I've never seen this movie. But the description of the recycling of history is so damn apt.
I was part of my own 'buyers club' thanks to the work of the FLCCC. Their conspiracy cocktails saved many elderly patients in my group of friends. None of those who took the conspiracy formula consisting of zinc, vitamins, ivermectin, and antiviral mouthwash, each day's dose of which price gouged them to the tune of maybe six dollars, died of cv19 or even developed pneumonia.
Who are deep in the fight still. Every Wednesday night 7pm Eastern they , FLCCC have an informative ( damning ) Zoom update for nearly two years now. On Thursday same hour you’ll find a parallel Zoom presentation by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, VSRF. Each are accessible via their web sites with Zoom . Both have the podcast of that weeks presentation on site within a day or two.
Yes, history does repeat. Such repetition is an unavoidable aspect of life in a world dominated by human unconsciousness and repressed shadows. We live in just such a world.
Thank you for spending the precious time required to compose such a thorough and well thought out article.
And so disappointing that Matthew McConaughey didn’t watch his own movie, or has had amnesia, because he was a walking and talking billboard for Fauci during the pandemic.
A great article. I have used the argument several times when trying to convince anyone of the propensity for big pharma and the FDA to suppress low-cost repurposed generics in favour of expensive patented drugs.
You think Dallas Buyers Club is a work of fiction? Who is the bad guy in that movie?
You left out a very critical piece of information, that being “Peptide T”- this is the drug from the movie that was used the most. This peptide was & possibly still is a huge way out. Its interaction with blocking the GP 120 epitope from binding to CCR5 could be key.
Dr Candice Pert’s drug was smeared and deliberately demonized because of how successful it was at stopping HIV in its tracks.
Its peer review was corrupt.
For anyone interested they should read - Molecules of emotion - Pert & Ruff
Since the day I’ve read your article “The day I understood ‚the good German“ I have been been following you on Twitter and using translate option at times. This is how I’ve found out about Dr Cadegiani and how he was treated.
I was aware what happened with AIDS episode and Dr Duisberg for some time but the way you presented the similarities of the last 3 years is astounding.
Don’t watch ‘Dallas Buyers Club’ is also an amazing article. I hope it would reach many more people.
It creates problems for those who promote drugs knowing they kill people, look at the oxycontin debacle with the perdue family,
Letos character is a trans woman, not a cross dresser, at least get that correct, Raymona is "she/her" and nothing else.
I enjoyed Dallas buyers club, have also had issues with the medical fraternity, was born at 25 weeks gestation back in '82, given lots of experimental drugs, one or two of which aren't given to neonates any more, have been given other drugs for asthma and all sorts, took me another 30 years to figure out I had a hormone imbalance, that my brain was running on estrogen but the body was on testosterone then as soon as I put estrogen in it it all works properly...no doctors helped with that though...
Yes, the main character is a homophobe and an arsehole but he does things the establishment didn't do, as for why the director dies, don't you know the link between the vaccine and SADS mixed with major exercise?
I made the connection. Lost an extended family member to AIDS in the 80s. It was horrible to witness. And as much as I have extreme sympathy for anyone with gender dysphoria, telling someone with this condition that they are the opposite of their biological sex is not kind but cruel. Raymona is in fact a man, dressed as a woman. That is scientific fact and sticking to science lends credibility to your article, but calling a man a she/her does not. Otherwise, great article.
I wrote it first in Portuguese, then I translated it into English. Probably the phrases in quotes, of what the characters say, are not 100% faithful to the original dialogue.
It has been years since I watched the movie. And I wouldn't be surprised if someone went back and changed any he/him pronouns to she/her to align with the "feelings vs facts" of today's society. I have a friend who has gender dysmorphia and I call him by his preferred name, but I do not refer to him as she/her. Submitting to compelled speech, in this case demands to use inaccurate and unscientific pronouns, is submitting to more tyranny. And as your article lays out, we have already been subjected to enough tyranny over the last three years.
This is the first article I’ve read of yours, and spent the first 5 minutes or so in awe of how misinformed you are!! 😂 Glad to see it was tongue in cheek and you do indeed know what’s going on. Thank you for this important timeline.
I'd like to add there was a cut scene where the main character was to make a reference to Dr. Duesberg's theory that the virus doesn't even cause the disease. He did it to make a pass at the atttractive Doctor. They took it out as it still was too taboo to be included. Some articles in the atlanic, or slate even brag about it saving the movie from ecoming homophobic.
Another excellent summary! As Jikky the mouse put it, "Stop what you're doing and read this."
Indeed, if one is even only vaguely familiar with the history of corruption that plagues the institutions of public health in 'for profit' societies, one easily recognizes the farce that the profiteering operation at hand has been.
It’s not that no one cared homosexuals we’re dying. It’s the the subhuman filth domestic enemy media helped cover it up, just like they did during COVID.
People can’t care about what they don’t know.
We were told the official line.
The idea that “no one cared because it was homosexuals.” Is a media lie to cover their own asses.
Just like they’ll cook up another lie to defend their role in millions of COVID and vaccine deaths.
The fault lies SOLELY at their feet.
If people knew the truth, then this horseshit wouldn’t happen.
You can have a society, or you can have “journalists”…but you can’t have both.
Taking advantage of your mention about 2009's H1N1 Pandemic events - about the "wonders" of Tamiflu touted by the industry. It seems that the modus operandi has not changed at all:
"According to a BMJ article, 'Conflict of interest forms filed by the 34 members of the external working group that wrote and reviewed the new CDC recommendation in 2012 show that nine had financial ties to the manufacturers.' The CDC Foundation also accepted conditional funding from Roche for the Take 3 flu campaign. CDC subsequently posted a recommendation on its website recommending influenza antiviral drugs (e.g. oseltamivir)" - https://www.jpands.org/vol25no3/huntoon.pdf
"Following criticism of the CDC and itsfoundation for accepting a directed donation from Roche for the agency’s Take 3 flu campaign (Step 3 tells the public to 'take antiviral medicine if your doctor prescribes it), the CDC posted an article on its website entitled, 'Why CDC Recommends Influenza Antiviral Drugs.' The agency cited multiple observational and industry funded studies, including the recent meta-analysis by Dobson and colleagues, which it described as an “independent” study. However, the study was sponsored by Roche, and all four authors had financial ties to Roche, Genentech, or Gilead (the first two sell oseltamivir and Gilead holds the patent). Despite its extensive list of studies, the CDC did not cite the systematic review and meta-analysis by the Cochrane Collaboration. The CDC told The BMJ that it didn’t include the Cochrane review because Cochrane 'did not consider any data from uncontrolled observational studies of oseltamivir treatment. While such studies have inherent design limitations, they can inform clinical practice and public health, especially when data from RCTs [randomized controlled trials] are unavailable or have not been conducted among high-risk groups or hospitalized influenza patients, or because having a placebo group would be unethical since antiviral treatment is recommended for these groups.' The US Food and Drug Administration issued a warning to Roche that it could not claim that oseltamivir reduces pneumonia or deaths since it has never provided evidence to the FDA to support that claim. Manufacturers are prohibited by law from making off-label claims about their drugs. However, doctors can legally recommend drugs for off-label uses. By funding the CDC’s Take 3 campaign, Roche and other companies are not claiming their antivirals will reduce pneumonia or death. CDC director, Frieden, however, did make the off-label claim, telling the public that it could 'save your life.'"(LENZER, 2015, p. 2) - https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h2362
Now that's an article.
I've never seen this movie. But the description of the recycling of history is so damn apt.
I was part of my own 'buyers club' thanks to the work of the FLCCC. Their conspiracy cocktails saved many elderly patients in my group of friends. None of those who took the conspiracy formula consisting of zinc, vitamins, ivermectin, and antiviral mouthwash, each day's dose of which price gouged them to the tune of maybe six dollars, died of cv19 or even developed pneumonia.
Yeah. Conspiracy cocktails from FLCCC: Paul Marik, Kory and Cadegiani...
Who are deep in the fight still. Every Wednesday night 7pm Eastern they , FLCCC have an informative ( damning ) Zoom update for nearly two years now. On Thursday same hour you’ll find a parallel Zoom presentation by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, VSRF. Each are accessible via their web sites with Zoom . Both have the podcast of that weeks presentation on site within a day or two.
Watch it. It’s really a good movie especially by todays 🤮standards.
An excellent article Felipe. 👏
And an highly relevant historical comparison.
Yes, history does repeat. Such repetition is an unavoidable aspect of life in a world dominated by human unconsciousness and repressed shadows. We live in just such a world.
Thank you for spending the precious time required to compose such a thorough and well thought out article.
Thanks, Jonathan! I am happy you liked it! :-)
And so disappointing that Matthew McConaughey didn’t watch his own movie, or has had amnesia, because he was a walking and talking billboard for Fauci during the pandemic.
You scared me for several paragraphs!!!!!
lol! Thanks for the reading, Ann! :-)
A great article. I have used the argument several times when trying to convince anyone of the propensity for big pharma and the FDA to suppress low-cost repurposed generics in favour of expensive patented drugs.
You think Dallas Buyers Club is a work of fiction? Who is the bad guy in that movie?
Great article, it seems history not only repeats itself, but also by the very same people..
ahaaha good observation!
A great piece!!! Thank you
subscribing
Thanks, Igor, good to know you liked it!
You left out a very critical piece of information, that being “Peptide T”- this is the drug from the movie that was used the most. This peptide was & possibly still is a huge way out. Its interaction with blocking the GP 120 epitope from binding to CCR5 could be key.
Dr Candice Pert’s drug was smeared and deliberately demonized because of how successful it was at stopping HIV in its tracks.
Its peer review was corrupt.
For anyone interested they should read - Molecules of emotion - Pert & Ruff
Just needed to add that, great read btw!
Thanks for your comment and thanks for more information about peptide T. Good to know you liked it!
Since the day I’ve read your article “The day I understood ‚the good German“ I have been been following you on Twitter and using translate option at times. This is how I’ve found out about Dr Cadegiani and how he was treated.
I was aware what happened with AIDS episode and Dr Duisberg for some time but the way you presented the similarities of the last 3 years is astounding.
Don’t watch ‘Dallas Buyers Club’ is also an amazing article. I hope it would reach many more people.
Hello Selma, thanks for the reading! Good to know you liked this article also! :-)
It creates problems for those who promote drugs knowing they kill people, look at the oxycontin debacle with the perdue family,
Letos character is a trans woman, not a cross dresser, at least get that correct, Raymona is "she/her" and nothing else.
I enjoyed Dallas buyers club, have also had issues with the medical fraternity, was born at 25 weeks gestation back in '82, given lots of experimental drugs, one or two of which aren't given to neonates any more, have been given other drugs for asthma and all sorts, took me another 30 years to figure out I had a hormone imbalance, that my brain was running on estrogen but the body was on testosterone then as soon as I put estrogen in it it all works properly...no doctors helped with that though...
Yes, the main character is a homophobe and an arsehole but he does things the establishment didn't do, as for why the director dies, don't you know the link between the vaccine and SADS mixed with major exercise?
Hello Kiera, I will try to correct for "trans woman". Thanks for your comment.
Updated!
I made the connection. Lost an extended family member to AIDS in the 80s. It was horrible to witness. And as much as I have extreme sympathy for anyone with gender dysphoria, telling someone with this condition that they are the opposite of their biological sex is not kind but cruel. Raymona is in fact a man, dressed as a woman. That is scientific fact and sticking to science lends credibility to your article, but calling a man a she/her does not. Otherwise, great article.
I just saw where the error is. I watched the movie in Portuguese dubbed.
In the Portuguese Wikipedia article, it says that Leto plays: "Raymond".
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Buyers_Club
In the English article, the name Raymond is not said, but Rayon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Buyers_Club
I wrote it first in Portuguese, then I translated it into English. Probably the phrases in quotes, of what the characters say, are not 100% faithful to the original dialogue.
It has been years since I watched the movie. And I wouldn't be surprised if someone went back and changed any he/him pronouns to she/her to align with the "feelings vs facts" of today's society. I have a friend who has gender dysmorphia and I call him by his preferred name, but I do not refer to him as she/her. Submitting to compelled speech, in this case demands to use inaccurate and unscientific pronouns, is submitting to more tyranny. And as your article lays out, we have already been subjected to enough tyranny over the last three years.
This is the first article I’ve read of yours, and spent the first 5 minutes or so in awe of how misinformed you are!! 😂 Glad to see it was tongue in cheek and you do indeed know what’s going on. Thank you for this important timeline.
Good to know you liked it!
I'd like to add there was a cut scene where the main character was to make a reference to Dr. Duesberg's theory that the virus doesn't even cause the disease. He did it to make a pass at the atttractive Doctor. They took it out as it still was too taboo to be included. Some articles in the atlanic, or slate even brag about it saving the movie from ecoming homophobic.
Another excellent summary! As Jikky the mouse put it, "Stop what you're doing and read this."
Indeed, if one is even only vaguely familiar with the history of corruption that plagues the institutions of public health in 'for profit' societies, one easily recognizes the farce that the profiteering operation at hand has been.
A little more grist for the mill -- echoes of 2009: https://www.avensonline.org/wp-content/uploads/JIMT-2378-1343-02-0004.pdf
Many thanks for your indispensable work, Filipe! Doing what I can to draw people's attention to it. Aye!
Hello Norman, I am happy you liked this article! And thanks fo the link. I will read it! Filipe
HIV = AIDS Fauci’s First Fraud
After watching this documentary many years ago, I immediately saw the parallels between what was done then, being repeated for this new Plannedemic.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wy3frBacd2k&t=0s
Probably the most important information that I’ve seen in the past 10 years. Well worth watching for anyone who seeks truth.
It’s not that no one cared homosexuals we’re dying. It’s the the subhuman filth domestic enemy media helped cover it up, just like they did during COVID.
People can’t care about what they don’t know.
We were told the official line.
The idea that “no one cared because it was homosexuals.” Is a media lie to cover their own asses.
Just like they’ll cook up another lie to defend their role in millions of COVID and vaccine deaths.
The fault lies SOLELY at their feet.
If people knew the truth, then this horseshit wouldn’t happen.
You can have a society, or you can have “journalists”…but you can’t have both.
Taking advantage of your mention about 2009's H1N1 Pandemic events - about the "wonders" of Tamiflu touted by the industry. It seems that the modus operandi has not changed at all:
https://youtu.be/CU3PsTd5Bg0 - "Peter Doshi -- Lessons from Tamiflu experience"
"According to a BMJ article, 'Conflict of interest forms filed by the 34 members of the external working group that wrote and reviewed the new CDC recommendation in 2012 show that nine had financial ties to the manufacturers.' The CDC Foundation also accepted conditional funding from Roche for the Take 3 flu campaign. CDC subsequently posted a recommendation on its website recommending influenza antiviral drugs (e.g. oseltamivir)" - https://www.jpands.org/vol25no3/huntoon.pdf
"Following criticism of the CDC and itsfoundation for accepting a directed donation from Roche for the agency’s Take 3 flu campaign (Step 3 tells the public to 'take antiviral medicine if your doctor prescribes it), the CDC posted an article on its website entitled, 'Why CDC Recommends Influenza Antiviral Drugs.' The agency cited multiple observational and industry funded studies, including the recent meta-analysis by Dobson and colleagues, which it described as an “independent” study. However, the study was sponsored by Roche, and all four authors had financial ties to Roche, Genentech, or Gilead (the first two sell oseltamivir and Gilead holds the patent). Despite its extensive list of studies, the CDC did not cite the systematic review and meta-analysis by the Cochrane Collaboration. The CDC told The BMJ that it didn’t include the Cochrane review because Cochrane 'did not consider any data from uncontrolled observational studies of oseltamivir treatment. While such studies have inherent design limitations, they can inform clinical practice and public health, especially when data from RCTs [randomized controlled trials] are unavailable or have not been conducted among high-risk groups or hospitalized influenza patients, or because having a placebo group would be unethical since antiviral treatment is recommended for these groups.' The US Food and Drug Administration issued a warning to Roche that it could not claim that oseltamivir reduces pneumonia or deaths since it has never provided evidence to the FDA to support that claim. Manufacturers are prohibited by law from making off-label claims about their drugs. However, doctors can legally recommend drugs for off-label uses. By funding the CDC’s Take 3 campaign, Roche and other companies are not claiming their antivirals will reduce pneumonia or death. CDC director, Frieden, however, did make the off-label claim, telling the public that it could 'save your life.'"(LENZER, 2015, p. 2) - https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h2362