My favorite conversation starters

My favorite conversation starters

I thought it would be fun to compile a handy list of questions you could ask in the event you ever get a chance to engage in a discussion with any of the individuals or institutions listed below. 

These questions are excellent “conversation starters” and will ensure that your relationship gets off to a great start and forms the foundation of a lasting relationship. Picking a question or two at random from the list below is a great way to make lasting first impressions. Trust me.

Also, in order to give you the proper context for these questions, please read my take-down article Should you get vaccinated?‘ before reading the questions below.

Senator Peters

  1. As chair of HSGAC, you are able to request the unredacted emails of Tony Fauci from NIH. Why haven’t you done this and shared with your HSGAC Republican colleagues. Then both parties can assure the American people that there is nothing nefarious going on here about the illegal redactions pointed out by Chris Martenson. Because it sure looks bad. What are you afraid of finding?? Isn’t it better to clear the air? Either Fauci covered it up or he didn’t. Why are you afraid to look????

Congress

  1. Have you asked Senator Peters to request the full unredacted emails from the NIH so we can clear the air? Why not?

President Biden

  1. Have you asked Senator Peters to request the full unredacted emails from the NIH so we can clear the air? Why not? It seems silly to have two groups trying to figure out whether the virus was man-made or not when we have the definitive answer in those emails. Why aren’t we taking the easy way to answer the question you posed?

Mainstream press

  1. Why aren’t you asking people the questions on this page? Are you part of the cover up?

CDC

  1. Exactly how many people have been killed by the vaccine so far?
  2. How many people do we have to kill before you call it? Seems like we are way over the limit.
  3. Why aren’t you telling anyone how many people have been killed?
  4. Can I see an analysis of the death reports done so far showing how you could possibly rule out the vaccine as the cause of death?
  5. If it wasn’t the vaccine that killed all these people, what was it? Just a sudden change in the death rate by 25X that just happened to coincide with the start of vaccinations?
  6. Aren’t you violating federal law by failing to inform patients of all the risks?
  7. How can you legally obtain informed consent of a minor without their parent’s permission?
  8. Were you aware of the paper showing an 82% miscarriage rate in pregnant women who get vaccinated? Would it matter at all?
  9. Since you are obligated by law to inform patients of potential risk, why aren’t you warning women that the ovaries are one of the main organs targeted by the defective vaccine and they could be at risk in the future for birth defects?
  10. Most people who get the vaccine think it stays in your shoulder. This is not the case here. Shouldn’t people be informed that the mRNA vaccine instructs cells in your heart, lungs, brain, and ovaries to make a toxic spike protein?
  11. The spike protein was never supposed to be free in the bloodstream and cross over the blood brain barrier into the brain. Shouldn’t people be informed of that?
  12. Why aren’t you informing people of all the significant adverse events that have been reported? I’ve heard that the range of side effects “off the charts.”
  13. Shouldn’t you be telling people “The adverse events reported for these vaccines are more than the last 30 years of all 70 vaccines combined?”
  14. Shouldn’t you be letting teenage boys know that there is a 25x higher chance of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with the jab which can lead to heart failure and death?
Can you comment on how this makes sense?

FDA

  1. OK, so let me get this straight. You are removing NAC from the market because you think it is unsafe and, at the same time, you want to rush approval of a defective vaccine (that allows the spike protein to break free) to market that has already killed well over 5,000 people and probably a lot more. Are you sure you aren’t confusing the two? If not, explain.
  2. Exactly how many people have died as a result of the vaccine?
  3. If the excess deaths (above background rate) aren’t due to the vaccine, what is the most likely cause?
  4. What are the top 25 most serious side effects that have been reported from the vaccine?
  5. What’s the deal with Leronlimab? I heard Dr. Bruce Patterson wants it to treat long-haulers. Why are you denying him the ability to do this to help long-haulers with this potential miracle drug? What do you know that Bruce doesn’t?

Tony Fauci

  1. Why was Jeremy Farrar involved in the coverup as to the source of the virus?
  2. How come Kristian Andersen deleted all those tweets. Do you think he’s trying to hide something?
  3. What is in the redacted part of the FOIA request? It seems it was redacted improperly. So can you just let us know what it said? Why not release the full records to HSGAC committee so the Senators call all represent that nothing was amiss.
  4. Did you honestly think you would get away with the cover up?
  5. How stupid do you think people in Congress really are? They seem to be pretty brain dead to have not figured this out by now. How long do you think they will continue to be fooled? 
  6. Have you ever heard of the precautionary principle? You seem to be using it for mask wearing, but not for repurposed drugs? Why the double standard.
  7. Surely, your direct report, Cliff Lane, told you about the email I sent him. What did you tell him to do?
  8. If I paid you $100,000 for your time, would you debate me on a live zoom call? 
  9. Knowing what you know now about the free S1, why the heck aren’t you calling for the stoppage of the vaccine so that the defect can be fixed before we kill more people? You do understand this stuff, right?
  10. Do you know how many people have been severely disabled by this vaccine? How do you know the exact number? Would it surprise you it is 3%?
  11. When Fluvoxamine was confirmed in a second trial, with 100% effect size, and a p-value of 1e-14, which is 10 orders of magnitude more than the vaccine, why weren’t you jumping on a plane to confirm or invalidate the result. This could have saved millions of lives.
  12. If fluvoxamine doesn’t work, how can you explain the 1e-14 p-value for the symptom data on the 77 treated vs. 48 untreated in the Seftel study?
  13. How come in the NIH Guidelines you never have a calculation of the cost you are wrong? Do human lives not matter to you? Is it all about being right?
  14. How long do you really think you’ll last before they fire you?
  15. Dude, the furin cleavage site is the “smoking gun” fingerprints showing the virus came from the Wuhan Lab. Why shouldn’t we fire your ass for absolute incompetence for not seeing the connection? You were funding (without proper authorization) the research on coronaviruses at the Wuhan lab which used the very unusual furin cleavage site. Covid breaks out and it’s an exact match to the research you funded. And then you tell the American public that it was a natural occurrence? What the hell what were you thinking?!?!
  16. How come you didn’t make a stink that the WHO committee never looked into the man-made origin theory? Surely you knew the cleavage site means it is 99.99999% certain it is man-made. Not considering that is beyond incompetent. Why didn’t you call them out on this? Asleep at the wheel?
  17. Are you ever going to be honest with the American people and take the blame for creating this virus in the first place?
  18. Early treatment is the fast, safest, cheapest way to end the pandemic. You knew that. You also knew that viruses are always best treated early. Why didn’t you fund clinical trials of any the most promising outpatient drugs?www.c19early.com has a handy list. Is NIAID that inept? Did you fund studies of ANY of the drugs on that list?
  19. Do you think you should face criminal charges?
  20. How does it feel to have created the world’s first man-made pandemic?
  21. You know that they’ll eventually out you… it’s just a matter of time. Will you fess up? Or continue to act clueless?
  22. Who would you like to share your jail cell with?
  23. When Cliff Lane told you that fluvoxamine and ivermectin were confirmed in a Phase 3 trial, what did you instruct him to do? 
  24. Are you EVER going to talk about fluvoxamine and ivermectin? You must know they both work. Don’t you give a shit about loss of life?

Cliff Lane

  1. Do you know what the precautionary principle is? Why do you apply it for mask wearing but not repurposed drugs.
  2. You knew about the systematic review of ivermectin, so why did you ignore it?
  3. What would have been the harm to given ivermectin the FOR recommendation? Virtually all the endpoints of the studies were all positive.
  4. Clearly you don’t use all the available evidence. Why not?
  5. Since it can take a year to do a DB-RCT for drugs, how would we ever survive a real pandemic like in Contagion?
  6. How many years in jail do you think Fauci deserves?

Kristian Andersen

  1. So Mr. Andersen, perhaps you can explain what motivated you to delete all those tweets after Chris Martenson outed you?
  2. Can you elaborate on improperly redacted info?
  3. What was Jeremy Farrar’s role in this?
  4. Whose Idea was the cover up?
  5. Did you really think you’d get away with it?

Jeremy Farrar

  1. What were you doing on all those emails?
  2. Can you elaborate on improperly redacted info?
  3. Chris Martenson would love to have you on his show. What do you say?

YouTube

  1. So you guys know that expert opinion (like that from WHO and NIH) is at the bottom of the Evidence Based Medicine pyramid, right? So it seems you got it backward… you are supposed to NOT trust the WHO/NIH and you should trust the systematic reviews, right? So why is ivermectin banned.

Wikipedia

You wrote:

Pierre Kory is an American critical care physician who gained attention during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic for advocacy of unproven treatments of COVID-19

unproven? OK, so can you actually name a doc who has used it who agrees with that statement?

During the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation was widely spread claiming that ivermectin was beneficial for treating and preventing COVID-19

OK, so when this is all done, you are going to correct that to:

During the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation was widely spread by Wikipedia falsely claiming that ivermectin wasn’t beneficial for treating and preventing COVID-19. Wikipedia regrets contributing to the unnecessary death of hundreds of thousand of people.

GAVI

  1. I see you are running ads about “why ivermectin isn’t recommended.” Wow. Pushing misinformation. Have you guys ever talked to any actual doctor who has used ivermectin and said it was bad? Or is it all head-in-the-sand decision making?
  2. So when the NIH gives Ivemectin a FOR rating, will you run ads apologizing for spreading misinformation that costs thousands of live?
  3. How do you live with yourself?
  4. Would you debate me live on zoom on ivermectin? It seems like a really weak article. Did you ever like talk to any docs using it???? (i know… that wouldn’t be scientific would it?)
  5. Can show me a paper where ivermectin (when used early) failed to beat the competitor in every single category that was measured that had a statistically certain outcome that was NOT ambiguous, e.g., that showed it was harmful even within the 95% confidence intervals?
  6. If ivermectin doesn’t work, how come nobody from GAVI applied for my $2M challenge? Surely a little time invested (which you’d have to do anyway) and you pick up another $2M.

I’ll be adding more great conversation starters soon. Please suggest in the comments below any questions you’d like me to add!

Steve Kirsch is a high-tech serial entrepreneur based in Silicon Valley. He has been a medical philanthropist for more than 20 years. When the pandemic started, he left his day job at M10 and started the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund (CETF) which funds researchers from all over the world running outpatient clinical trials on repurposed drugs. CETF funded David Boulware’s trials on hydroxychloroquine and the Phase 2 and Phase 3 fluvoxamine trials, among many other research projects. He was recently featured on 60 Minutes which highlighted his work with fluvoxamine. He has no conflicts of interest; his objective is to help save lives. In 2003, Hillary Clinton presented him with a National Caring Award. He wrote this article to share some of what he has learned over the past year about the failure of evidence-based medicine during a pandemic in the hopes that people will realize their mistakes and change their views.

Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite, Inc. or the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund.

Responses

  1. After reading about bioaccumulation in the ovaries, one word springs to mind – diethylstilbestrol, where the intergenerational effects of the drug appeared in granddaughters.

  2. Future effects are more dangerous than current side effects. These anti-spike vaccines are likely to cause antibody-dependent enhancement (i.e., worsening) after the initial immunity wanes. Judging by what their execs say, Pfizer & Moderna intend to literally put its vaccine recipients on a needle.

    BTW, these vaccines lead to development of vaccine resistant variants of the coronavirus.

    https://defyccc.com/vaed/

  3. Steve, the breadth and depth of knowledge you have on C19 early treatments and vaccine-related harms is outstanding. The irony is, you are not a doctor but you outperform 99.9% of doctors globally.

    I posted the comment below on your “Should you get vaccinated?” article as well. Please have a look at it, I think it’s very important.

    There have been a series of aggressive attacks on prof. Byram Bridle’s interview in the last couple of days.

    The following two claims made by “fact-checkers” need to be addressed:

    Claim 1: The concentration of vaccine-induced spike protein released and circulating in the bloodstream is negligible and THEREFORE HARMLESS.

    Claim 2: The spike protein produced by the U.S. FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccines does not bind to ACE2 receptors and is THEREFORE HARMLESS.

    If these two arguments are proven false, safety of spike protein producing vaccines will be extremely hard to defend even for the best of their best “fact-checkers”.

    P.S. Here is one of the “fact-checking” articles:
    https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/byram-bridles-claim-that-covid-19-vaccines-are-toxic-fails-to-account-for-key-differences-between-the-spike-protein-produced-during-infection-and-vaccination-misrepresents-studies/

  4. The vaccine and s spike going to ovaries is big! Why have the women’s groups not protected their members?
    What about NOW?
    Forget lawsuits unless an argument by the ACLU on behalf of adolescents ?
    I consider trial site news the matt drudge for doctors.

  5. Steve,
    Thank you so much for your tireless work.

    I posted this comment on an older thread so it’s possible you didn’t see it.

    Might I make a suggestion (which maybe you have already considered)?

    You need to escalate this into legal action.
    Start filing lawsuits.
    Start filing wrongful death suits against the CDC, FDA, NIH.

    The members of these organizations will never voluntarily debate you. Instead of offering up prize money, you should find lawyers willing to participate at cost and you should use your financial wealth to fund the legal action required to compel these actors to testify under oath. Ralph Lorigo (lawyer who fought to get patients Ivermectin) could be part of the team.

    Hoping that these organizations will come around is not a strategy.

    1. I have been focused on this too.

      I want to take it to the PHAs and hold them culpable. But I suspect that will be a long drawn out process. Years and in the meantime, they hunker down and dig in to hold their current position.

      I am thinking another front might bring more relief to the people and that is to call out, and sue clinicians that are derelict in keeping up with this fast-breaking science and indifferent to the suffering. It might even rise to challenge their license to continue practicing medicine. There defense will be of course, FDA dose not approve, yada yada yada. So yes, FDA remains in the crosshairs too.

      The scale of this could be immense, especially since there are global consequences. But we are right and they are wrong.

      I will be beating the bushes, even more now.