vessels, alright? Which keep them from exiting the bloodstream. This is something that people don’t realize. And we said, “Therefore, the only cells that will be able to take up these genes in quantity must be the cells that are lining the blood vessels themselves. Sounds logical, I hope.
[00:16:26:0] JOHN KIRBY: Yes. But so what does that mean? What will end up … or so what ends up happening then?
[00:16:33:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: What ends up is that the gene enters the cell and the gene is sort of translated into the spike protein, okay? It uses the machinery, the protein synthesis machinery of the cell, and it’s like an alien code that is put into your factory, and outcomes the product, which is the virus spike. And this virus spike, within hours, this spike will sort of protrude out of the cell, okay?—and at the same time the waste products will also be put in front of the door. So there will be the waste products, plus the spike. And the spike, on the one hand, will probably activate the platelets just by touch, you know.
[00:17:29:0] Whereas the lymphocytes will see the waste products, because that’s what they’re trained to do, and they’re going try to attack and kill the cells. So that all this waste and that spike is not made anymore. So you have a double path to the tragedy. A double path! Yes, and this will happen wherever these spikes are made. And they’re probably going to be made at locations where the blood flow is very sluggish because those cells have the most time to take up these packages, alright? And this, it now turns out—we didn’t know this when we wrote the letter to the EMA, because, you know, this experiment has never been performed in animals, humans are not being the test animals, humans, millions—and now we’re seeing the outcome. And the outcome is horrible, and frightening. It may be interesting to some, but I find this so absolutely … it’s such a nightmare.
[00:18:33:0] JOHN KIRBY: But Dr. Bhakdi, yeah, sorry, but you would say, they say in absolute terms only twelve or thirteen people have died, you and I might say that there were more, but they would say this is providing 90% to 95% effectiveness. Why is that wrong? Why are they wrong to say … or first of all, how can they say that their vaccine is 95% effective in the case of Moderna or Pfizer, whichever one claimed that? Is that even a possible thing to say? Isn’t the virus 99.97% survivable for most people? How can they tell that the vaccine is 95% effective at preventing long-term illness or death?
[00:19:22:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Of course it’s nonsense. Of course they couldn’t have shown this, because there weren’t enough deaths to show. They would have had to vaccinate the whole world to show that maybe they saved so and so many lives. Now, I think I said this before. During the whole first wave of the pandemic, fifty two people under sixty (in Germany) died because of or with the virus. Fifty two people. Now to show that a vaccine was 95% efficient, you would have to have a second group who had been vaccinated and shown that less than fifty two, far less than fifty two, less than one person, had died. And of course no trial could ever have shown that, and there is no trial.
[00:20:12:0] What they show, or what they purported to show--because that also was not true, by the way—was that, in the case of the Pfizer, I know the numbers there: they had 20,000 people who were not vaccinated, and 20,000 who were vaccinated, and then they counted the number of COVID-19 cases in the one group and in the other group. And they came up with numbers like 150 in the unvaccinated group got COVID-19, and only ten in the vaccinated case got COVID-19, so the vaccine was 90% or 95% efficient. I mean this is … it’s so ridiculous.
[00:21:00:0] JOHN KIRBY: Why is that ridiculous?
[00:21:01:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Because how did they define COVID-19? Was it death? Of course it wasn’t death. It was cough, mild symptoms like cough, sneeze, and a positive PCR test that is lying all the time anyway. I mean, you don’t go around saying how many people got a cold in one group and so this vaccine has protected a hundred and fifty people. When I read this I stopped reading, because I knew that all of this was bullshit. Excuse what I say. Don’t go … you know, if you want to start wallowing around in shit, it’s not good. What they said was, I think in the BioNTech case, it was ten severe cases in the control group and one severe case in the vaccinated group. But so, my God, you vaccinate 20,000 people to save nine people from severe … God knows what severe meant, they were not on the ICU, they were not on ICU, they were not vitally endangered. And it was also because the test was positive which was probably wrong anyway. So you know—
[00:22:11:0] JOHN KIRBY: Dr. Bhakdi, you made a great analogy in an interview I saw. You talked about tetanus vaccines. So tell us, when someone gets tetanus, what happens?
[00:22:25:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: You die. You die, okay? In Thailand, a hundred people get tetanus, a hundred are going to die. In America, because your system is so good—if your doctors are still doing their job, by the way, which they’re not anymore—you could save half the people’s lives, or maybe even seventy percent, if your doctors are still working, and thinking, and using their instruments and training.
[00:22:52:0] JOHN KIRBY: So what does that tell us about the tetanus vaccine? So, in other words, with tetanus, which untreated has a 100% or near 100% death rate, when we apply the tetanus vaccine, which people can talk about safety issues in its manufacture, but in principle it works, is that not correct?
[00:23:10:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Yes! That’s why the tetanus vaccination is good. And that’s why I’ve always told my students, you know, that they should get vaccinated against tetanus, and they should get revaccinated after ten or twenty years, it doesn’t … the side effects are really so small, the risks are so small, and the benefit is so huge that there can be no question about it.
[00:23:36:0] JOHN KIRBY: So contrast that with … so, in other words, you can protect ten out of ten people with a tetanus vaccine, whereas … and you could tell that it’s working, because if they’re exposed to tetanus, they don’t die. Whereas here they might not have died anyway.
[00:23:56:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: They wouldn’t have died. But you go around killing now with the vaccine, one, and secondly, maiming others for life. Because, you know, even in the vaccination trials, it turned out, several hundred people who got vaccinated got such severe side effects that they had to be treated in the hospital, okay? So, on the one hand, you might have prevented—you might have, but I don’t believe this anyway—nine severe cases, you prevented 140 mild cases, but in return you got 100 or 200 side effects that were so severe they had to be taken care of in the hospital. I heard that some had to be taken to the ICU. I don’t have any data, so I’m just saying that’s what I heard, but I can believe it.
[00:24:53:0] And I don’t want to know whether there’ve been even worse effects that people are not talking about. I … you know, excuse me, but this bleeding, profuse bleeding, has been seen in individuals who have taken … gotten the Moderna vaccine, right? They have bleeding of the skin. This jerking over the whole body, which also can be the consequence of thrombus formation in the brain, has been reported from America, from people taking the … getting that vaccine, correct?
[00:25:34:0] JOHN KIRBY: Yes, yes.
[00:25:35:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: And this jerking, which is horrible, probably … these people will probably never be normal again, you know? There was a case three days ago in Germany, just three days ago, twenty nine year old mother, three children, who’s now in … you know, it’s living hell for these people. So let’s not fight, guys, let’s sit down and think. And do something about this.
[00:26:05:0] JOHN KIRBY: Let me ask you, Dr. Bhakdi, when you look ahead … so what about people who had perhaps some mild or ranging to some fairly severe side effects; vomiting, the appearance of quote unquote COVID, and then it subsided, okay? As we see, obviously millions of people have been vaccinated, and they have … some have had severe adverse reactions, some have died, but the majority have survived. So what are we worried about for those people? Are we worried that something permanent may have happened to their immune system? Is there a possibility that maybe in the presence of a new contact with wild virus or some other way that they could enter into a kind of cytokine storm or autoimmune disorder, or … what are the concerns about the people who’ve been vaccinated long-term?
[00:27:04:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Yes, that is a very good point, and a very important point. In fact, it is precisely that, it’s that—what we fear is going to happen. And the scene is now set, because of this mass vaccination of young people. Now you see, this virus is taken care of by you, me, and all the young guys, whose immune system is trained to live with them, alright? The virus gets into your throat and nose, and the virus infects the upper part of your respiratory system, which is the nose and the throat. And the virus will replicate there and you won’t even notice this because those cells are renewed all the time. And the immune system just uses this as a train … a round of training, and gets to know the virus;
[00:28:05:0] so that if the unfortunate thing happens (that should not happen) that the virus (and a lot of the virus) can get into your bronchi and lung, where the cells are not renewed all the time, alright?--and enter the cells there, then the immune system will come and take care of the virus by killing the cells of the bronchi and lung that are infected. And that’s when you start getting your cough, okay?—and your pneumonia, if it goes down to the lung, and fever. This does not happen if the immune system not active. People don’t fever when they have … cold, or when they have just sore throat, alright? And you better not meddle around with that, it’s a system that has been working all … all the time. So the immune system is trained to combat this virus and the cells that make the virus as things get serious. And that’s when the virus replicates to a high extent in the lung.
[00:29:06:0] Now, this immune system, you know, it’s like an orchestra. The playing has to be on the right tone and loudness. And the conductor’s there. So, we have a conductor of our immune system. Whether it’s God or nature, I don’t know, but the conductor is perfect. Now, what is happening now, is that by injecting the gene of this virus, you are meddling with the conductor. And now something is coming to confuse the immune system. Now the members of the orchestra are getting the information that they should play, alright? And they should react against this virus part. And the trouble about the immune system is that if you train them to play louder, they’re going to go on playing louder and louder every time.
[00:30:05:0] Because, you see, if you have an immune system which is trained against one virus, and another one comes in and it … if it doesn’t care of it so well, and it’s a bout of training, and it gets stronger. Now, what is happening now, I fear, is that the immune system is being trained to do something that it would do very well on its own. And now if the real virus comes in, all the virus that is related--because this immune system is much more intelligent than our politicians and our scientists who say this it’s a new virus and therefore we don’t recognize it; this is so foolish that it hurts, alright?—and now have an immune system that is ready to attack.
[00:31:01:0] And this virus gets into the lung and just starting to replicate in a way that is not really dangerous, but you have this over-reactive immune system is going to come and is going to destroy your lung. Because it’s overreacting. This is immune dependent enhancement of disease that we fear is going to come. Now, this is going to happen with every related virus. So those guys who think they’re being protected are actually being sensitized, so that they’re going to become more ill when they get that or a related virus. And this can happen tomorrow, next month, next fall, or next year, because our immune system has a long, long memory, okay? Now, what about those guys who want to get revaccinated? I tell you, if you escaped this time thank the lord. But don’t do this again. Because that immune system--the moment those cells in the vessel lining start making those spikes and putting them out to show again--those killer lymphocytes are going to be so fast, you bet. It’s not Russian roulette, it’s worse. But if you want to do it, I mean, go ahead. Don’t say that we didn’t warn you.
[00:32:30:0] JOHN KIRBY: So, your fear is that … first of all, you think that, you know, contrary to what we’ve been told, you think that the mRNA shots are going to stay in the body for an extended period of time. Is that correct?
[00:32:49:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: No, I … no, no, no. That is not what I said. I said that the immune system has a memory, so that if this spike appears anywhere again, it’s going to go for it. Those are our lymphocytes. The mRNA only has a relative short life in the cell, okay? It’s going to be destroyed. So you don’t have to worry about the mRNA being there, worry about what is being created. That’s what you should worry about, and those are the spikes. The danger of the spikes is twofold. The first is the immediate danger of the spike appearing on the cell surface together with the waste, because that makes this location, this part of the vessel wall, the target of … or the crystallization point for blood clotting to occur. That is the immediate danger of the spike. The long-term danger is that the spike, having been produced, is going to recognized by the immune system, and the immune system is going to be trained to combat cells that make the spike on the spot, alright? And this training is going to come to fore, is going to appear, whenever that spike comes. Today, tomorrow, next year, okay?—when a real virus comes in—or when you get revaccinated.
[00:34:18:0] JOHN KIRBY: Wouldn’t the proponents of this new vaccine say that’s a good thing, we’ve created … we’ve trained the lymphocytes to kill the spike protein when they see it—
[00:34:31:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: They don’t kill the spike protein! Sorry. It’s not the spike protein that’s being killed it’s the cell that’s making the spike protein.
[00:34:38:0] JOHN KIRBY: Oh, sorry, sorry, correct, sorry. Pardon me. So we’ve trained it to kill infected cells. What’s wrong with that?
[00:34;45:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: There is nothing basically wrong about that except that if you do too much a good job it becomes a bad job. If you inject the gene, so that it gets to places the virus never was, like in the brain, in the vessel of the brain, and you start scraping the walls of your brain vessels, that can kill you. And I don’t think any proponents of vaccination can say that’s a good thing.
[00:35:11:0] JOHN KIRBY: Have these vaccines been formally approved, and what does that mean if they haven’t?
[00:35:16:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: They haven’t been formally approved. They have not. In America they’ve been approved for emergency use, which means, in America, that there’s no liability, there’s no guarantee that they work. It would be extremely important that everyone taking the vaccine is informed about his, and I’m sure that it’s not being done. It’s not being done in Europe, in any event.
[00:35:41:0] JOHN KIRBY: What about, say, the Johnson and Johnson vaccine that is not based on mRNA? Do you have the same concerns about that vaccine?
[00:35:50:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Yes, of course, it’s a gene-based vaccine. It’s a gene-based vaccine just like the AstraZeneca, which is also not an mRNA, it’s a gene-based. But we don’t have to go into details about what a gene-based vaccine is, whether it’s an mRNA or a vector. The fact is that the gene for the spike--the gene for the spike, not the spike itself—is entering the bloodstream and reaching cells of the blood vessel wall at location that are actually forbidden. Because if they are then used, these genes are then put into the machinery of the cell, to produce those spikes,--these spikes are going to be produced at locations where they never are produced normally. Normally they are produced in the lung, or the vessels of the lung, but not in the vessels of your brain, alright?
[00:36:50:0] That is the immediate danger because once they are … you know, once these spikes are produced and are extruded through the wall, sticking out into the bloodstream, they are going to be recognized and then the immune system is then going to attack the vessel wall cells and try to kill them, okay?—as they do in the lung. The thing is that if little clots form in the lung it’s not good, but it’s something the doctors can take care of. But if the clot forms in the brain, and you don’t know it’s been formed, then you can be in for a very, very bad time. Now, the second part was that the waste was also put there, and that’s … the spikes and the waste. The spike is going to trigger the platelets and the waste is going to trigger the immune system. And together, I think we’re heading for a catastrophe.
[00:37:50:0] And I think that this is taking place in the brain very, very often, because all those poor young people getting the second shot have so many splitting headaches, alright?--I mean, it’s screaming at us; and because the EMA conceded that they had a number of deaths because of brain clots. So we know the clotting in the brain does take place. People have died, and this has been diagnose, alright? Now, if it happens once, it will happen again, and if you’ve have ten deaths you will have a hundred deaths or a thousand deaths. And if the other cases--of people going blind, or deaf, or having this jerking disease, chorea Huntington, that cannot be cured—if you’re going to take that into account and say, “Okay, the benefit is greater,” you tell me, who are you going to convince? There’s no time to lose, you got to act, you’ve got to stop it.
[00:38:50:0] ROBERT CIBIS: I just was wondering, because I spoke to nurses in hospitals who examined patients with COVID-19 before the vaccines. And what they described often were also this clotting in the lungs. IS this somehow related?
[00:39:10:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Yes, of course! Yes!
[00:39:13:0] ROBERT CIBIS: What is … what is the link between this clotting and that clotting?
[00:39:17:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Because … okay, in the real disease, yeah?—what happens is that the linings of the small vessels of the lung are also infected by the virus. You see the virus is sitting in the lung, then you have damage to the lung, then the virus gets into the blood vessels. This is true! And then it infects the blood vessel walling. And when this vessel wall is destroyed,—probably, we don’t know this, probably--because of the killer lymphocytes, just as is now being done in the brain, you get a clot! Why not? And also the spikes that are there cause spikes to be formed, like they’re now being formed in the brain. That’s why I’m saying, you know: you go around meddling with what nature has taken care of very well, then don’t come around crying and saying something’s gone wrong.
[00:40:21:0] JOHN KIRBY: If people have gotten the shot and they haven’t had any bad symptoms, they can … hopefully they’ll be alright going forward. But you do believe there is a danger of long-term impact if they are re-exposed to something, a similar virus?
[00:40:40:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: Well, yes … okay, this is a retake. Yes, of course. Because their immune system is now primed to fight, and it is super aggressive. So if the real virus comes in--in the fall or tomorrow or the day after tomorrow or next year--or a related virus—you know, there’s so many coronaviruses flying around us, and any one will do—and if they come and infect the lung, the moment those cells start making the slightest bit of the virus, they’re going to mount an attack and kill that lung. This is called overreaction. This would be … the immune dependent enhancement of disease, which is very, very bad potentially. This has been shown to take place in animal experiments where people were vaccinating against SARS-COV-1, or MERS.
[00:41;44:0] So this sort of thing is known to be able to take place. Second, and this is to me perhaps even more frightening: if people get revaccinated those side-effects that will take place in the brain are going to be enforced, and magnified, and so those guys who escaped the first time may not escape another time, and a third time or fourth time, I don’t think so. So with every revaccination--against the next mutant, this fall--before anyone takes that third shot, I think you better make your will.
[00:42:30:0] JOHN KIRBY: Dr. Bhakdi, I guess, what’s the final message you want to leave people with?
[00:42:35:0] SUCHARIT BHAKDI, M.D.: The final message is let’s quit fighting each other. Let’s get together because we have a real problem, guys. This problem is going to hit you too. Even the people … the proponents, why don’t you sit back and think about it. Imagine that there’s a grain of truth in things that we’ve been saying today. Then, you are endangered, when you take the vaccine, your family’s endangered, your children are going to be endangered. I’m horrified that children are now being given the jab in clinical trials. I think it’s Moderna, right? Six month-old children…. This is criminal. I hope you realize that this is criminal. That you are endangering your own children. How can you? How can you do this?