“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks.

Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics.

Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.” -Michael Crichton

I just wanted to clear that up right at the beginning. The majority of scientists agreeing on a certain narrative means nothing to me, so please don’t try to convince me with that argument. If the majority is against a certain scientist, I will automatically be interested in finding out what this scientist has to say, and will be much more apt to side with them against the “consensus” because of this very reason.

Galileo went against consensus science and declared the earth was round and that it revolved around the sun. He was put in jail and then moved to house arrest for the rest of his life. He was called a heretic, his works were banned, and has only been honored since his death.

Semmelweis was essentially killed by his fellow doctors for daring to suggest that they should wash their hands between handling dead bodies in the morgue and assisting women in childbirth. He was committed to an insane asylum where he died shortly after from a cut he received from a beating by the guards. This was after he produced published results proving hand washing was effective in preventing the incredibly high rate of new mothers dying via puerperal fever after several hospitals practiced his handwashing advice and the mortality was reduced to 1%. They laughed at him, silenced him, and no one knew he was right until after he was murdered.

Going against consensus is a rough road.

These are just two examples of the prevailing ignorance of the day producing hatred and a concerted effort to silence, disqualify, and destroy the reputation of anyone who has the audacity to go against the prevailing belief system of the times. There are many more, but these speak eloquently enough to prove my point. So pardon me if I have quite an open mind to scientists who are not following “consensus”. And pardon me further if I am not quick to believe the resultant attack and slander leveled at these same scientists.

As a more recent example of this type of thing, the many doctors and scientists who are publishing and publicly voicing the dangers associated with vaccines are consistently ignored, and if they do happen to get any attention or are heard at all, their reputation and any of their findings are instantly attacked with a smear campaign that is shocking in its vitriol.

So from that premise, (and yes, I freely admit I’m a little biased in her favor, but I’m aware of it, and will try to set it aside as I go forward) I want to address the information presented in the recent film Plandemic and go over some of the claims presented.

First of all I want to address the claim that does give me pause. The director of this documentary is very obviously into occult worship and the commercial for his company, Elevate, is very scary to me. I have no idea what his agenda is in giving Judy Mikovits some air time, or what the rest of the documentary will focus on, but I think it is wise to be very wary of anything he says and to be aware of his stance as the rest of this comes out.

That said, I don’t think this reflects at all on Dr Judy.

I will first address the claims I cannot substantiate, and probably sneak in a few that I can back up as I go, and then focus on the parts that are obviously true next.

ONE: The story of her ending up in jail and everything that went down throughout that time. I feel like this is very much a he-said-she-said scenario and there are people on both sides who corroborate her story, and those who say she is a liar and a thief. She has a wikipedia page as of May 9th, 2020 and the first line is, “Judy Anne Mikovits is a discredited American ex-research scientist who is known for her anti-vaccination, promotion of conspiracy theories, and scientific misconduct.” I’ll leave it up to you whether that’s a biased opening or not.

I expected a huge attack on her from every direction imaginable. What she’s saying is heavy. Of course she will be attacked. And the more people who watch the film, the more vitriol will be produced. This is no surprise. I will not be going over any of this because I’m taking her and the film at face value. Feel free to google her for a delightful few hours of reading repeated smear campaign tactics and ask yourself why anyone would willingly expose themselves to this. I feel that a doctor or scientist who is guilty of misconduct and whose only motivation would be to get back in the good graces of the powers that be and reinstate their standing, would walk a different path than continuing to reveal corruption, buck the system, and point out the inconsistencies. But that’s just me.

From what I’m gathering in trying to piece together her story (without yet having read her book, which is on my TBR list and I’m looking forward to it–I may edit this post after I finish reading it), in 2009, she and a group of scientists she worked with published a study [1] revealing the discovery of multiple retroviruses originating in mice from the blood of people with several different disorders, including chronic fatigue syndrome (syndrome stands for “we don’t know what causes this” by the way). This study had nothing to do with vaccines. She was dealing in the scandal of contaminated blood with retroviruses that were not supposed to be in humans. The question was then, how do mice viruses end up in humans? The answer was inconveniently, vaccines, but this connection wasn’t even made by her. She later pursued this evidence and has since been termed “anti-vaxx” despite her saying that label does not apply to her. The study was later retracted.

The story goes, that other labs have tried and failed to reproduce their results, but I found this pubmed study (that has not been retracted) done by her same group at a later date, interesting. Especially this part: “Our results indicate that PCR from DNA of unstimulated peripheral blood mononuclear cells is the least sensitive method for detection of XMRV in subjects’ blood. We advocate the use of more than one type of assay in order to determine the frequency of XMRV infection in patient cohorts in future studies of the relevance of XMRV to human disease.” [2] That sounds to me like perhaps the other labs were using methods designed to fail? Just a thought.

According to this interview, they were asked to cover up the findings, to hide the discovery, and she refused. So she became the scapegoat, and her suffering was great. For a long time, she says she fully believed they would kill her. She did spend time in jail, and her ruination was pretty complete.

So let’s ask some questions about these claims. Is it possible for vaccines to be contaminated with animal viruses? Short answer, yes. It wouldn’t be fair to talk about the multiple problems with the smallpox and diphtheria vaccines because science has advanced since then, but to say that there were problems with contamination resulting in infection, sepsis, and death, is putting it mildly. Moving on in vaccine history, the contamination of the polio vaccine with SV40 virus from monkeys is well documented and admitted, although perhaps not widely known, and that was going on up into the 80s. [3,4,5] When a third party lab tested the MMRV vaccine just last year, they detected contamination by 3 viruses: one horse virus, one human retrovirus, and one bird virus, all in higher amounts than the rubella virus, by the way. [6] And finally, on the CDC website very clearly written out under both of the rotavirus vaccines, is the admission of the contamination of 2 pig viruses “not known to cause disease in humans”. [7]

I think it’s reasonable to say that getting these pesky animal viruses out of vaccines must be a difficult task.

Two: the claims against Dr Fauci. I don’t know much about Anthony Fauci in relation to his work with HIV/AIDS, but I feel that what is happening now is possibly a bit of a repeat of what Dr Judy is claiming happened back then. And he does own patents inm HIV medications, by the way. [8] He also has connections to the Wuhan lab in China. [9]

I pointed this out in this blog post how the NIH (where Dr Fauci works) had published a study on the efficacy of hydrochloroquine on SARS Coronaviruses with very optimistic reports all the way back in 2005, but Dr Fauci is either ignorant of this study or chose not to reveal its existence and has been dead against this very effective drug from the very beginning. Skeptical, I think would be a good description of his attitude towards it. The NIH is only as of April 9th, announcing clinical trials looking at its effect on Covid-19. I don’t think it would be far fetched to accuse them of dragging their feet on this.

And then we discover the drug he does advocate, remdesivir (which has a 30% success rate compared to 99% according to the doctors who use hydrochloroquine). The clinical trial for this drug in its efficacy of curing Covid-19 patients is very interesting to read through. They keep making changes that are very suspicious, including removing death from the outcomes measured. [10] Why would they do that? Why would we not want to know if remdesivir has the ability to save your life when you have this virus? Anyone have any good ideas that don’t involve the dread word conspiracy?

If you know anything about how vaccine clinical trials are operated, I’m sure you’ve heard the complaints of no saline placebos. Well, the placebo arm of this study is just straight up poison. They’re termed “inactive ingredients”, but I’ll leave it to you to decide if hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide are inactive when put inside humans.

Gilead and Dr Fauci are working together on these trials, and he has worked with this company since the 80s according to this article which I found very interesting since it corroborates Dr Judy’s story and was published back in April, before Plandemic was released, and never mentions her, but doesn’t have as many sources as I would like.

Does anyone want to guess the difference between price in these two drugs? Hydroxychloroquine cost .60 per dose. Remdesivir is projected to cost anywhere from as low as $390 “per treatment” (is that per dose or the entire course of medication?) to $4,500 per treatment. [11] And that’s from your friendly facebook fact checkers, so it must be true. 😛

Does Dr Fauci directly benefit from the use of this drug? I don’t know. Not claiming that. Will he benefit from a vaccine? I don’t know. Not claiming that either. But he is promoting a drug that by all current evidence, is much less effective, and much more expensive than a drug highly promoted by the doctors who have used it. Anyone with an ounce of critical thinking would want to know why. It reveals an agenda of some sort, an agenda with a willingness for a certain amount of people to needlessly die in the meantime. Just saying.

But then saving lives does not seem to be the goal of any of this anymore. But that’s only because actual health is not the goal, and hasn’t been from the beginning. If it were, you would hear just one doctor, just one of the talking heads on TV, just one person in power recommend something, anything that would contribute to actual health.

All the italics are probably tipping you off to how much this disturbs me, but it’s only because not only do they completely avoid any and all reference to boosting our immune systems with healthy practices, the latest trend among popular doctors is to deny that we have any ability whatsoever to boost our immune systems. The amount of ignorance necessary to make such a statement boggles the mind. When given the choice between ignorance and malice, I normally choose ignorance. But doctors making statements like this on their social media accounts is beyond the pale, y’all. There’s something truly malicious about it. America has woefully little motivation or empowerment when it comes to their own health. A virus that effects the unhealthy might be a chance for some people to rectify that, and you would think doctors would encourage anything that would lead to the protection of their patients. But no. The opposite is true. Why is that, do you think? Hopefully it’s just ignorance. The latest science on the microbiome is only 15 years old, after all, and it takes at least 17 years for doctors to catch up with the science. [12] It’s just sad when people on the internet know more than doctors. Kind of embarrassing.

That was way off topic. But I do feel better since I’ve gotten it off my chest. 😛

Three: The flu vaccine being contaminated with coronavirus. I do not know if this is true.

But here’s the deal:

1. The flu virus for the flu vaccine is grown in egg or in the kidney cells of a cockerspaniel. [13, 14]
2. Dogs do have coronaviruses. [15]
3. The flu shot makes you more likely to get other respiratory infections. 4 times more likely in one study, [16] and 36% more likely in the study mentioned that actually looked at coronavirus among the viruses you are more vulnerable to. [17]

Given that at the beginning of this pandemic, instead of relevant science like this being discussed and people encouraged to consider skipping the flu shot this year just in case this thing is set to kill millions of us, every other article I saw encouraged people to get the flu shot and some had the nerve to say the flu shot would possibly protect you from coronavirus. I would love to see a study showing how many people who were infected and had a serious case of it also got the flu shot. I doubt such a study will ever be done, but I really wonder what it would reveal.

Now, for the claims I can substantiate.

One: Corruption in science, allowing people to have major conflicts of interest while holding positions of power. If this isn’t obvious to everyone by now, I’m not sure I can help you.

Two: Bloated death numbers. I’ve already gone over this. Again, if this hasn’t become obvious to you, what even? Are you living under a rock? 😀

“Why would they want to skew the death numbers?”

“Well, fear is a great way to control people.”

Need I say more?

Three: There is a drug called suramin, and there was a small clinical trial done that “showed that all 5 boys who received antipurinergic therapy (APT) with a single intravenous dose of suramin experienced improvements in all the core symptoms of autism that lasted for 5-8weeks. Language, social interaction, restricted interests, and repetitive movements all improved. Two children who were non-verbal spoke their first sentences. None of these improvements were observed in the placebo group. Larger and longer studies are needed to confirm this promising discovery.” [18]

No larger trials were done that I can see, with this drug or any similar, and I’ve never heard of it. I don’t know if it’s been completely removed from the market, but I’ve certainly never heard of it being used in autism. Maybe they will study it in future, especially considering how autism is exploding and finding a cure and giving them a voice would be phenomenal. At least, one assumes it would be. There isn’t much evidence that the people in charge would agree, so far.

Four: Healthy people should not wear masks unless they are in close contact with someone who has symptoms. The common mantra is that the asymptomatic are spreading this, but I would like to see some evidence of that. Is there any proof that a completely healthy person has passed this to someone? Anyone? I would love to see this evidence.

From my knowledge base of a virus that is transmitted via droplets, you have to be within 3 feet of the person, they have to be spitting pretty heavily as they talk to you, or they have to be violently coughing or sneezing right at you. The droplets must touch you. All through nursing school and throughout my subsequent career as a nurse, it was always 3 feet, not 6. I honestly don’t know where that number came from, but I think it’s a little bit overkill. Maybe there’s some new science I haven’t caught up with yet ;), but from the knowledge base I have, this current belief that you can catch this from someone who glances at you as you walk past each other on the street, or that a virus can be a sort of aura that hovers around a person 6 feet in all directions, just waiting to infect anyone in that vicinity, and that healthy people are spreading it without coughing/sneezing on people, is based in a weird sort of paranoid brain fog, based in fear, and has nothing to do with science, common sense, or basically anything resembling rational thought.

I don’t know about “re-infecting” yourself with your own virus, but if you recognize the science showing that when healthy people are screened for specific viruses, we are able to detect at least 94 different viruses, including HIV, hepatitis C and B, and influenza in 42% of healthy individuals, showing no symptoms whatsoever, [19] one wonders what would happen if the immune system of such an individual were compromised. Possibly compromised by lack of oxygen and continual rebreathing of our own CO2. I’m just speculating from my own experience of feeling like I’m suffocating behind that mask as I take care of my patients. The constant anxiety of not being able to fully breathe can’t be good for anyone’s health. Not saying she’s right. Just saying it sounds plausible to me.

My favorite line from the film is, “Why would you close the beach? You’ve got sequences in the soil, the sand. You’ve got healing microbes in the ocean, in the salt water…that’s insanity.”

Yes, Judy. A lot of this is insanity.

In conclusion, I am interested for what the next parts of this documentary will reveal and I look forward to watching with prayers for discernment and for truth to always be revealed. The thing is, letting a woman like this tell her story is simply never wrong. I don’t care who gave her a voice, and I don’t even care if she’s not right about everything. I’ve never required for my sources to align with me perfectly on every single minute detail of life. This may be too open minded of an approach, but I would have missed out on a world of encouragement, knowledge, empowerment, and humility if I had turned Jordan Peterson off the first time I heard him speak on evolution. If I would instantly shut down anyone who says something I don’t agree with, or even something I know to be completely false, and refuse to learn anything from them, my world would be narrow and dark and cramped indeed. I value truth wherever I find it, no matter the source, no matter the agenda. I trust in God to keep my open mind safe and to show me when I walk down a path that leads to deceit.

But the thing is, I’m not following these people. Listening to someone’s story, hearing them out, even believing parts of it are not the same as following them to whatever pit they may be walking toward. “Conspiracy theories” are not things meant to be followed blindly. They are meant to open your eyes, open your mind, to new thoughts and possibilities that turns you from a sleepy sheep into a person who takes responsibility for knowledge, ceases to follow anyone but God, and takes away the blind trust in man that is only a hindrance in our path to truth. If I can get one person to question the status quo, to ask, “But why?” of the current mantras we are surrounded by that are clearly lies, I honestly don’t care if I’m wrong.

And I very easily might be! I might be wrong about a lot of things. I may have to apologize publicly and embarrassingly someday. I may have to admit that all the things I thought were wrong and I was truly mistaken. But I’m absolutely more okay with that scenario than I am with where I was before in my happy ignorance. God doesn’t call all of us to walk this path and I respect that. He even calls us at different times in our lives and now might not be your time. I don’t regret my years of happy ignorance. So no pressure. But if you’re reading this and you want to silence me, why is that? Why does this evidence and speculation make you uncomfortable? More and more, I think a conspiracy theory is just that: evidence + speculation, with maybe a little spice of critical thinking thrown in. What if I’m right? What if there’s truth here and you dismissing me as a conspiracy theorist is just as dangerous as you think this information might be. When we’re outside the realm of religion, information is just that. It’s information. It’s not dangerous. You can take it or leave it.

Why is it that those who are not interested in these subjects except to try and silence them, view information as dangerous? Isn’t it more dangerous to censor people? To be so cautious that we are ineffectively silent in a time when God wants us to be loud? Is it possible God wants some of us to speak up and others to be silent? That’s possible, right? Maybe you should respect other people’s walk with God and not assume that the path you’ve chosen is the one God wants us all to walk. And I just have to point out that when people are talking and they’re lying or they’re an idiot, the more they’re allowed to speak, the more apparent that will become to everyone who hears them. So don’t be scared of information, y’all. Don’t be threatened by speculation and theorizing. If they’re wrong, that’s on them.

Maybe instead of trying to silence people and aligning yourself with the likes of facebook, youtube, instagram, *whispers* Hitler, and anyone else who feels the need to monitor/silence/censor people’s thoughts, maybe pray for them instead. Maybe pray for them and encourage them in their questions of the stories we’re all told to believe. Maybe pray for them and then say a prayer for yourself as well. That you would see the truth beyond all the bias and pride and desire to be right. That’s the prayer I keep praying for myself. I truly believe that if we really want it, God will show us truth. If you disagree with my stance on this, please comment, disagree, point out the flaws in my logic, and please do pray for me. But don’t try to silence me.

It won’t work anyway. 🙂

I hope this brings some clarity to this film for those who have had mixed feelings.

1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21998366
2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21178474
3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3241931/
4. https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/22/10273
5. https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/59/24/6103
6. https://www.corvelva.it/en/speciale-corvelva/vaccinegate-en/what-did-we-find-in-the-mmrv-priorix-tetra-vaccine.html
7. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf
8. https://patents.justia.com/inventor/anthony-s-fauci
9. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/research/us-china-collaborative-biomedical-research-program?fbclid=IwAR0UB3T2ajnO6WWvvxr56wW7-Q9eSdcuedytRAUvOZoLEWkQUpa-t51mLUM
10. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/history/NCT04280705?A=10&B=15&C=Side-by-Side#StudyPageTop
11. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/05/09/fact-check-price-didnt-push-remdesivir-over-hydroxychloroquine/3094440001/
12. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3241518/
13. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/cell-based.htm
14. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madin-Darby_Canine_Kidney_cells
15. https://www.petmd.com/dog/conditions/digestive/c_dg_canine_coronavirus_infection
16. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=22423139
17. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31607599
18. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29253638
19. https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1006292