OK guys, here is the transcript. Keep in mind: this transcript still needs a clean-up - I have sent SocioStudent a PM and asked her if she can fill in some of the terms that I didn't manage to catch/comprehend while listening to the interview.
So most likely I am going to make another post soon with the definitive transcript. So don't take this to the printer JUST YET...
James Corbett: This is James Corbett of the Corbett Report. It's currently the 19th of September 2009 in the United States, where I'm joined on the line by Sheree Vodak - a researcher and member of the Prisonplanet forum who has researched and written extensively on the H1N1 flu pandemic fearmongering and the swine flu vaccine that has been pushed in the wake of that hysteria. Sheree, thank you for joining me on the program today.
Sheree Vodak: Thanks James, it's good to be here.
JC: Well, Sheree, today I want to concentrate specifically on the swine flu shot and the science behind vaccine damage. Perhaps it would be beneficial to start with an overview of the H1N1 pandemic itself. And I know you've been doing quite a bit of research on this topic. So from your research, where can you say from where this swine flu virus came from?
SV: Well, in March, we were all listening to the Alex Jones Show, and it was March 5th when we heard that Baxter International had shipped live H5N1 avian influenza virus to multiple locations in Europe - where they were creating seasonal flu vaccines. And not only did they ship live H5N1, which is extremely deadly - about 60% of the people that get it die - it was not even radiated right. They told them not to irradiate it, which would keep it all live, all of it, and to mix it all together, and then get it in the seasonal influenza vaccine - which would have been a disaster, had it been shipped out. I don't know if they ever even said it wasn't shipped out. I'm assuming it wasn't - but we didn't know for a month what was going on with that. And then all of a sudden, in April, it shows up in Mexico - out of nowhere. And when it came to Texas in mid-April, I actually knew somebody in the town where it first broke out in Texas . And he was scared to death - we were all scared to death. But it blew over. The whole thing just blew over and everyone forget about it. But, of course, I didn't forget about it - I kept researching it and researching it.
And then I find out that the shots wouldn't even be necessary - because if it blows over, why are they expecting another wave of it in the fall? And that bothered me a bit - So I decided to look up the shots - and I found out that, of course, thimerasol has been an issue for some time now. In Hollywood, what's her name... [struggling for the name]
JC: [interjecting] Jenny McCarthy?
SV: Jenny McCarthy. She went forward about her son getting autism from the vaccines, and so, that's more in the media than the adjuvants has been. And I wanted to know why that was. So I looked it up a little bit more. And I found [a book] by Gary Matsumoto, called 'Vaccine A: the covert government experiment that's killing our soldiers' And I found out that they said that squalene was found as a contamination, but people were developing anti-squalene antibodies. And squalene is a precursor to cholesterol in your body - you're not supposed to have it in your bloodstream. There's a lot of people out there that say: "Oh well, squalene is a naturally-occurring substance. Why don't you want to be injected with it?". And I'm like: "Well, urine, is a naturally-occurring substance, too, but you don't want somebody injecting you with that." And, you know, then they kinda think: "Oh, that makes sense." You know, the point with squalene is - it activates an auto-immune response - in about, they say between 20 to 30 percent of people that take it. There is an auto-immune response, and it can cause T-mediated arthritis in rats that have been injected with. And it's not like one of those things that: "Oh, it's just bad for animals, it's not for humans". This is bad for humans and animals. The creator of it actually said that he didn't think it should actually be used in animals - because it was inhumane.
Because it causes arthritis - it causes auto-immune disorders. The girls that are taking Gardasil, which has aluminum hydroxide instead of squalene as an adjuvant - well, squalene is MF59, that is the tradename for it. When they take Gardasil, which has aluminum hydroxide instead, they still get blood cloths, heart problems, strokes, and, they're expecting fertility problems with it too later on - but, you know, it hasn't been long enough for people to really know what the long-term effects of aluminum hydroxide are.
But squalene is much, much worse. And they even admitted it. Overseas, when they put it in the flu shot, it killed several people in Poland, when they gave it to homeless people in a flu vaccine trial for H5N1 vaccine. And it's pretty likely that was the adjuvant doing that. And they've been trying to hide all this for a long time. And they've put it in the anthrax vaccine for our soldiers. And our soldiers have taken this - and they've gotten so sick from it - that they can't even work anymore. And they're young people - they're not old people that are gotten sick from this.
And, so it's very worrisome - that not only are parents not being told that it's even in the shots this Fall. But that, you know, they're [trying to] say: "Oh, there's no adjuvants in it. There's no mercury in it." And you're like: "Wait, mercury is not an adjuvant. Mercury is an additive: it's a preservative. I'm not talking about the preservative, I'm talking about the adjuvant." And they're like, and they don't even know what you're talking about. Most of the time. I called Wallgreens; they had no idea what I was talking about. They knew what thimerasol was - and they assured me that it only had trace amounts of mercury. And I'm like: "Well, what about the adjuvant?" And they're like: "What are you talking about?". They just have no idea. And so it's very scary to me that they're not even teaching pharmacy managers, or people that work as a pharmacy tech about this. Because I worked as a pharmacy tech at Wallgreens - and we were all taught everything [about] different medications and the side effects. And they're expecting them to inject these people at Wallgreens or Cosco, or wherever your pharmacy is. They're expecting people to inject you with this, but they don't even know what's in it.
And so I did a little bit more research - I even called on The Alex Jones Show back in - I believe it is July - about it, because I was just so concerned. But I still think it's in there - I think they're keeping it in there. The reason why I say that is because - in the medical journals, when you read about squalene and aluminum - they either have aluminum or squalene in it.
I'm sure of that, because when they talk about these adjuvants, they say it creates a robust immune response. And you only get that robust immune response with eggs - when you're eating eggs instead of animal tissue. You only get that robust immune response when you use an adjuvant. And so, I'm very concerned that people are just taking them at their word, and saying: "Oh well, it doesn't have mercury in it, it's OK". But, you know, these adjuvants can take a while to cause some pretty horrible side effects - it may take a few months to really start working on you in that way.
JC: Well, I think you make a very important point there - that the word has, by and large, gotten out about thimerasol and mercury in the vaccines, but the word has not gotten out about the squalene and the other adjuvants in the vaccines. So I think there is definitely a concerted effort to keep that information from the public. So, let's back up for a second - I think a lot of listeners don't even know what an adjuvant is, or how it operates. So, can you go over - what is an adjuvant, and what does it do?
SV: Well, back in the 1800s, when they actually tried to use breadcrumbs added to vaccines. And I know that sounds disgusting, but the reason why they did that - and it made a lot of people sick - it's because they have to have something keeping the actual vaccine in place for it to stimulate an immune response. If you don't have enough immune response, you're not going to be protected by the vaccine. And when you add an adjuvant, you can also use a lot less antigen. That's why they call it antigen-sparing adjuvants - because you don't have to use nearly as much, and say you're putting something relatively cheap in there, but getting more bang for your buck, as far as the pharmaceutical companies are concerned. They want to spend [inaudible] on creating these vaccines, And they really don't care about the outcome - as long as it gets sold and it gets injected into people, they're alright. The scary thing about the adjuvants is that - the military has done so much research on it. But yet, domestically, there's almost no research on it.
So if you're not military and if you're not an MD, it's nearly impossible to get any information about it. I mean, it's only because a medical terminology course that I even understood half of what they were saying.
But what they were saying was - we love using adjuvants, because we get to spare the anti-gen - they're not as expensive to create, and they can vaccinate more people. And they're really not thinking about the long-term effects that they admit happened in soldiers that were injected with it. So the adjuvants - they stimulate an immune response - but what's bad about them - they stimulate an auto-immune response in people that are susceptible to that kind of thing. Diabetes is an auto-immune disorder, so is lupus, so is muscular dystrophy. Those kind of things aren't fun to live with, I've heard. And also connected tissue disorders, fybro-myalga. Those are things that are - when people have them, and they're young, and they go to a doctor for that thing - they're usually seen as , or faking it. I don't know why - but doctors have a real hard time understanding that adjuvants can cause these kinds of reactions, and that, say, the young women that take Gardasil - when they go in, they've got macrophagic myofasciitis in their muscles from aluminum hydroxide building up in their muscles. The doctor says: "Oh, you're just faking it", you know. "Just get over it - you've got fybro-myalga", which is a wastebasket diagnosis for muscular skeletal pain that is unexplained.
And the reason why squalene - in my opinion - is so devious, is because it's a naturally occurring substance in your body - so, you come back with anti-squalene antibodies, it's basically going to be attacking yourself. It's gonna be attacking that pre-cholesterol in your blood, and that's really scary - whenever you consider all of these side-effects with Gardasil - it's going to be times ten with squalene. Because with squalene being an oil - it can penetrate your tissues easier - it can really get in there a lot more than aluminum. Aluminum kind of stays put - squalene just goes directly to your organs, and keeps attacking, keeps attacking. And it's really hard to detect an abnormality in something that's already occurring in your body.
JC: That's an interesting point - because you bring up the point that doctors are able to write off a lot of vaccine reactions - as: "Oh, you're just faking it." Because there isn't - to my understanding - there isn't a good system for reporting adverse effects from vaccines, but what can you tell us about the reporting for that?
SV: The reporting for squalene is - we don't know. We don't know what happens when you inject children with squalene. We have no idea. The reason why is because it's never been approved in this country - in the United States at least - for use in children. They don't know what happens, because they have only used it in soldiers. That's scary to me - because they have no idea what's going to happen. And they have no real good system for setting up reporting for adverse reactions. Not with a mass-vaccination campaign. When you have a mass-vaccination campaign - when you're injecting millions of people with something that hasn't been tested throughly - you're going to have a problem. Because already they're saying - 35.000 people in the United States die from the flu every year. They're saying that they're going to see many [not] just from the flu, but they're going to see that many from the shots. It's like - what?! They never really - they don't say why, but they say: "Oh well, we expect a lot of bad reactions in the vaccine, but that's totally normal". And you know, it's like - and they ship those bodybags to your country - didn't they? It was a few days ago.
JC: Yes, yes indeed. There was quite a scandal there.
SV: And they're telling people to prepare mass graves and morques and...? It's like - what in the world? If this is really as bad of a flu as that, I'll just stay home and shield myself. But no - they want you to take that shot. You know, and that's scary to me - that they're so pushy with this shot. They really, really want people to take this shot, no matter what. They said a few months ago - they wanted us to take the shot, because it was a horrible flu, and people were going to die in droves if we didn't. Now they're saying - oh, it's not going to be a bad flu at all, but you still need to take a shot. I'm like: "We don't want to take the shot. It's not that bad". And, you know, I think - the tears are going to have to be on their pillow, at night, at the big pharmaceutical companies, on this one. The tears are going to have to be on their pillow, because it's not gonna be on mine I'm not going to be injecting my child with that, and I wouldn't expect any parent - especially any parent who loves their child is going to think about what's being injected into them
And, you know, really think about it - just not let peer pressure or cognitive dissonance get in the way of that. Because they will do that. They're going to guilt-trip every mother into thinking that their child is going to die unless they get the vaccine. And really, it's quite the opposite. The vaccine's side-effects - we don't even know yet - we have no idea. And that's number one - the second thing is, you know, the VAERS system is inadequate as it is. Obviously, it's inadequate - or Gardasil and Cervarix wouldn't be approved in the United States if it was adequate. They had three times the reactions with Gardasil than the meningitis shot - I believe it was Minactra - for children [aged] 12 - all those girls who have to take it. The side effects were three times higher, and they still approved it. And even all these reactions, thousands and thousands of reactions have been recorded - they don't care. You know, the VAERS reporting system right now is pretty much obsolete. Because - even if you do report a reaction - all they're going to do is - try to make it mandatory for the state so that the vaccine damage fund will kick in, to pay off the millions of dollars in side effects and adverse reactions to the shot.
In other words, they're trying to make us pay for our own destruction, and I don't like it.
JC: Well, that's important to point out to people - that the vaccine manufacturers have complete indemnity against anything that might happen because of these shots.
SV: Yes, they've been granted immunity under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2006 (PREPA), and according to that - as long as it's a Level 6 declared pandemic by the WHO (World Health Organization), then the WHO automatically gets to take over all the pandemic stuff in the United States. Under that Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2006, it also says that they are given immunity - immunity from poor liability, and immunity from poor liability means there's no legal poor claim that can be pursued in court - whether state or federal. It includes all claims - except for willfulness misconduct. And I think that's the main thing that people should really be pushing in the media - of course they're not going to - but the alternative media really needs to push the fact that this is willful misconduct - it is willful misconduct to put something that you know is harmful in vaccines and then expect people to take them. That's wilful misconduct in my opinion. And wilful misconduct is not covered under the  liability.
That's one thing I disagree with - with a lot of my family on this. A lot of my family thinks that: "This has to be a mistake", or "They're trying to do a good thing" And I'm like - "What pandemic? The pandemic they created? You know - they create the pandemic - then they create the vaccines for it - which turns out to have worse side-effects than the pandemic. And this time, they're saying: "Oh, we don't want to have to pay for all of these horrible, horrible adverse reactions that we know are going to happen - so we go ahead and give ourselves  immunity, so that you can't sue us when we inject you with it. It's - it's awful - and it's horrible, actually. Because that's almost genocidal. Because later on they're going to say: "Oh well, the shot didn't do this to you. And if you keep saying: "The shots did this to you", we're going to take away your kids". Because that's what they're doing in the UK right now: a lady claims that a vaccine gave her son autism, and you know, the government says: "Nope, we're not going to pay for it. Oh, not only are we not going to pay for it, but we're going to take your kid away if you keep saying that". And, you know, that's genocide, you know - it's genocide to target people because they say something bad about your company. God, their child is taken away from them. That's the worst thing you could ever do to somebody. And now we have this swine flu shot - and people are wondering: "What's going to happen to my kid after he takes this?". Because this has stuff in it that they have never put in a shot before, in the United States, much less given it to children, so what's gonna happen with my child? And the say: "Oh, well, nothing is going to happen - don't worry - but if something does happen, you can't sue." What does that tell you? The fact that they're staying quiet about what is in this vaccine, but still soothing us with: "Oh, don't worry - we took all the mercury out, it's OK? Yeah, there's still trace amounts of it - don't worry, there's nothing else bad in it". And there's a lot of bad things into it - there's formaldehyde, there's - in other countries there is animal tissues. Fetal tissues, fetal
, they use dog kidney, monkey kidney, and with monkey kidney you get viruses -  viruses that are a whole different ballgame. Thank god they're not in our vaccines - but, you know, I just felt into the New World Order trap, didn't I?
The New World Order trap says: "Oh well, as long as it's not happening to me, it's OK". When really, it's not. It's not OK for it to happen to anybody. But we're such a selfish and self-centered society that we think: "As long as it's not happening to me, it's OK ". And it's not OK. It's not OK to let other people get thrown under the bus just so that you and your family can be comfortable or safe. It's a very self-centered society we live in - but I think people are starting to wake up to the vaccines. I'm hoping anyway - I hope people wake up to these vaccines and really think about what they're going to be doing in the Fall. I'm very concerned about the lack of information in the media versus the thousands of information that we have online about it. If you go to the forum and read about it, it will convince even the most staunch supporter of vaccines that maybe we need to look into this a little bit more. I heard that Leonard Horowitz actually filed something with the FBI regarding the pandemic and the H1N1 vaccine. And I'm hoping it goes through. I really hope that - even if the FBI - you know, just makes them at least be honest what is in this shot. If they would post the exact ingredients and what's in it, I would feel a lot more comfortable. Because at this point - they're not saying - they're not saying anything at all. So I have to assume the worst - but, I'm afraid that, once it rolls around, they're gonna see: "Oh it's not in there. Don't worry -we didn't put any extra stuff in it" .
And of course, it will have it in it, and it'll at least have mercury. But the adjuvants - the adjuvants are a whole other ballgame - a whole other ballgame. I mean - mercury I can understand - trace amounts maybe for as a preservative; but adjuvants are totally unnecessary, unless you're either trying to save money, or unless you're trying to hurt people. And even the saving thing - you know - the thing about making it mandatory is because they want you to take this shot - they want your kids to take this shot - no matter what - and if they can't do it legally, they're going to do it illegally. And when people realize that - just giving them money isn't going to help - they realize: "Oh, there's an ulterior motive here. They're not just trying to sell vaccines - they're not just trying to sell vaccines - there's something else here." There's an ulterior motive here that involves setting people up for - what we cal - soft-kill. Soft-kill weapons are: things like mercury, things like fluoride - they kill you slowly. They cause bone cancer, things like that, but it's a very slow process. The adjuvants in the vaccines are kind of like that - they cause a slow, inhumane and horrible death - and from something that cannot pinned down by a doctor exactly, especially if they give them  liability. If they give them immunity, then anything goes. And the fact that they called it a Level 6 pandemic - when really - we find out 2 days ago - it's only on Level 1. But they're calling it a Level 6, so that they can get this pandemic progress going - so that they can get this vaccination process going.
And, June 4th, when they declared Level 6, I called into Jason Bermas' show, and I said: "Hey, guess what? Bloomberg says they're going to declare Level 6 in ten days." And he's like: "No way? Because if we go Level 6, that's forced inoculations, that's quarantine". I'm like: "Well, that's what they're saying." And they're saying they had to fiddle with the definitions of a pandemic - just to get that. You know, and that right off the bat, raised a few red flags in my mind. that - you know, this doesn't seem to be a real - it's not even a real pandemic. They're just trying to make it look like a pandemic, so that they can get immunity for the shot and that they can force the shots onto people. And that's what it's looking like - I don't see any other way to look at it, unless people are dying in the streets and collapsing and blood coming out of their nose from it. I don't see that. I don't see that at all - I see posters all around at schools: "The law says - go get your flu shots". That's what I see. I see flu shots being sold to people that are scared, and people that are under the media's spell - that "Oh, everything will be just fine if I get this shot". And it's not like that at all. The media is run by people that - they don't care about you, they don't care about your family. And they want to sell their products. And their product is, unfortunately, very deadly. And instead of accepting that the public does not want this, they're trying to force it now - they're trying to coerce. They're trying to - "Oh well, we'll bribe the kids. Let's bribe them. Let's give them BestBuy gift cards - you know - if they come and test this vaccine out for us". That's sick - I would never have thought that they would bribe children in the United States to take a vaccine - to take a trial run of a vaccine that has never been tested in children for a $50 BestBuy giftcard. I never thought I'd see that - but I did. And it was really reminiscent of the OPV (oral polio vaccine) vaccine trials in Africa, when they told the children they were getting chocolates and bonbons if they came and took the vaccine. Kind of the same kinda deal there. But - the parents are only going to get this shot for their child if they really are frightened that this pandemic is going to kill their kid. And the media has just been harping on and on about: "Oh, go get the shot, go get the shot". And a lot of parents that I talk to - they don't see the need to get the shot, but they still believe the media. And it's going to be real interesting in a few months to see how the media is going to try to play it, because this is a very dangerous game that they are playing with our kids' lives.
The little mindgame they are playing with their parents. Because they even have people on Fox News taking inoculations on camera, like "Oh, oh, look, I'm taking my shot, ohh". But that's not even the H1N1 shot - that's the seasonal shot. But it's almost like Pavlovian conditioning - where you condition the public to accept vaccines in general, and then you move in with the real thing - the real shot, that actually has the adjuvants in it. You don't start with the adjuvants at first, you start with the seasonal flu shot. "Oh, it's harmless, we've had this for years, don't worry about it." And in a few months from now, they're going to say: "Oh, well you got the seasonal flu shot? Oh, well it's no different from this one. Don't worry". And, so I think that the media really needs to be called out on this - they really need to be called out on this. Because - these parents -the majority of parents that I've talked to have said: "I do not want to get the swine flu shot for my child. I might get the better one, but I don't want the swine flu shot - that has not been tested good enough". But the media keeps saying: "Oh don't worry, it's good, it's good". And it might not work now, it might not work tomorrow - but in two weeks from now, four weeks from now, when you have reports in from Turkey or Malaysia, saying: "Oh, 3000 people died from swine flu", when we have no idea of what they really died of, parents are going to freak out - just like they did in April and wanted to cart their kids down the store and get them lined up. And that's the scariest thing to me, that is the herd mentality of the public with things like this - they really do believe the media, when it comes to health, especially. Makes me reminisce on the FDA (Food And Drugs Administration), because the FDA used to actually do its job partly, at least, with regulating this kind of stuff. The FDA used to do its job, but now, it's not only not doing it - it's helping the perpetrators with this crime against humanity. They're helping them. And they're covering up for them. So the media is really the only lifeline that the public has in the event of a pandemic - the media is the only lifeline we have. And so, when they're telling us: "Go out and get your swine flu shot!", "Go out and get your swine flu shot!". And say, the Internet goes down - how many people do you think are going to be going out to get the swine flu shot? If the Internet was down and they were saying on the media: "Oh, thousands of people are dying - go get the swine flu shot". The majority of people, I think, would be scared enough to go get it - unless they knew that it had adjuvants in it, or that it had four times as much squalene as the Anthrax shot, that gave soldiers Gulf War Syndrome.
If they know it has four times as much squalene, they're not going to go down there and get it. And that's when the whole forced thing comes in. But I don't know if I want to get into that [laughs]. I don't think they have the personnel they would need to force-vaccinate people. I think the worst they can do really - well, they can take you to camps - but, I don't want to think about it [laughs]. I don't want to think about the prospect of having to go into an internment camp just because I don't want to take a shot. It seems very overkill to me - that they would go so far as to do that. I don't think they'll do it. I think that it's mainly going to be a media fearmongering campaign, and that a lot of people will fall for it. They will go out and get the shot, and that a lot of people will get sick from this shot. And I hope that's not going to happen - but I have a feeling that's going [to happen]. If that doesn't work - if the fearmongering doesn't work, to the point where they pull the vaccine entirely, that would be great. That would be wonderful. If people would wake up and realize what's in these shots, and get it off the market completely, and tell everybody: "Turn those [inaudible] back in, they're contaminated!", that would be fine, that would be fine with me. But the fact that they're still harping on about it, and still pushing, still pushing it, is pretty indicative of their level of commitment to this. So I don't really know what is going to happen - I really hope they realize the error of their ways, and stop this insane plan.
I just don't think that's going to happen - because they've already shown their level of commitment to it.
JC: Well, Sheeree, it's extremely important - I think - that the media tries to cover this in an objective way - which is obviously never going to happen. But the alternative media, too, also, I think, has to take care in the information that they're reporting. And I think there are, of course, a lot of quacks out there as well, that are trying to sell, you know, magic remedies for this type of thing. So how do you discriminate between the doctors that are bringing real research into this, and people who are just trying to sell scam products? And who are some of the sources that you trust for this type of information?
SV: Well, I trust sources that actually come from an actual MD, for one thing. When you look at research, always make sure that it's an MD that has been published before - that has the proper accreditations. Don't go for - if you feel like you're being sold something - don't run away, but really be wary. Personally, I don't buy health products online - I'm sticking with my [inaudible] and all that - at the local health foodstore. You know, I just - as far as the information that I get, I usually go to different medical journals. Of course, you know, that's considering I took a few classes on medical terminology. So I like Dr. Merkela - I look at the information. I try not to look at who's selling what - I look at what is it that they're trying to say about what they're against, and what they're for. What are they trying - but I mean, yeah, look at what they're selling also, but - I'm merely just focused on the information about the vaccines that that person has written. If they've written books about things, and that have actually been published, or medical journal articles on it - then yeah - it'd be good to listen to them. Also, like I said, Gary Matsumoto wrote a really good book - "Vaccine A". Edward Hooper wrote a good book, and he's just a journalist too. "The River: a journey to the source of HIV and AIDS" - and it's well cited, there's lots of good references in "The River: a journey to the source of HIV and AIDS". But don't fall for somebody that's telling you things that don't coincide with anything that you've heard in the alternative media. If you hear lots of weird or kooky ideas, like - for instance, I don't think that they're trying to kill 80% of us yet. Like - that kind of idea. I don't think - they're trying to commit genocide - it's the right title for this kind of thing. It's more of a - I try to go and listen to people that are either doctors, or they're really, really well accredited journalists. If you see lots of dollar signs right off the bat, "buy this now", "this is a cure-all for H1N1", run the other way - really. Because, there's a lot of strange ideas out there - but you know, investigate for yourself.
Look up the different ingredients - and you'll find a lot of strange articles written about it. But on the other side of the coin, you'll find a lot of things saying: "Oh, this is so good for you", when it's really not. There's a lot of disinfo on the Internet, there really is, and it's really difficult to weed the good out from the bad. But the good info is stuff that has been cited in multiple journals, like ideas - like squalene is bad for your body. That's kind of a grey area - because squalene is actually is good for you when you're swallowing it - like as a vitamine - it's good as and essential fatty acid, but if you inject it, it's totally different. So when people say: "Oh well, it's bad to inject" - that's actually been cited - but if people are saying: "All squalene is bad" - that's not true. So it's really difficult to separate disinfo from real info. Whenever you read something that a doctor has written about, say. Well, say that a doctor has written about the swine flu vaccine - if you can look down at the bottom and actually see real references to real medical reports with real relevance, and it's in multiple journals, and not just cited one or two times, then it's pretty safe to say: "Trust it". If it's an idea that's right out there, but kinda makes sense - I like to keep it in the back of my head, but not really focus on it. But if it is something like - whenever I was looking at the squalene - if it's something that you can find in multiple locations, and you can find out exactly which medical journal cite it and what it actually says about it, then I would say it's pretty safe to trust it. But there are also medical journals that basically work for the pharmaceutical companies, though. You have to be realcareful about those, too. Because they will try to say that, say: "A robust immune response is great". And so you really have to take into account - they're trying to sell something. They're trying to get something approved, and so of course they're going to be a little bit bogus. But if it's something that they have discovered in a lab - like if they inject mice with this - this happens - like the T-mediated 'arthritis' in rats after squalene injection - that's safe in my opinion. That's safe to trust, because it's a scientific theory in action. But something that hasn't been proven at all in actual demonstrable, reproducible results, I don't trust it.
JC: Well, Sheree, in closing, if people are interested in following your research and the work that you've been doing, what would be the best way for people to do that?
SV: Well, [you can find me on the Prisonplanet forums] under the name Sociostudent. Also, Sociostudent at Twitter, at MySpace, and at Facebook. And my e-mail is also [mailto: firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com
]. If anybody has any questions, or would like to be directed to any websites that could possibly be of service to them in their quest for the truth, that would be great. [inaudible] - I care about my family and I care about other people's kids. And I know how the media works - I know how they try to deceive, try to soft-peddle, and I don't want somebody's kid getting hurt because they listened to, or trusted the media on something so important as their child's health.
JC: Well, Sheree, let's end it there - it has been a fascinating conversation and there's much more to discuss. But I do encourage listeners to go to the Prisonplanet forum and start looking into this information for themselves. So, Sheree, once again thanks for taking the time to talk with us today.
SV: Thank you so much, James.