Roberta Doricchi interviews dr. Stefano Montanari and Dr. Antonietta Gatti.
Roberta Doricchi – Today there are so many topics on which it would be interesting to keep in mind that it is difficult to select them. We try, however, to be as short as possible even if I know that we will go beyond the usual size. We want to start with you, dr. Montanari, from the political world preparing for the March 4 elections?
Stefano Montanari – The only novelty is the physiological worsening of the situation.
RD – That is?
SM– Let’s start from what remains stable now by several consultations to this part: their manifest illegality. As I have already denounced several times, Articles 56 and 58 of the Constitution are violated with the arrogance of those who know they can count on a people who streaks with underpants and, once again, those who will sit in parliament will do so in an abusive manner. In fact we can not even call it a coup, if only because there is no element of surprise and the thing is perpetuated undisturbed for years under the eyes of all, including the Constitutional Court. We are the only Italians who are responsible, a people who has forgotten and erased the concepts of law and dignity, which he has delivered himself and his children out of laziness and, however, by his own will, to an increasingly hypocritical and suffocating regime. Leaving aside the many details, the most significant deterioration lies in the level of those exposed in the window. The grillini, with an unprecedented speed and volatility, say everything and the opposite of everything, affirm and deny; Renzi, like Lorenzin, remains coherently anchored to his role as a destroyer; Grasso has the nerve to ask for consents after the shameful figure he made forbidding that the film Vaxxed was projected for the senators; Casini wears the t-shirt of the enemies who for years had demonized; Berlusconi threatens to present Tajani … And then there are the partitini. I never counted them, but I challenge anyone to distinguish one from the other. Look at those who claim the obvious freedom to get vaccinated if you want to do it or not to do so if you choose in that sense: would you be able to tell me with acceptable clarity what these groups differ from each other? Have you ever thought about why there are so many and not just one? I fear that none of them, even reaching the number of signatures necessary to present themselves in the elections, and it is not said at all, will collect more than a few tenths of the votes and, in that way, the votes will be lost to the benefit of the regime.
RD – You have also expressed perplexity about some of the candidates.
SM – And I will reconfirm it. There are several worthy figures, but in some of those groups, people have infiltrated without culture and without skills, and people whose morality I would not feel to swear. And I leave aside those decidedly ridiculous.
RD – What about the League? After having expressed themselves on the vaccine freedom, now, for some time, they no longer mention the topic, even if it is undoubted that it is something that will affect a lot on the choices of the voters.
SM – Salvini has allied with Berlusconi and Meloni and for them the vaccines are untouchable. And, then, if Salvini aims to govern will accept the massacre, as a good “politician” (and please put the word in quotes). In short, the party was made with the eventual conquest of power, the saint was confounded. Maybe it will remove vaccines against the most improbable diseases from the obligation and everyone will live happily ever after.
RD – Will you stay out?
SM – If you have any convincing reason that I have reason to get into that bad jumble …
RD – And you, Dr. Gatti? Are not you tempted to make your voice heard in politics?
Antonietta Gatti – The voices you need are more than one, but, because these voices weigh, you need a sufficiently strong party to know how to assert them. To date, I do not see anyone among the parties with a parliamentary representation nourished or with the hope of obtaining one that, giving space to those voices, is willing to go against the not certain interests of the community that pollute our politics. In fact, I did not have any serious proposals and, if I had agreed to join one of the many small parties, I would have burnt myself. My job is research and research is what I can do. For now I think I’m more useful this way.
RD – Let’s change the subject. For next March 2, the National Order of Biologists organized a conference in Rome on the new frontiers of biology and it seems that it was not appreciated on the high ground.
SM– There would have been amazement if it had been the other way around. At that conference there will be not only my wife and me, and it will be her only to make an intervention, but, among others, there will be Giulio Tarro, Jeuda Shoenfeld and Luc Montagnier. The danger to the regime is that someone can say unwelcome things, for example about the vaccines. And then the means of so-called information regime are unleashed, from Rai to the Confindustria radio station. Then there are the newspapers with Repubblica in mind. When you want to counter a thesis or, in any case, a position or results, those who are honest and prepared present their own data. But in this case the data to counterattack are not there and, then, here is the usual trick: you download free mud on the participants if you can introduce unknown characters on the stage, occasionally disguised as men of science, and these will recite, and patience if they stutter, what is written on the script. Of course, most people will fall for it, justifying those who stage the tragic farce. And, a bit ‘hysterically, as always we try to make sure that the conference does not take place. In short, the usual gag, what, just to give an example, Grasso, Lorenzin and Tajani have successfully put into practice to ensure that ignorance continues to reign supreme. Moreover, Hitler declared that to govern a people of ignoramuses is a real pacca and, as you can see, there are no news. It may be fun to consider how, if you want to remain compliant with the regime, the new frontiers enunciated in the title of the conference must be inextricably linked to what the regime likes. But even here there is no news: who has any notion of contemporary history knows that in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union the pseudoscientific truths of the regime were the norm.
RD – If it’s only you, doctor, talking, will you talk about vaccines?
AG – The theme will be that of our research on nanopathologies and the focus will not be on vaccines.
RD – So, as far as I understand, an unjustified fear.
AG – When you are wrong, when you have made some prank, it may happen that you are afraid of your own shadow. If you think about it for a moment, we are facing the most open of confessions: scientific facts are scary.
RD – The criticism of the conference and of Senator D’Anna who is of the Order is the president was based on the fact that the Order of Biologists invites no-vax.
SM – Apart from the fact that the definition of no-vax applied at random is clear indication of the culture of those who use it and aside from the fact that the conference is centered on another, the Order of Biologists has done the only honest and intelligent thing that he could do. For what the regime says there is certainly no need for repetitions, receiving every day equine doses. Maybe we also listen to those who have different things to say because ideas can come from there. Then, if there is reason, you can argue that what has been communicated has no value, but a prior censorship is mortifying for those who implement it or, at least, try. All these characters, to whatever team they belong and in whatever capacity they act, have all my commiseration even before my disdain. To lack honesty even before culture and intelligence is a punishment in itself and these have received the punishment. After all, then, the Order of Biologists has the right to do what it thinks best without being accountable to anyone and perhaps the biologists, those serious and serene and not those who unfortunately are subservient to those who pay them, want to meet positions that can diverge from those offered. It is only in this way that knowledge can progress. But I understand that taking away even for a moment the gag scare those who have an interest in what everything remains as it is. they want to meet positions that may diverge from those offered. It is only in this way that knowledge can progress. But I understand that taking away even for a moment the gag scare those who have an interest in what everything remains as it is. they want to meet positions that may diverge from those offered. It is only in this way that knowledge can progress. But I understand that taking away even for a moment the gag scare those who have an interest in what everything remains as it is.
RD – From what I have read, the presence of the journalist Rai Franco Di Mare as a moderator was foreseen, but now, as I read it, it seems that Di Mare has renounced. Dr. Montanari, give me your comment?
SM – Everyone interprets his human and professional role as he sees fit. There are two cases: o Di Mare did not understand anything about the conference, perhaps because he was misinformed, or he understood that his presence would have been unwelcome to someone who was on top of him. I Di Mare crossed him two or three times very marginally in the Rai studios and, anyway, I would never allow myself to make a judgment. I only say that I would have acted very differently.
RD – We remain on TV subject. You have refused an interview with La7. Because?
SM– Simply because I have already fallen too many times in the same trap and I would be really too stupid if I would fall back. What had been proposed to me was naively ridiculous: from 5 to 10 minutes of interviews including the questions and interruptions of the journalist. You understand that, just to deal with even the most stringent arguments with which the TV’s regime continues to dupe customers, it would take many hours. I do not claim a correct and honest par condicio because no regime is correct and honest, but after the continued overdose of Lorenzin, Burioni and the camel reinforcement troops with characters grotesquely passed off as scientists, an overdose that, putting together all the sources , total hours of daily treatment, how do you respond in those few and certainly uncomfortable minutes? Just think of how much you should explain to the people hypnotized by regime anesthesia about that ignoble hoax that is the so-called herd immunity. And if you were to enter the fundamental theme of the toxicology related to the components and pollutants present in the vaccines, it would take several hours. The trick was the usual: I invite myself, I can not explain anything, do not show images, images that need explanations and, consequently, of time, and then it is said that Montanari was there but, after all, he did not say anything. if you were to enter the fundamental topic of toxicology related to the components and pollutants present in the vaccines, it would take several hours. The trick was the usual: I invite myself, I can not explain anything, do not show images, images that need explanations and, consequently, of time, and then it is said that Montanari was there but, after all, he did not say anything. if you were to enter the fundamental topic of toxicology related to the components and pollutants present in the vaccines, it would take several hours. The trick was the usual: I invite myself, I can not explain anything, do not show images, images that need explanations and, consequently, of time, and then it is said that Montanari was there but, after all, he did not say anything.
RD – You have appointed Minister Lorenzin again. Do you know that you have scheduled an electoral event at a funeral home?
SM – I know it may seem like a joke, but it’s true. In Modena, his constituency, there is a large funeral agency called Terra e Cielo and the lady has chosen it with great aptitude to talk about vaccines and its political plan. It is an event with a lot of musical entertainment, and apparently Burioni teaches, and dinner buffet. It becomes difficult for me to comment on avoiding jokes. So, please, let’s move on to something else.
RD – Can you at least give me a comment on what the minister has said about the big business that would be behind those who oppose compulsory vaccination [http://www.meteoweb.eu/2018/02/vaccini-no- vax / 1041622 / (NdR)]?
SM – What can I tell you? Who would the money come from for a product that is not sold? I realize that now there is no limit to the absurd, but do not let me say what I believe any person with mental balance would say. Please, ask another question.
RD – Dr. Gatti, that you are a scientist is recognized worldwide. Who can be called a scientist?
AG – Contrary to what happens in other languages, for example English, in Italian the word scientist often takes on a somewhat inflated connotation. We define a scientist as a simple scholar or, a step higher up, a lover of the subject but, referring to Enrico Fermi and borrowing from him the concept, scientist is who discovers something scientific. Naturally, the discovery can be more or less important and, consequently, the scientist protagonist of the discovery occupies a step in proportion.
RD – Who, among the various characters dealing with vaccines in Italy, can be called a scientist?
AG – Evaluate yourself. I am not aware of any discovery but I could be poorly informed.
RD – Let’s move on to something else. This year’s flu vaccination was a fiasco. What do you say, dr. Montanari?
SM“I say that it took neither a genius nor a fortune-teller to predict it. Of all the vaccinations the most absurd is the flu. As I have repeated up to boring myself, those vaccines are prepared on one or more viruses now no longer massively present, given their rate of mutation. For this reason, in the most harmless of cases, no effect is obtained. It should, however, be considered as those vaccines contain a bit ‘of everything and, therefore, like any other drug can induce far from desirable effects. To worsen the situation there is the very urgent call of the so-called authorities to vaccinate the old, already massacred in the habit of drug abuse. As some medical journals now rightly write, but as my pharmacology professor told me almost half a century ago, old people can not get benefits from vaccines, and the human organism does not adapt to someone’s pretensions: that was and remains. The fact remains that those who are vaccinated against the flu get sick at least six times more than those who do not, in addition to becoming a real giver, and this is also clearly reported in the literature [http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/flu-vaccine-increases-your-risk-infecting-others-6-fold-study-suggests (NdR)].
RD – Still on the subject of vaccines I heard Professor Burioni say that if a person gets sick of tetanus and heals, it is not said to be immune. So you must vaccinate.
SM– I can not say why, but it seems that the tetanus unleash the most bizarre fantasies. Perhaps Mrs. Lorenzin will remember when she came out with the cruelty that vaccinating against tetanus, a disease that can not be transmitted from one individual to another, serves to obtain the immunity of herds. Here I do not want to shoot on the Red Cross raging on the incompetence, however more than obvious, of the character who has no idea what the immunity of flock is, even if it is an unsustainable hoax if you have a just normal IQ and a culture, even only average, can not be applicable to a disease that does not pass from one person to another. Out of pity, I mention only when he shot that it is mainly the old ones who get sick and that grandparents infect their grandchildren. Absolutely not allowing me to suspect that it is bad faith, I can only see the evidence drawn from what the lady says. There is no question: this is the minister we deserve. Burioni, on the other hand, is a different case. Good or bad he graduated in medicine and, good or bad, teaches in a university, and I prefer to fly over that. I leave aside any commentary on the professor’s culture and I simply ask myself a question: if the contact with Clostridium tetani and its toxin, that is the agent that, under certain conditions, makes sick of tetanus, he says does not induce immunity, how will you give immunity a vaccine, that is to say something that mimics the disease without inducing the formation of antibodies with the same efficacy of the natural disease so much so that the so-called recalls are needed? that’s the minister we deserve. Burioni, on the other hand, is a different case. Good or bad he graduated in medicine and, good or bad, teaches in a university, and I prefer to fly over that. I leave aside any commentary on the professor’s culture and I simply ask myself a question: if the contact with Clostridium tetani and its toxin, that is the agent that, under certain conditions, makes sick of tetanus, he says does not induce immunity, how will you give immunity a vaccine, that is to say something that mimics the disease without inducing the formation of antibodies with the same efficacy of the natural disease so much so that the so-called recalls are needed? that’s the minister we deserve. Burioni, on the other hand, is a different case. Good or bad he graduated in medicine and, good or bad, teaches in a university, and I prefer to fly over that. I leave aside any commentary on the professor’s culture and I simply ask myself a question: if the contact with Clostridium tetani and its toxin, that is the agent that, under certain conditions, makes sick of tetanus, he says does not induce immunity, how will you give immunity a vaccine, that is to say something that mimics the disease without inducing the formation of antibodies with the same efficacy of the natural disease so much so that the so-called recalls are needed?
RD – In fact it seems absurd.
SM – It is.
RD – Do you have an explanation?
SM – Yes.
RD – Do you give it to me?
SM – No.
RD – Let me continue for a moment with the topic related to Professor Burioni. In these years, have you ever had a meeting with him to clarify the positions?
SM – In these years I have shown an almost unlimited patience towards him. The castronerie he shot is so gross that anyone with a minimum of scientific knowledge can not fail to notice it. I struggle to believe that Burioni, a graduate in Medicine, can really believe what he tells but, of course, I could be wrong and it could be that he really believes it. With patience I have invited him several times to attend an analysis of electron microscopy on a vaccine of his choice, with patience I invited him to a confrontation and I even put up with the mortifying spectacle of the presentation of his latest book, the where he writes that anyone who does not agree with him is a donkey. On that occasion I tried to meet him but the bodyguards, prudently rented by the bank that sponsored the event, prevented me from approaching. You will understand that in fact it is impossible to make any comparison with those who run away.
RD – Dr. Gatti, since she is the one who conducts the investigation of microscopy, has it ever happened to be accompanied, when analyzing a vaccine, by someone who criticizes her?
AG – The invitations to do so have been many but nobody has ever agreed to do so. After all, you obviously pay more to chat and defame. And, in a certain way, I understand the position of these people who defend the indefensible. If you were to make a confrontation, not to clamor and “you do not know who I am” but sitting in front of a microscope focused on a vaccine sample, there would be no more room for lies: either I’m right or I, after decades of microscopy I have not learned to work and I get whistles for flasks. The fact that no one responds to the invitation, also addressed in writing to the Minister of Health, seems to me to be an eloquent answer.
RD – Good. Let’s move on to something else. Dr. Montanari, I heard it in Radio Studio 54 talk about something that seems impossible to believe: the treatment of worms given to millions of children without indication.
SM – Things are a bit worse. Indeed, they are much worse.
RD – What is it?
SM – Very soon, the children are administered drugs that are completely known to the same administrators the uselessness and, in this case, at least the initial costs are the African children, now treated as livestock. We need to know that 55 different bodies have joined in order to eliminate children’s intestinal parasites. The money or, at least, part of the money, puts the ineffable Bill Gates who has already done so much for Big Pharma, and the World Health Organization, enthusiastic, puts the rest together with the American CDC. Just in brackets, it is reasonable to assume that Bill Gates puts his money, but the WHO puts our own. The latter institution is pushing strongly to treat at least 675 million children, mostly Africans, to remedy the presence of worms in their intestines by giving them a drug twice a year, which amounts to a billion and 350 million doses. An inordinate business that, as happens with vaccines, arrives without a hurting blow, directly at home of those charitable institutions that are pharmaceutical companies. It would all be beautiful if it were not for some particular. Children are not checked in advance and, therefore, we can not know if worms are there or not. Thus, it is practically certain that a share of them will take a drug that they will not be able to enjoy if only for lack of the disease but from which it will have the inevitable side effects as it happens for any medicine. And the side effects are lovingly treatable with another medicine that will have side effects treatable with patience and love from another medicine, and so on until death has subtracted a client from Big Pharma’s affection. The other detail is that the British Medical Journal, which is one of the great medical journals, has been clear: that stuff is not effective. And further confirmation comes, among others, from 65 studies conducted in 23 countries, from the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the Cochrane Collaboration, a worldwide association that controls drug safety. But the most surprising thing is that, faced with the most evident evidence that could not be, not only do not stop but aim to treat a mass estimated 873 million children worldwide. This in the general silence.
RD – What does all this mean?
SM – That too many doctors have abdicated and that, if we do not wake up, there will be no way out for the children.
RD – One more jump. You have analyzed a vial of vitamin K that is given to newborns. What did you find there?
AG – Some solid and inorganic particle but, in fact, not many. If you ask me if these powders have the right to be there, I say of course not, but if we compare them with what we find in vaccines, it’s little stuff. Also take into account that the preparation is also intended to be taken by mouth and those few particles are very likely to be eliminated in the faeces. Of course, injected, and especially in a child born a few minutes, is another matter.
RD – Why is vitamin K given to all newborns?
SM – The mysteries of faith must remain mysterious. In fact there is no reason to do so, given the fact that vitamin K deficiency in the newborn should be ascertained, which, as is current practice since it began in style to play with drugs, is not done . In the same way you should inject all the other vitamins but, for some reason, K is privileged. And I do not think it is a fact of money because that preparation has a very low price. And then, I confess I do not know how to answer.
RD – We still change the subject. I know you continue to receive inquiries about the possibility of paying eight per cent of your taxes to your research. How are things?
SM – It’s an old and painful story. Years ago, before Grillo and his companions took away the microscope, a group of young Florentines founded an association called Ricerca è Vita and soon obtained the status of non-profit organization, which means that it could be donated eight per thousand . Some donation money arrived that remained intact in a postal account and shortly after came the surprise: the institution of Florence that had granted the status of non-profit organization canceled everything. The reason is very evident. The purpose of the association was to disseminate the results of our research with conferences, videos and publications, and that danger had to be avoided. Keep in mind that we were then kept in check because we put the waste incinerator business at risk, a decidedly appetizing affair. So a person whose identity was never revealed to us and who, as a good coward, remains faceless but whose membership is obvious he wrote to the office that we used the money to do research, which was forbidden. That the strange accusation was false was obvious: not a penny had been touched as documented by the report of the Post and, therefore, everything should have ended there, perhaps with a penalty for the scoundrel author of the fake act. In addition, the four money arrived would not even allowed to start any research, modest that this was and, therefore, we were the most obvious nonsense, a nonsense that even the most obtuse of bureaucrats would have to understand without too much difficulty. But, without today, after many years and with all that has happened, I can somehow surprise me, no one wanted to check the documents, from the postal ones to the registers of the association, no one took into consideration the absurdity of an accusation that was all too obviously untenable and the non-profit organization was closed. Here, then, that we can not access that funding, a financing that, however, could not legally help the research.
RD – And then, what is the answer to those who would like to devote a slice of their taxes?
SM – It is answered that, if Italy is in these conditions, the thing does not come from nothing. Therefore, thanks to those who wanted to help themselves by helping the research whose results it benefits from and the invitation to inquire, given that this umpteenth farce of our boot I have spoken and written countless times.
RD – About money, how is fundraising for the microscope?
SM– I beat Italy, often with my wife, giving lectures to collect the necessary sum and, as happened in Grillo’s day, we actually do the work. Yet, if the microscope arrives, we will get nothing more than a further dose of work provided free of charge as we have for many years. What irritates me most is to see the people who, if they have to put the money, ask a thousand questions and ask me a thousand questions without realizing that all that is exclusively for them. Believe me: the ever stronger temptation is to send everyone to the devil and, if they are not even to care for their children, I wonder why I have to do it. Then I get the case of the naive and gullible parent who has bombarded the child with vaccines and now finds a vegetable in the house or, when all is well, a catorcio. IS,
RD – Why?
SM – I do not know if you can imagine the weight of what my wife and I have been doing for years, of the fatigue, of what we have obtained, of insults, defamation, slander, obstacles of all kinds. Of course I will appear to be selfish, but if we can not continue to do research, the fault will be all those who put us in those conditions and put almost were, and I say almost because there were those who do not deserve all this, sixty million of Italians, from politicians to doctors to journalists, down to too many common people. In short, if there is not a microscope I will be free from any moral obligation towards anyone. Yes, my heart cries, but what can I do?
RD – What he says is very sad.
SM – The world is and Italy is one of the many mirrors.
RD – Doctor, what is your position?
AG– If I leave my heart aside, I can not admit that my husband is right. But you let me be, at least for a moment, a mother. How can I send to hell a woman who comes with a child massacred, a woman who maybe just by accident is not me? Every now and then, almost as a joke, my husband says that between four and a half billion years there will not be even the solar system anymore and, therefore, our life is an almost imperceptible moment. But that moment is all we have and the moral law within us that so fascinates Kant imposes us to behave as if our life and the behavior that we hold in our lives were, and I believe they are, the most important we can administer in the full condition of free will. In short, beyond any more or less noble interest, more or less criticizable, beyond any consideration, we must do the accounts with ourselves and I have done the accounts: I will do everything to continue until I will be crushed. It is only against the dead that one wins.
RD – Now, in this unusually long interview I would like to continue with you, doctor. In the last few days the conclusions of the parliamentary commission on the diseases of the soldiers came out. What do you think?
AG – As I think you can imagine, after having been for four legislatures a consultant of the commission, I was able to realize the real and artificial difficulties that exist in a theme like that of nanoparticles with which the military come into contact during the peace missions and during their work in shooting ranges.
RD – What was your role in all those commissions?
AG – The one of scientific consultant.
RD – I know that the question I am about to ask you is irrelevant, but it seems that it affects many people. Have you been paid for your work?
AG – I had the reimbursement of the cost of second-class train tickets and the cost of restaurants and hotels, always very modest, when I was forced to stay overnight in Rome. Of course I had to face other expenses, even consider the telephone ones, but we never talked about them. To answer the curiosity, all my work was given as absolutely free, something that I was aware from the beginning and, therefore, something that I accepted without problems.
RD – You mentioned nanoparticles. Why were the soldiers interested?
AG– Every time a bomb is exploded, it is inevitable that the bomb and target will be pulverized, and the size of the grains of dust, grains of micrometric and nanometric dimensions, are smaller the higher the temperature triggered by the explosion. Incidentally, the smaller the particles, the more easily they penetrate the tissues and organs, until they can be introduced into the nucleus of the cells where they can interfere with the DNA. For the work they exercise, the military, which, it is clear, for us Italians who reject the war as a Constitution are workers, are often forced to breathe air polluted by those powders and are also ingested because they fall on fruit, vegetables and cereals that become food. Consider that most of the particles are indestructible and, therefore,
RD – In short, the soldiers get sick.
AG – They get sick and they often die, and when they survive, they do not fare well.
RD – What evidence do you have to prove that the particles were getting them sick?
AG – Almost twenty years of analysis of electron microscopy on the sick tissues of a few hundred dead or sick soldiers.
RD – We come to the commission and its conclusions.
AG – This commission, unlike the others, is much more precise, more respectful of scientific results and less politicized. Thanks to the wisdom and stubbornness of the president, Mr Scanu, and to the members of the committee all the defense summits were audited asking them what they had done to identify the risk faced by our boys both in shooting ranges and abroad in peace missions. The whole of the General Staff was recognized as an employer of soldiers and the inadequacy of controls and supervision was contested. Therefore, a risk to human health and to work in polluted places like those bombarded contaminated by nanoparticles and also in vaccine prophylaxis is not recognized even in line with the prescriptions of the manufacturers.
RD – What will happen now?
AG – This commission has opened a gap that I believe it will be difficult for the defense to close down. It is therefore hoped that soon, when there will be new boys who will fall ill after missions abroad, the medical commissions do not reject the application for recognition of the correlation between the place and working conditions and the disease.
RD – It seems to me, reading the report, that the participation of the vaccines has been officially recognized as the disease begins.
AG – It was impossible not to do it.
RD – And it is clearly stated that the adverse effects are underestimated.
AG – We’ve been saying it for years simply because it’s true, and you have no idea how many damaged people or damaged children tell us about their tragedies that remain unknown to the rest of the world and, indeed, it is not uncommon to tell us to be been mocked. The underestimation is enormous and, unfortunately, the truth is that doctors report only a small part of the deleterious effects, arrogating a function of judgment that is not theirs.
RD – But, if the vaccines are dangerous for healthy and chosen boys as they are the military, what can be said for the children?
AG – That things are certainly not better for them.
RD – What should all those who, at the political, medical and media level, have asserted that the vaccines are harmless should say and do now?
AG – It is all too evident that so much has been hidden and so much has been distorted, to the detriment of health. The minimum that should be done is to begin to seriously review and without concessions to anyone all positions without preconceptions and without censorship.
RD – Will it be done?
AG – If things remain as they are at the next election, I’m afraid not.
RD – Thanks to both of you.
Thank you for this wonderful interview with these two witty and cultivated scientists. Their humor reminded me enormously of my mentor, Dr Andrew Hall Cutler, Phd, who unfortunately died a few months ago. Everybody who knew him misses him a whole lot.