Dr. Kelly Victory

A hundred percent. Just to make sure that for anyone who's listening, what you're referencing when you say the 86 Act, you're talking about the Childhood Vaccine Injury Act that was passed in 1986 by Congress. And it was passed as an effort to incentivize vaccine manufacturers to be willing to create, to develop more vaccines for children.

A hundred percent. Just to make sure that for anyone who's listening, what you're referencing when you say the 86 Act, you're talking about the Childhood Vaccine Injury Act that was passed in 1986 by Congress. And it was passed as an effort to incentivize vaccine manufacturers to be willing to create, to develop more vaccines for children.

But in so doing, they granted to the vaccine manufacturers blanket liability protection. They cannot be sued. They have no exposure, which would be tantamount to saying, and I use this example all the time, I would not buy a baby car seat that said on the box, by the way, if your child is maimed or killed by a malfunction of this product, good luck to you because you can't sue them.

But in so doing, they granted to the vaccine manufacturers blanket liability protection. They cannot be sued. They have no exposure, which would be tantamount to saying, and I use this example all the time, I would not buy a baby car seat that said on the box, by the way, if your child is maimed or killed by a malfunction of this product, good luck to you because you can't sue them.

They have no liability. I wouldn't buy that product. Why in the world would I allow somebody to inject my child with a product that fundamentally says the same. If your kid dies from this or is maimed or disabled for the rest of his or her life, you have no recourse. It's insanity. So I'm with you. That needs to be repealed.

They have no liability. I wouldn't buy that product. Why in the world would I allow somebody to inject my child with a product that fundamentally says the same. If your kid dies from this or is maimed or disabled for the rest of his or her life, you have no recourse. It's insanity. So I'm with you. That needs to be repealed.

I also agree we need wholesale removal of the mRNA vaccines from the market, given the data. And we're going to get into the weeds again of what you've seen recently. But it is so egregious. It is so irrefutable to me, you know, what has gone on. Just another study came out today, a really well done study. report on the contamination of these mRNA shots. I don't know if you saw it with this SV40.

I also agree we need wholesale removal of the mRNA vaccines from the market, given the data. And we're going to get into the weeds again of what you've seen recently. But it is so egregious. It is so irrefutable to me, you know, what has gone on. Just another study came out today, a really well done study. report on the contamination of these mRNA shots. I don't know if you saw it with this SV40.

That's DNA that in layman's terms, what we have now shown is that the BioNTech Pfizer mRNA shots are contaminated with DNA that promotes cancer as well as promotes antibiotic resistance. More than four times the allowable amounts of this is contaminating these. That by itself should cause these to be removed. So what's your stance on pharmaceutical advertising? Do you have thoughts about that?

That's DNA that in layman's terms, what we have now shown is that the BioNTech Pfizer mRNA shots are contaminated with DNA that promotes cancer as well as promotes antibiotic resistance. More than four times the allowable amounts of this is contaminating these. That by itself should cause these to be removed. So what's your stance on pharmaceutical advertising? Do you have thoughts about that?

Yeah, Roger Ailes, the former CEO of Fox News, actually acknowledged that he wanted to get rid of pharmaceutical advertising on Fox. But at the time that he made the statement, it represented 70 percent of the advertising revenue for Fox News came from Big Pharma. And as you said, Ed, you know, they don't advertise because they think they can sell three more doses of Ozempic.

Yeah, Roger Ailes, the former CEO of Fox News, actually acknowledged that he wanted to get rid of pharmaceutical advertising on Fox. But at the time that he made the statement, it represented 70 percent of the advertising revenue for Fox News came from Big Pharma. And as you said, Ed, you know, they don't advertise because they think they can sell three more doses of Ozempic.

They advertise so that they can control the talking heads so that they can make sure that nobody ever says a bad word about their products, says anything about their liability protection on vaccines, says anything about the fact that there's a question whether statins are legitimate or should be prescribed, any of that. They do it to control it.

They advertise so that they can control the talking heads so that they can make sure that nobody ever says a bad word about their products, says anything about their liability protection on vaccines, says anything about the fact that there's a question whether statins are legitimate or should be prescribed, any of that. They do it to control it.

And there's a reason why every other country with the exception of New Zealand doesn't allow it because you cannot have integrity in the media if the media is completely owned and controlled by big pharma. So I think that this is a huge issue.

And there's a reason why every other country with the exception of New Zealand doesn't allow it because you cannot have integrity in the media if the media is completely owned and controlled by big pharma. So I think that this is a huge issue.

And back to what you were saying, when you think about the profit center of vaccines, if you don't have to spend any money on marketing because they're mandated, they're on the childhood schedule, and your kid can't go to school without them, and you don't have to spend any money on liability, You don't have to have lawyers or fundamentally malpractice insurance.

And back to what you were saying, when you think about the profit center of vaccines, if you don't have to spend any money on marketing because they're mandated, they're on the childhood schedule, and your kid can't go to school without them, and you don't have to spend any money on liability, You don't have to have lawyers or fundamentally malpractice insurance.

The entire thing goes to the bottom line. It is a cash cow. So if you wonder why there's an effort to keep Bobby Kennedy out of HHS has nothing to do with what they're saying. It's purely about the dollars. So let's pivot for a second here now to the update on what I would call the state of the data.

The entire thing goes to the bottom line. It is a cash cow. So if you wonder why there's an effort to keep Bobby Kennedy out of HHS has nothing to do with what they're saying. It's purely about the dollars. So let's pivot for a second here now to the update on what I would call the state of the data.