ICAN ATTORNEY DELIVERS KEYNOTE SPEECH AT DARTMOUTH

this rising medical cartel that was, that, you know, really posed a threat to our civil rights, our individual freedoms. That was this elevation of corporate power over democracy and over all the things that our countries stand for, which is freedom of the individual to flourish, to function, to make their own choices. And, you know, I went to pursue happiness in our own individualized way. And that

was, you know, we were being treated in this kind of cookie cutter medicine that had abandoned public health and was focused instead on this kind of militarized and monetized version of public health and had nothing to do with healthy people. And that was turning people to be, you know, doctors into agents of the state and agents of, you know, abandoning the 28, 100 years of tradition

since apocryties where a doctor would be solely focused on the good of the patient. And instead the doctor would, would the, the good of that patient was irrelevant, who was the good, he was treating the patient for the good of society. And once you do that, you're on a slippery slope because, I mean, in truth, it would be better for society under some arguments if we

just got rid of all the old people. Because, you know, they're spending 80% of our medical expenses go to treating people in the first last year of life. Wouldn't it be better for us all if we just got rid of those people? And that is where this will take us. When doctors become agents of state policy and they're no longer treating that patient, you know, there's

no end to the villainy that is going to occur. And you have these incredible ethical doctors in this room. We were talking during, you know, during dinner about what happened in other countries under fascist regimes where, you know, the medical system, the medical system, the medical system, the medical system. It's not been had a sterling reputation at defending ethics and defending morality. And so, you know,

people like Aaron are critically needed. And he came in with a very clear vision about what this battle is about. His life and his family have been touched also by vaccine injury. But the main thing about Aaron is that he's really, really smart. I don't know what his IQ is, but it's a lot more than mine. And it's a, he's scary smart. And he's an incredible

litigator. And he's a very seasoned litigator. And the people, you know, in my life, in my world, the people who are kind of most respected are people who are really serious litigators. And because they get that seasoning gives them a veteran savvy. It gives them a judgment that is even more valuable than that. And there are intelligence. And he has an incredible strategic sense. The, the

law suits that he's focused on and he's got an ost of all focus on. And that his organization, I can, has focused on, have been very, very methodical in the strategy of, of kind of advancing the ball incrementally to a point where we can then begin a cascading effect. And I'm, I'm, I'm not going to say it's a very, very important thing. And, you know, I'll

give you an example. I mean, this week, he, he won a case that was, is really breathtaking. Which is a case in Mississippi to reestablish the religious exemption, but it's based upon the first amendment of the Constitution. So it has presidential and, and implications for every state in this country. It really is a, a beachhead. Reestablishing our rights to choose our own medical interventions, not have

the state. Choose them for us. The first big case, he brought us a cage against HHS. HHS, a Congress when it passed the vaccine act. To hold HHS three things, you got to make vaccines safer. And you got to report, you got to form a committee that evaluates the vaccines every year. And tells us whether they're being made safer. And number three, you have to publish

a report to Congress every two years. That shows how you've made the vaccine safer. And I, in, what is it now, 34 years or 44 years since the 36 years since the vaccine act, how many times is HHS actually complied with that law to publish that report every two years now once? And that, and they did form a committee at first, but 20 years ago they

abandoned it and they've done nothing. This is the number one thing that Congress has them to do. And, and basically what Congress said is we recognize we're giving liability shield to these vaccine companies and they have no incentive to make these vaccines safer. They have zero incentive to make them safer. And, but, we need to put that responsibility in somebody's hands. So we're putting it in

HHS's hands. And this is how you got to do it. And from the beginning, HHS just ignored that. And it was a law that nobody knew about that, you know, Aaron, that everybody had long forgotten and Aaron discovered and said this actually is going to be the, you know, the way that we get the camels knows under the tent. We begin here. And then you know,

we'll work on the rest of the camel when we get that done. And, and he won that case and it was one of our first great victories. And then he's won case after case after that. But he has something more than judgment. He has incredible, he's an incredible friend to me. And he has, he's been a source of wisdom to me in, in personal ways and

in professional ways. But consistently when I went, President Trump asked me to go have these meetings of the white house, the guy I called up and said, well, you come with me with Aaron because I trust his judgment. And I, as I said, he has wisdom. The word wisdom means a knowledge of God's will. It means a really an instinct for right and wrong. And what's

right to do in every situation. And Aaron has that. And I have so much respect for him and so much love for him. And I wish I could be in this room with you to hear him talk to me. I'm going to have to listen to the tape later. Anyway, my friend, Aaron Siri. There he is. So I was asked to come and talk about mandates

and in particular about college mandates. And so I am, you know, I was thinking about mandates and I was thinking about what I was going to say here tonight. And of course, I also was thinking about React 19's mission with regards to folks who've been injured by COVID-19 vaccines. And as I was thinking about what I was going to say, I realized that in many ways

mandates and the safety of vaccines is very much go hand in hand. They go hand in hand because when you think about mandates, when you think about coercing somebody to do something, when has that been done in our time and throughout history, it's usually been done when people in power can't persuade you on the merits. When they can't persuade you on the merits, they turn to

coercion mandates. Force. But when do they need to do that? Do they need to do that with water? If you don't drink, we're all going to die. Then they need to do that with the chicken you're about to be served. Nope. They need to do that when they want to force you to do something that probably has some issue risk. Whether it be a risk to

your body. To your mortal soul because it violates your religious beliefs or some other form of risk. The intersection of what's especially when it comes to products and mandating products and mandating vaccines really intersects with safety. Because if there were zero safety issues, if there were no concern, then you probably wouldn't need the mandate to begin with. You wouldn't need to coerce people. Except for my

nine year old, he will not need his health. So, but I'm not the government. So in my house, I'm allowed to set any rules I want. My kids tell me all the time I have a right to freedom of speech. I'm like, no, I'm not the government. You have no right to speak to the house. This is called a parenthocracy. When you go up to few

folks, when most people go up to somebody and they say, hey, I've been injured. I've been hurt. I've got something that is something bad happened to me. The typical reaction for most people is sympathy. Empathy. But when you add the word vaccine before the word injury, doesn't always get the same reaction. Mother's, fathers, children, neighbors across this country have suffered devastating injuries from COVID-19 vaccines. Many

of them will never know the serenity of a day without any pain and suffering ever again. That's just a reality. And it's a very uncomfortable reality for some. Many of these folks who are injured by COVID-19 vaccines are everyday Americans. They trusted the federal health authorities. They trusted the medical organizations. They went out and got the shot thinking, safe and effective. And when they had an

issue, when they were injured, what did they do? They often went back to those very same institutions. Pleading. Sometimes crying. For help. I trusted you. I got the shot. I'm now seriously hurt. Help me. And what do they get in return? Often they get no reaction, no response, no assistance, no even appearing interest often investigating what went wrong to not only help them, but avoid the

issue going forward. The proof of what I'm saying, of the differential that I'm going to be that occurs when you're injured by a vaccine. To see that proof, you need look no further than the existence of React-19. React-19 is the testament, the living proof of what I just said. If our health authorities and our medical organization institutions had done what they were supposed to do, had

stepped up, had treated those who were injured, had had the humanity, the decency, or at least just did their hypocritical oath of nothing else, and stepped up and treated those who were injured. React-19 wouldn't need to exist. It exists precisely because they're not doing their job, because it's a vaccine injury, not an injury. I had somebody ask me earlier, tell me a heartbreaking story of loss

from a COVID-19 vaccine. And they said to me, how could this happen? Why is nothing happening? Why is nobody doing anything? And that question is asked to me over and over again. How can it be? React-19 has, is it 19,000 members? I'm seeing a higher number. 30,000 members. I presume most of whom have had some serious injury from COVID-19 vaccine. That's one group. One group. That

is 30,000. I presume mostly folks in America? All Americans. 30,000 Americans. One group. Seriously injured from the COVID-19 vaccine. How can the concofony of that much suffering and injury that probably distributes across this whole country just be ignored by our health authorities? That is the question I'm often asked. Without understanding that backdrop, without understanding the framework, in which COVID-19 fell into, it's hard to understand how

health authorities and organized medical objects could be so callous. So I'm going to talk a bit about that structure and that framework that COVID-19 vaccines fell into. Try to keep it a little bit light and exciting, because I believe it's a dinner conversation, but I'll try. The genesis of the current paradigm in which vaccines fell into is the National Childhood Vaccine and Reactive 1986. As its

name says, next slide, please, it was passed in 1986. This is the harbinger of the paradigm into which COVID-19 vaccines fell into. Product safety, product in America, and in most places, there are two ways you assure product safety. You invited a lawyer, so you're going to get a lawyer answer. Just not my doing. There are two ways you assure product safety in this country. The first

way you assure product safety is, and this is the most critical way, the most important way, is market forces. And this is the most critical way. Products are made by companies. Companies exist, and I'm no economist, but I believe they exist to make money, because they want to make money for their shareholders. And so the most effective way to assure a company doesn't make a product

that injures people, is to make sure that if they injure people, they know they're going to have to pay, because that hurts the bottom line. But what happens when you tell a company hey, don't worry, you can sell your product no matter what injury it causes, you don't have to pay. It creates an incredible moral hazard. There's virtually no product in America where you cannot sue

the manufacturer for the injuries that that product causes. The main exception, pretty much the only exception that has robust immunity are, is it nuclear warheads? Let me see what's dangerous out there. Grenades, full-bound machine guns, vaccines. A product that you are told over and over, like a mountain trough that are safe and effective, that are given to babies over and over again, vaccines have virtually complete

immunity to liability. You cannot sue a pharmaceutical company pretty much. Pretty much. There are very many things that are safe and effective. Now our exceptions, for virtually any injury from a vaccine. That is 37 years of unchecked market forces on an industry that is very smart and knows how to make money. 37 years of them marketing their products. Car manufacturers advertise their products. They want you

to think it's great. So do other product manufacturers. Pharmaceutical companies do that too. They want you to think their product is great and the pushback. When you see something bad about a car in the news, it's usually from a lawsuit. That's right. But you're not going to see that for vaccines in the news. Because you can't see them on class actions. The class action lawyers, the

product liability attorneys, have been neutered to put them mildly. There are nowhere to be seen when it comes to vaccines. The most essential way you assure product safety, market forces, gone. 37 years without any stopgap on the pharmaceutical companies. The second way you assure product safety, it's a far less effective. A far less effective way is regulators, government. And they can't have an impact. Not as

effective as the natural pushing of market forces of self-regulation, which is what market forces cause. But regulators have a role. The problem is, is that the regulators here, which is the Department of Health and Human Services, under which of the FDA, CDC, NIH, they are hopelessly conflicted. They're hopelessly conflicted because not only reponse, responsible for the fact that they're not in the right place, they're in

the right place. And they've been in a lot of trouble. They've been in a lot of trouble. They're in the right place. They're in an acceptable for safety. They're also responsible for promotion of vaccines. They can, and those are, those are diametrically opposed. They're in auto conflict. For example, the Department of Transportation promotes transportation in this country. They want more airplanes, they want more airlines. While

Congress recognized, they want more time, smack you for not having safety plans. So Congress said, oh, well, we should create a separately separate agency, the National Transportation Safety Board. Separate from the Department of Transportation. One promotes transportation, one ensures safety. Same thing, for example, with nuclear power plants. The Department of Energy promotes creation of nuclear power plants in this country. The nuclear regulatory authority completely separate

independent, responsible for the safety of the country. They're in safety of nuclear power plants. Again, it's hard to go in and say, hey, build that nuclear power plant in shake hands and push industry and work hand in hand with them and then slap them at the same time. It doesn't work out. So well, my nine year old can do that to me really well. But it

doesn't work out very well in the regulatory environment. But when it comes to vaccines, they're not separate. They both exist in the Department of Health and Human Services. And the promotion function has a totally overtaken the safety function. Not in a day, but it's been going on for 37 years. I'll also point out that not only are the health authorities responsible for safety, they are also

responsible for literally defending against any claim of vaccine injury. For all vaccines other than COVID vaccine and something called the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Program, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, excuse me. And for COVID vaccines, it's a really good thing to do. This is currently in the CICP, where where do you bring the claim? Health authorities. The fact that they've become hopelessly conflicted and the fact

that these health authorities literally view that their mission is basically completely aligned with the pharma companies, you don't need to take my word for it. Next slide, please. This is a report from Congress, from 2000, in which the conflicts from the majority staff report from the committee of the UN government reform United States House of Representatives. And they went and they looked at the FDA and

CDC vaccine committees, ASIP and Verbach. You're all familiar, many of you are probably familiar with those committees at this point. And here's what they found. Quote, the overwhelming majority of members, both voting members of consultants have substantial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. End quote. That's Congress saying that. You think that after this is a scathing report, the CDC and FDA would feel the need to clean

up their act. Maybe uncouple themselves from the pharmaceutical industry. Next tap, please. Here's another report from 2009 from the HHS Inspector General, finding again, pervasive conflicts of interest within our federal health authorities. So there it is. 37 years, you have had this paradigm developing in this country. And it's been around vaccines in which pharmaceutical companies have been unchecked in terms of market forces. And have been

unchecked by regulatory health authorities. That is the paradigm in which COVID-19 vaccines fell into. And it's critical to understand that, to understand what has happened with COVID-19 vaccines. Didn't happen overnight, happened over a long period of time. And during those 37 years, pharmaceutical industry has a few billion dollar a year kitty to protect their profits, their products. And they do it, and they do it very,

very well. They've got 1,400 lobbyists in Congress. I'm aware of no at least formal vaccine safety lobbyists in Congress. Maybe react 19, I'll have the first one. And so they're continuously there, able to lobby to pass laws, continue to protect their profits. To the point where pretty much everybody in the medical community for the most part, with very brave, notable exceptions, many of those doctors in

this room tonight, these are her words. Center for Bioethics at the Harvard Medical School. She says, it's no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authority, authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reach slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as the editor of the New England

Journal of Medicine end quote. That is the result of decades of pharmaceutical money flowing into journals, medical organizations with no check, no market check, no regulatory check. Just want to make sure I really drive home. This is not an abstraction. This is real. This is real business and real money. From pharmaceutical companies are not to be laughed at or taken lightly. They're very smart. You give

them a few billion dollars a year that they then can use to protect their profits. They can protect the continued flow of those billions of dollars. They're going to do that. And they're going to keep doing that. And we'll talk about solutions at the end. But let me pivot now back to COVID-19 vaccines. So that's the paradigm in which COVID-19 vaccines fell. So when you look

and you say, whoa, how can these regulators just ignore us? How can this be? It's because COVID-19 vaccines just fell into the same exact regulatory market framework that all other vaccines had fell into. From the perspective of regulators, medical organizations, and so forth, there's no difference. Fur back, ASIP, businesses usual, just a little more rushed, maybe. Here's the proof. Anybody know of any lawsuit against Pfizer

Moderna for an injury from one of their COVID-19 vaccines? No. None. 30,000 people, seriously injured from COVID-19 vaccines in just React 19, not one lawsuit. Prep Act immunity. And if that wasn't applicable, it would have been the same 1986 act we looked before. They have double immunity, frankly. Sure. I was asked to say a minute, a bit more about the prep act. So I explain before

the 1986 act and how that provided immunity. For the COVID-19 vaccines, there is actually another layer of immunity. And that is something called the prep act. That is when there is an emergency of some form declared by the Secretary of HHS that they believe that certain countermeasures should have even higher protection than the 86 act provides, basically. And when precked act immunity provides, it actually complete

brinket immunity to the pharmaceutical companies. In fact, under the 1986 act, you actually could technically still sue, for example, for fraud. Just if you could get the proof and plead it. Under prep act immunity, if you had proof, if you had a precked act, you literally came to me and said, here it is. I have a recording of all the meeting of people in Pfizer sitting

together, plotting, scheming. I could show you abject fraud under the prep act as written, put aside whether I think it's constitutional. As written, the Department of Justice or the HHS regulatory authorities would have to actually first bring a case for that fraud. Before, any lawyers could do that. Any other lawyers like myself, civil litigators could do that. That's an incredible amount of protection. In fact, when

I saw it the first time, I couldn't believe it. I literally couldn't believe that that was in the laws. But there it was. It goes back to what I said earlier. Pharmaceutical companies are not to be taken lightly. They are very smart. They have lots of money. They have lots of lawyers. No doubt. Your hat has to go off to the lawyers in the farm because

it's going to shoot that right. I wrote that bill. It is an incredible level of protection. Prep act immunity. There you go. So prep act immunity. But even if prep act immunity didn't apply, which eventually, presumably, it will eventually go away, the 1986 act immunity will continue to apply to COVID-19 vaccines. There are no lawsuits for injury because you can't sue them. Market force is gone

for COVID-19 vaccines, just like other vaccines. Do you think that if we could sue Pfizer or Moderna for COVID-19 vaccines, they'd be on the market long? I give them a day. How about the FDA? Are they doing their job? COVID-19 vaccines? No. They're not. Next slide, please. This is the homepage of the FDA website. Is this look like a regulatory authority to you? Now, aren't these

the people that are supposed to evaluate whether this product is safe and effective before it's licensed? What does that say right there? By-veiling vaccine boosters? Are those licensed yet? Oh, no. Oh, they're not licensed. Kind of looks like a promotional ad to me. I don't know. Maybe. It's incredible. But this is reflective of what I'm talking about. The FDA doesn't view itself as a regulator that

has to share safe and effective. They view themselves as partner with these products. Peter Marx, who is the head of the Biologics Division, of the vaccine division, at the FDA, in fact, can you skip ahead to... Could you go to the next slide, please? He put out these promotional videos, again, about unlicensed products. This is literally the person who is deciding them on whether or not,

for the most part, COVID-19 vaccines are going to get licensed. And he has got these... Cute-see videos about why I should get an updated COVID-19 vaccine now, which is not even licensed, by the way. Do you think this man views himself as truly responsible for the safety of this product? No, he sees himself. He believes, I believe, I think. He sees himself, in fact, as a

partner with industry, to get these products out there. I think he thinks he's doing a good thing. He thinks, I assume, that even if there are safety issues, he's saving more people than he's hurting. So he's good. So he's doing a good thing. I got to assume that. Because assuming he doesn't truly just... Totally callous would be... That would be a really scary thought. So I'm

going to assume that. That would be given the benefit of the doubt. That's what he thinks. And that's how he justifies himself. But that's not his job. His job is not to promote vaccines. His job is to assure they're safe and effective to the FDA standard. And I don't get me started on my thoughts on what that standard is. But at least to their standard, there's

no way after he has gone out, promoted this product, told every American to get it. There's no way he can objectively do that evaluation. Nobody is... Very few people are able to have that type of introspection and go, hey, you know what? That product I told all 270 million of you that went and got this COVID vaccine. Oops. Sorry. I know I was doing these videos,

promoting it, telling you all to get it before was even licensed, but I kind of messed up. Unlikely. One last point on the FDA. And if this doesn't drive it home, I don't know, you know, nothing will. I assume many of you know, Maddie DeGarry. Maddie DeGarry is one of only about a thousand and change. He's a woman who participated in the 12 to 15-year-old clinical

trial for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine who got the shot. She's in a wheelchair feeding tube. And I can tell you, we have now gotten the internal report that Pfizer submitted to the FDA explaining what happened to Maddie. When I read it, I thought, ah, they're capitulating. You read it and you're like, okay, the vaccine is going to be the vaccine, did it? They're all but admitting

it. And then the very last line, the principal investigator, paid by Pfizer, says that he does not, quote, can't make this up. Feel, feel. That's the word. Feel. Feel. There's some feel. I don't feel like I have a chicken. I don't, you know, I don't feel like doing a lot of things. And this guy apparently doesn't feel the vaccine. He's related to Maddie's injuries despite all

of the medical records and her entire chronology, TikTok video dancing, totally fine, to debilitated, no other explanation, initial emergency reports reflecting that it was the vaccine, but this guy doesn't feel as related. And we have the email that Peter Marx reviewing that report. You know the guy right, oh, this guy right here. Mr. Ruh, just a minute. Mr. Just a minute who's deciding on licensing COVID-19

vaccine says, basically, I'll just, I'll paraphrase it. Great. Principal Asuka says I don't feel it's related. Done. That was it. That is your regulatory authority in action. It's incredible. But that's the FDA and that's the process they did. But that process did not start with COVID-19 vaccine. It started over 37 years of just a regulatory agency basically unchecked and conflicted and viewing itself as a promotional

arm for these products. Well, what about the CDC? I think I'm, let me, let me hurry this up a little bit. It looks like I, I don't want to keep folks too long. CDC. Next slide, please. Well, the CDC decided that they're going to do an analysis of VAERS data. Everybody's familiar with VAERS is the vaccine adverse event supporting system. And they preset something called proportional

reporting ratio analyses in which they were going to use these preset formulas to see whether or not there are safety signals with the VAERS data. Well, guess what? They set up an equation basically where if the N was greater than three, the number of cases and the P R R was greater than two, that's a safety signal. Now, I'm just a lawyer, no mathematician. But I

believe 73 for cerebral thrombosis is bigger than two. And I believe as we go down this list of very serious reactions, these numbers are far greater than two. These numbers, this data had to be clawed out of the hand. And the CDC, through freedom of information, I'll press, they didn't just make this available to the public. The analysis that they were going to do was available

in a report. But clearly once that analysis didn't show what they'd like, they were not making that available to the public now without a legal fight. But here it is. And the CDC's response to this. Well, actually, we're going to do something called empirical Bayesian analysis by the FDA. And the FDA did this empirical Bayesian analysis, so we don't have to worry about this. So we

said, great. Can we see the empirical Bayesian analysis data? What do you think they did? No, you can't have it. And we're now in federal court trying to get that data too. And let's see what that says. And I suspect that I want to give it because it might show something similar, maybe maybe not. And I wonder what the next excuse will be. That's your VAERS

system for you. That's what it showed, according to the CDC's own analyses. Frightening scary numbers. So, please, please, please. And then there's the V-safE. V-safE is a different safety system that the CDC specifically rolled out for COVID-19 vaccines. The whole purpose of the V-safE system was to assess the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. It was rolled out in December 2020 when the first COVID-19 vaccine was shipped

out. 10 million Americans signed up for V-safE. 10 million. Okay. And they almost all signed up in the first five years. Five or six months after the COVID-19 rolled out. Who was getting the shot in the first five or six months where those, the people who, like, didn't want the shot? No, these were the enthusiasts. These were the people who signed up. And they signed up

for V-safE. Just to report all kinds of stuff, they wanted to participate and then excited about the new vaccine. For a year and a half, we fought with the CDC to get this V-safE data, to check the box V-safE data. Because they were publishing study after study after study. And using this data to say COVID-19 vaccines are safe, they were for 20 studies where they were

liable mostly what? You guys know, there's data and V-safE data to say COVID-19 vaccines are safe. That is what they rely upon. They say it over and over again like a mantra. You know, if you hang out in the CDC FDH enough, you think that's from God too. These 20-something studies are also the core. They're the heart of the scientific literature that the CDC relies upon

to say COVID-19 vaccines are safe. And in it, in all 20 reports, when they published the V-safE data, they published only the first week of people reporting need medical care after the COVID-19 vaccine. We finally got that, which is a nut, which, by the way, was, you know, sometimes half a percent, quarter percent, 1 percent depending on the Democrats, depending on the shot, the age and

so forth, which, by the way, I don't know why that's somehow comforting, but CDC thought it was. But when we finally got the full data set, it's 7.7 percent of folks. When you look at all the weeks, not just the first week, 7.7 of folks using V-safE reported needing medical care after a COVID-19 vaccine. You could see that on this chart because on the top right,

you see there were 20 million users. And the little red bar shows 0.8 million by 800,000 required medical care. 70 percent of those were hospitalized, emergency for urgent care. Okay? It's bad. It's not good when a product injures people, but that's not surprising. Drugs injure people all the time. But what we don't expect, what we really don't expect, is that our federal health authorities will hide

and effectively, I'll say mislead to be kind. Mislead the public for a year and a half about what this V-safed data showed, the core data that they were saying, they were lying upon say COVID-19 vaccines are safe. They only released a week of the data. And it's not like nobody was asking. We had two federal lawsuits actually to get this data and they finally gave it

to us. 7.7 percent. Next slide, please. I'll show you one last piece of this and I'll wrap up. When they designed V-safE, we actually got a copy of the version one of the V-safE protocol and you could see it from November 19, 2020. That's before the first V-safE was rolled out. It's really hard to prove somebody's mental state. It's really hard to prove somebody purposely and

knowingly did something wrong, committed a crime, what we call C-enter, and criminal law. It's very difficult. This is the last page of the protocol that was used to design the V-safE system. What you're going to see here at the top, these are adverse events of special interest. They're pre-specified medical conditions. And when you look down this list, you're going to see many of the serious issues

that people ended up experiencing COVID-19 vaccines. This is before the vaccine was rolled out to the public. This was at least a month before the first shot COVID vaccine was authorized for public use. It includes, look, blood clotting, myocarditis, pericarditis, transarsmylitis, seizures, stroke, transarsmylitis, serious issues. Here's the damnating thing. Did they include these as pre-specified medical conditions of V-safE? They did not. They did not. The

only thing CDC included is check the box options of V-safE. We're around 10 conditions that they say are totally normal from vaccines. Pain in the injection site. Not kidding. I can't make this stuff up. The 10 conditions are the same conditions that they say are totally normal after the vaccine. And guess what? They only collected it for one week after the shot. They're exactly the conditions

they tell you are totally normal. They were reported at the rates of 50, 60, 70%. CDC said, great. This is actually good. This shows reactive genicity. Show's the vaccine's working. Show's you're having a immune reaction. What did they leave off that list? Everything here. They didn't even ask about whether you had part pain. How about that? How about asking just about chest pain? How about any

of the symptoms of these cases? What do you think about these conditions? If you don't ask about these conditions, to me that was purposeful and knowingly done by the CDC. And when you think about C-Enter, when you think about purposeful conduct intending to produce a harmful result, I think this shows some clear proof that the CDC knew these vaccines could cause potentially these inches and chose

to leave them out of the V-safE system. Because if they tracked it, then they would have a rate. If they included a check the box option, they would have a sample, Mara Coditis, and 500,000 people reported it out of the 10 million, they would know it's 5%. That data would be really damn for them. So instead, they left a free text field that you could type

stuff in if you wanted to. And they're saying that that can't be released to the public. The other thing that the CDC ignored, and I think this is also critical, and I won't belabor it, I'll just say it quickly, is what went on in countries that didn't roll out the COVID-19 vaccine. How come we're not studying Haiti? How come we're not studying all these other countries

that have virtually no COVID-19 vaccine uptake? And have minuscule amount of deaths? And this argument I've heard, oh, well, they don't have great tracking, healthcare tracking systems. They got better tracking systems than we have in the United States. The United States is one of the worst healthcare tracking systems in the world because we don't have centralized healthcare. In many of these countries, developing countries, they have

centralized healthcare. They are all going into the same database. They actually, they can tell you down to the 9.2346% of the kids have DTP vaccine. How do they know that? They're tracking it because they got centralized healthcare. This argument that will hate it isn't have a good healthcare system, or these other countries is nonsense. Many of them have very good. They're centralized medical healthcare systems. They

could track it. And they are in many ways reflective of the differential which you would happen between countries that took this shot, those that did it. I'm going to wrap up on the COVID-19 vaccine. Then I'll talk about solutions by just pointing out one case. And this is of Dr. Gregory Poland. I don't know if anybody here knows that name, but he is one of the

leading vaccinologists in our country. He is the director of the Myoclinics Vaccine Research Group. And I think the story of what happened to Dr. Gregory Poland, I think, is so emblematic of everything I just said. At least I think it is. Dr. Poland, who is, you know, hobnob with Paul Offit and Dr. Marks and everybody else, when they get together, he is in there. You know,

he is one of the, literally one of the leading voices that pushes vaccines in this country. He is the one who has been offered a vaccine injury after COVID-19 vaccine. I'm going to read you his own words about his vaccine injury. He suffered tenitis, which is, it can be a debilitating condition where you constantly are painful, excruciating, ringing your ears if it's bad enough. He described

that as this quote, was like someone suddenly blew a dog whistle in my ear and quote, quote, quote, quote. And then he says, when he went public with that, painful condition, he says he can't sleep at night. He says he went public here and here's what he says happened when he went public. He says in his own words what has been heartbreaking about this as a

seasoned physician are the emails I got from people that this has affected their lives so badly that they have told me they're going to take their own life and quote. Dr. Poland goes on in his article to estimate. There may be tens of thousands. He estimates millions of people worldwide with this serious debilitating condition. Excuse me. Now, you would think, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Now I know I've been talking too much. It's a good thing I'm not live because if we're alive, my wife would be watching. She would be texting me, wrap it up. Now, you think that since this happened to a vocal world renowned, nobody could question his credentials. Pro vaccine. To the health vaccine scientists, at least tonight, at least this condition will be taken seriously. Right? Let

me tell you. Now, let me read your quote, how the medical organization that reported this, what they wrote in this article quote, ongoing research efforts to understand of COVID-19 vaccines may be related to various auditory complaints, including hearing loss and tonight is end quote. And that there are quote, no definitive studies on the subject. And no causal association to the COVID-19 vaccine has been established. And

quote. Wow. 24,000 reports tonight is in theirs. This world leading vaccinologist is literally reporting he has the condition himself from the vaccine. He says it's from the vaccine. He's not saying maybe he says it's from the vaccine. He's getting emails from people around the world telling him they're going to kill themselves. They're going to end their lives because they cannot live with this condition. quote. It's

literally what he wrote what he said to the in response to all of this. He said quote. Or at least this would be more accurate. What he said in the article. He said quote. Temporal app. Temporal app. Rality. Meaning these things being close in time. Tonight is in COVID-19 vaccine is not causality. And quote. He goes on to say, rather comma. It forms a hypothesis. And

then what you do is carefully collect information to determine. This potential syndrome of side effect above and beyond the background rate. Before there was a COVID vaccine or a COVID before there was COVID or a COVID vaccine. And is the rate different in people who got the vaccine and people who didn't. End quote. Who's going to do that study? Pfizer? What would Pfizer say? Oh yeah.

It says there's no cause. It says we're ready concluded. There's no cause of relationship. Okay. So they're not going to do it. How about CDC? So industry's not going to do it. Why? They have no market sense of it to do it. You know who might have done it? Class action, product liability lawyers. They did a dog and dog and dog. And they might have gotten

there. But Pfizer will never do it. And there's nothing in the market that I see that will force them to do it. Or I don't see any money to interest out there that is going to push forward and get that study done. They're not cheap. They're expensive. They're time consuming. Somebody has to do them. And industry's not going to fund them. And there's no money to

do it. They're going to need interest out there to do it as far as I'm aware. And that leaves a regulatory authorities. Dr. Mark's going to do it. CDC is going to do it. Agency that wouldn't even release the V-safe data. And I hope that brings it home. Here it is. Here is a world-linear vaccinologist that suffered a debilitating condition himself. And his response to the

dogma is so powerful. He's living within his own mind that even he says, yeah, but temporality doesn't prove causation. It's just a hypothesis. I guess he's a hypothesis. He's a living hypothesis. What he is, he's a living reflection of the incredible dogma that results when you have 37 years of unchecked, basically corporate hegemony, pushing in one direction with no money to interest pushing back in the

other direction. The reality is the only injuries they're ever going to recognize. From COVID-19 vaccines are the ones they absolutely cannot avoid admitting exist. For example, thrombosis with thrombocytopedia. When you have TTS, when you've got blood clotting, but you have lower platelet counts. Usually when you've got blood clotting, you've got higher platelet counts. So it's not normal. And when they saw cases of that, they're like,

well, that's pretty hard to avoid. They can't hide that in the background. They can hide that in the background rate. But tonight is, tonight is happens all the ways too. They can hide that in the background rate. Neurological issues, background rate. All the other, most of the issues you see from COVID-19 vaccine, they can hide that, so to speak, in the background rate. I would make

you a prediction that if COVID-19 vaccine were rolled out like other vaccines slowly and incrementally, where only a very narrow cohort of people got it every single year. Such that marketitis, parcoditis in the child population and young adults in particular, slowly rose. Probably never ascribed to the COVID-19 vaccine. It was just that they gave it to 270 million people. And the rate amongst children, the differential,

so massive, they couldn't avoid that one. And they couldn't avoid TTS. But man, they're going to fight like heck to say none of the others are actually caused by COVID-19 vaccine. In fact, and I think, the one story I heard was there were a number of physicians and others who were injured by COVID vaccines, plenty of neurological issues on a call with Dr. Marks. And he

bragged about how they spotted TTS after six cases. And they're on the phone with him, telling him, we have serious, debilitating neurological issues. And he's telling them, but we don't see a signal in the FDA data. And they responded to him, and he again brags about TTS. And he says, but they were, look at that. We picked that up with only six cases. And they said

to him, there are more than six of us on this call telling you that we have this neurological issue, many of whom were physicians. Okay. So, with all of that said, I'd like to leave this on a hopeful note because I am actually very hopeful for the future. But you have to understand the problem to fix it. And I hope I've laid out my view of

what is causing the problem. The first solution, the minimal solution, and this brings us all the way back finally to mandates, is that at the end of this long litany of horrors and failures, it's got to be the right to say no. Maybe we can't change the law with the unfortunate lobbyists or fix FDA CDC, but at the end of all of that, every American needs

to always have the right to say no. Without that right, all of those things that we just talked about, that is the very last stop in the train of protection. And I'm very heartened to say that I believe that we are moving as a country in the right direction. And I'm very hopeful that we are moving back to the end of this long litany of horrors

and failures. And I'm very hopeful that we are moving back to the end of this long litany of horrors and failures. And I hope I've laid out my view of what is causing the problem. But they did. And over 20 states in this country now actually recognize all kinds of laws protecting people's right in various forms, whether it be for religious reasons, otherwise to say no

to a vaccine. As a matter of conscious or otherwise, as another example, we just had a lawsuit where we got a decision in this Monday in Mississippi, a Bobby mentioned, that's all bring it up again. But the state of Mississippi for 44 years has not had a religious exemption. It was taken away in 1979. I think I did that math, right? And now for the first

time again, parents can finally send their children who have religious belief convictions, where they are convicted not to vaccinate, can send their children to school in the state of Mississippi. So... So I'm incredibly hopeful that we are moving the right directions in terms of rights. And I really, really hope that universities, especially those who are producing so many of the leaders of tomorrow, understand that when

they mandate, when they don't persuade on the merits, and they try to get what they want through bullying and coercion, they are teaching the absolute wrong message to the leaders of tomorrow. Everybody in this room, I know many of the folks here, are each fighting in many different ways. And I think that's all right. Everybody, sometimes it might feel like you are fighting on your own,

but you're not. Look around this room. Everybody in this room is fighting in different ways. There are doctors in this room, there are lawyers in this room, there are folks who worked in pharmaceutical companies who left their fighting. And every one of them, every day, is contributing to that fight. And everybody just has to keep doing what they're doing. And I do believe that eventually not

only will be able to restore rights, but will also be able to break this unholy alliance between pharmaceutical companies and the regulatory agencies for the betterment of COVID-19 victims and everybody else's country. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, wow. Thanks. Thank you. Well, thank you all very much for being here. It's kind of getting towards the end of the night. And

I'll tell you a little story about Aaron, Siri. In 2021, I had no idea what I was going to do next with my life. That was lost. And I couldn't work. And I was going to do my work. I went out to a Senator Ron Johnson hearing a press conference and Aaron was sitting next to me. And we all kind of told our stories. But even

before I spoke and Aaron spoke, we listened to a lot of stories of the vaccine injured. And I remember hearing Ernest from Aaron's story. Ernest is a father down in South Texas, who his best friend was his 16 year old son, Ernesto Jr. And I remember I couldn't stop crying. But to give credit to Aaron, Aaron was sitting right to my left. I looked over. And

he had just as much tears in his eyes as I. So I will always tell you I know Aaron understands our passion, our fight. So thank you so much, Aaron, for what you do. Next, I want to thank you all for being here tonight. I want to thank you for your generosity. I'll tell you a little bit about our strategic plans. And so I always say

we have a new kind of what I say is director of strategy. And we said, what do we want to do in the next year? She said, what do you want to do in the next five years? And I said, well, the next year, we have we're dead set and trying to open up our own clinic. This will be the first clinic dedicated. To the treatment

of COVID vaccine injured people. So we're partnering with some physician groups. And we hope and open this clinic sometime this year early in 2024, probably in the Texas area. But what a statement to say that our care sucks so bad. We had to do it ourselves. So that's one thing. The second thing is, and this goes a little bit about, I think, Aaron referred to this.

What, when someone asked me, what was my fighter goal? I said not to do this. The frank matter of, we all have better things to do. I was hoping to disappear into an early retirement and live in somewhere warm and look at the ocean. But, you know, for all of us, I think this chose us. We didn't, you know, we didn't choose it. So thank you

all for what you're doing. I will hit you up a little bit. So you all have been very generous. However, if you know other people who might be interested in contributing, let us know. We are 100% volunteer. You can donate on our website. There's a donate button. People also can text the word react, RECT, 50155. But no, sincerely, we are all driven by donations. Literally what

Brian and I do almost every day is work and fundraising. Why? Because we get $0 in corporate sponsorship. We've applied for numerous grants. We've even applied to some people that I thought would be honorized kind of on our side, kind of in the autism world. But people told that we're to polarized or the environment's to polarized to donate to us. It's been quite by opening. So

we appreciate your generosity to be here. We appreciate your generosity to donate moving forward. If you have any, you know, contact. And your networks, we sincerely appreciate it because without your generosity, we wouldn't exist. Thank you very much and have a good night.