One Doctor's Discovery (Precipitin) About the COVID Vaccine That the Experts Are Hiding- Interview with Joseph Y. Lee, M.D.

Could our very understanding of COVID-19 and its vaccines be rooted in misconceptions? Dr. Joe Lee, a seasoned ophthalmologist with a striking perspective on lung infections and antibody theory, is interviewed by host James Egidio of the Medical Truth Podcast to dissect these critical questions and more. Dr. Lee tackles the complex interplay between antibodies, antigens, and the alarming potential for clotting that has accompanied the vaccine rollout. Dr. Lee, bolstered by his investigations and the backing of Dr. Peter MacDonald from Johns Hopkins, brings his challenging insights to the forefront, unafraid to confront resistance from powerful entities.

For Current and Previous Podcast Episodes, Show Notes, and Videos go to www.MedicalTruthPodcast.com

You can also find the Medical Truth Podcast on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Rumble, and Substack, as well as all the major podcast platforms such as Apple Podcast, Spotify, Google Podcast, Amazon Music, iHeart, and Podchaser

Episode Transcript

Intro (00:01):
Get ready to hear the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth about theUnited States healthcare system
With your host of the MedicalTruth Podcast, James Zegidio.

James Egidio (00:19):
Dr Lee, welcome to the Medical Truth Podcast.
How are you doing this evening?
Good.
Good, tell us a little bitabout who you are and what you
do, and your discovery.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (00:30):
So I'm at least a surgeon.
I went to medical school atUniversity of Michigan,
graduated in 1994, and then Ifinished my ophthalmology
residency, did my fellowship inrefractive surgery way back a
long time ago at USC-Dohini 1998.
And then, when COVID hit, I'vehad lung infections my whole

(00:52):
life, meaning everyone around me, anyone who gets sick, I get it
.
So I've had this problemforever.
Ever since I moved toCalifornia I would have a
chronic cough.
So I investigated this lungsituation more than most and
when January 2020, when COVIDhit, I was ready to analyze it

(01:14):
and I figured out almost Ifigured out a lot of stuff in
the very first month before thevaccine rollout, because that
was a year later.
So I figured out all this stuffand when I realized at the end
I thought I could have no effecton this, meaning it couldn't
provide any benefit, I told allmy smartest doctor friends, I
talked about it with all mydoctor friends and everyone was

(01:36):
just a little shocked and theydidn't have any answers for me.
And so I developed a little bitmore confidence in my little
theory.
And then my mentor, who's adirector of ophthalmology at
Johns Hopkins, dr PeterMacDonald.
He was a director of refractivesurgery at USC for a long time
and then he moved on and he haddone a lot of his training at
Johns Hopkins and he went backthere and he became the director

(01:58):
of ophthalmology at JohnsHopkins.
So May 2020, I reached out tohim and I explained a lot of my
findings and he was just inshock.
He said Joe, I think you'regoing to be going to Stockholm.
He said that I didn't evenreally it didn't register what
it meant.
But we've had discussions nowfor three years and he's always

(02:20):
incredibly amazed.
And in California they passedthis bill 2098, into law that
says misinformation can bepunished.
Misinformation by physicianscan be punished, and he worried
for me.
He says he thinks well, I thinkthey're going to put you in
prison before they ever give youa Nobel Prize.
He says if they do, I'll flyout tomorrow and I'll bail you

(02:41):
out because your daughter needsher dad.
That's how much he believed ineverything I had done, and yet
this campaign againstmisinformation prevented me from
getting this information out.
So it was a very interestingjourney.
After I talked to him, I had alot more confidence, because
he's been an academia for hiswhole life.

(03:01):
There's not an ophthalmologiston earth who doesn't know who he
is, but he's a very reputableperson.
He's been in academic researchforever.
He's been the chief editor ofOphthalmology Times, the most
read throwaway journal forophthalmologists in the whole
world, for at least 10 years.
So then I wrote up a nice onepage letter explaining what the

(03:24):
lung barrier issue, meaning ourlungs are an airspace inside our
body.
Our body is 70% water.
This blood lung barrier that Italk about, it's not a phrase I
invented, it's in the literature.
There are millions ofreferences to it.
My point is the antibody ismade on the outside of this
blood lung barrier.
This blood lung barrier canstop water molecules from

(03:46):
crossing through into our lungs.
Okay, this lung barrier canstop water molecules which are
18 dolens in size.
Ovid antibodies are 145,000dolens in size.
There isn't a pore large enoughin the cell membrane in this
blood lung barrier to let thisantibody through.

(04:08):
So that's a nightmare.
Big mistake.
This is drug development 101.
The drug actually has to be inthe space where it's supposed to
exert its benefit, and if thedrug, the molecule, has no
chance of getting into thatspace, it can't work.
When I reported this to Fauci, Ididn't just send it to Fauci, I
sent this to a lot of people.
I emailed it to dozens ofpeople.

(04:29):
They were all in on it.
I put everyone in on this email.
I sent this letter to everymember of Congress.
I gave my sister a $10,000budget to do all that.
I wrote the letter and she sentit out.
She had piles of letters thatshe sent out there.
I thought she was going to sendit certified.
She didn't, but regardless itwas sent to everybody and I got

(04:50):
responses from a lot of peopleand they directed it to Fauci
and then he sent it to Dr EmilyErbelding to respond.
She responded to that.
She's the director ofinfectious disease at the NIH
and when my mentor saw herresponse, it was not very good.
She was just trying tobasically say look, our clinical
data looks great.
We see that you have concernsand we respect that, but our

(05:10):
clinical data looks great.
Now my mentor he goes.
Oh, so they're still notopen-minded.
All they would have had to dois throw a few million dollars
at it.
Have some grad students, phdpostdocs look into this issue,
because it's a real issue.
We're talking about a vaccinethat's going to be pushed out to
billions of people and theycan't even show how it enters

(05:32):
along where it's supposed tohave its effect.
It's like a nightmare issue.
When I got the response fromEmily Erbelding, it only gave me
more confidence because she'sat the top of her game.
This is the person who'ssupposed to know this.
She's a director of infectiousdisease at the NIH.
She gives out millions andmillions, maybe billions of

(05:52):
dollars worth of grads a year.
And she quoted one person toexplain how the antibody crosses
.
She quoted this article byWagner I don't remember his
first name.
1985 or 1986 was the articlethat's a 35-year-old article to
explain how the antibody crossesthe blood-lung barrier.
So I looked at everything hewrote and there was one paper

(06:15):
where he explained how thisantibody crosses and he said it
was transjudation.
And that's what Dr EmilyErbelding said it's
transjudation.
One sentence to justifyvaccinating 10 billion people.
And that one sentence was itcrosses by transjudation.
And Wagner, who she quoted,describes transjudation as
simple diffusion.

(06:36):
And he describes in hisarticles that transjudation, the
simple diffusion molecular sizeis critical.
And he even explains that a100,000-dollon molecule would
cross the lung barrier less than1% of the time.
Now, that was his guess.
He didn't even do that study.
He was extrapolating becauseit's not a straight line, the

(07:00):
bigger the molecule.
At some point it drops off andit doesn't cross.
So he was assuming it was astraight line.
It could have been 0% or $1,000.
No one knows.
At any rate, it's a very smallamount.
It's not just that.
Look at the situation in 2020.
Did anyone have a COVID-19antibody?
When somebody had their firstCOVID-19 experience like Tom
Hanks got COVID-19, did he havea COVID-19 antibody in his blood

(07:23):
?
He did not.
Did he have a vaccine?
It didn't exist, so he had noCOVID antibody.
So if he has no COVID antibody,then how could it have blocked
the virus?
The COVID antibody wasn'trelated.
It was in no way related to howwe healed.
It had nothing to do with it.
It wasn't there when it finallyarrived late.
It doesn't have a path to theblood lung barrier to get into

(07:46):
our lung.
Those are two huge points.
They can never get around.
How do they try thesevaccinologists try.
They're not speaking science,though, because I tell people in
the year 2020, think back.
Did anyone have a COVID vaccine?
No, if you had COVID-19 for thefirst time, you had no natural

(08:07):
immunity either.
It takes at least a few weeksfor a significant amount of
antibodies to form, but mostpeople got better in a week.
I'm a surgeon.
If I have an assistant whodoesn't know what I'm doing, who
doesn't know what my goals areand they're brand new the
assistant is not really helpingme.
They're not facilitating mywork, they're just in the way
they're actually hindering me.

(08:28):
I have an assistant who'sworked with me for thousands of
cases.
They're very useful.
They can anticipate my nextmove, they can hand me the
instruments when I need it andthey make my work easier.
But that's only if they'resupporting what I'm doing.
So the human body is somethingincredible.
20 million people got COVID inthe year 2020.

(08:49):
One million people died, but 19million people survived, and
under the age of 45, the 10million under 45, 99% survived.
Yes, we respect the people whodied, but look at the people who
lived.
How did the human body healthese people?
Not one scientist on earth hasa mechanism to show how we

(09:09):
actually healed from COVID.
Not one person, not onescientist on earth says how we
heal from COVID Basically aCOVID antibody that helped
anyone and no one explains howthe human body actually helped
us recover from COVID.
And if you don't know what thehuman body did, you're in no
position to pretend that you'rehelping the human body.

(09:30):
You're like that brand newassistant who thinks they know
everything and just keepshanding me a scalpel and I say,
no, I didn't ask for that, Ididn't know that.
But you keep adding it to me.
The human body did not use aCOVID antibody to heal us in the
year 2020.
Not a single person healed froma COVID antibody.
The human body didn't use itand we got better.

(09:51):
If you don't know what thehuman body did, but you think
you're helping, how are you sosure?
Now I found out exactly whatthe human body does, so it's not
difficult.
You just have to pretend thisis a war.
The virus comes in.
You have to admit that when thevirus infects a lung cell

(10:12):
inside our lung cell, is thatviral RNA?
Is that COVID viral RNA?
Is that the enemy?
Yes, does anyone know how itwas destroyed?
I say it's the RNA's enzymesthat destroyed it.
No one else is saying that.
I am saying it's the RNA'senzymes that's destroyed it.
Now there is some literature tosupport that.

(10:34):
In the innate immune systemthey discuss how our races may
help.
They don't realize that it'sthe main thing that did it.
And if you really understand,see this RNA's enzyme.
It's been extremely wellstudied.
It's the most studied moleculein all of biological chemistry.

(10:55):
We know more about this thanany other biological molecule in
all of medicine.
So there are thousands of peoplethat have worked on this.
It was under their nose.
This was the enzyme thatdestroyed the viral RNA inside
our lung cells.
There's nothing else thatanyone even there is, not, even

(11:16):
in competing hypotheses.
No one even has one.
So my contention it was theRNA's enzyme that all the work,
the COVID antibody, thatmolecule got all the credit and
it wasn't even present in theyear 2020.
And that when it finallyarrived to the game late, it
can't even get through the bloodlung barrier.
It's like the stupidest thingon earth.

(11:37):
If I talk to a scientist likeFauci and we're having this
discussion live, he would haveno answer and he would turn red
in the face and everyone wouldrealize he doesn't know what
he's talking about, because I'mjust expressing pure science.
You have to have the antibodypresent if you're going to think

(11:58):
that it's what saved humanity.

James Egidio (12:01):
Okay, so the answer is Are you saying that
the mRNA was the antibody orimmune response to COVID?
Is that what you're saying?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (12:13):
I am saying it's not the mRNA, it's the
ribonuclease enzyme and we callit the RNA enzyme.
I am saying that is whatdestroyed the COVID virus inside
our lung cells.

James Egidio (12:27):
So that was an immune response, correct?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (12:31):
An immune response is a big word, right?
I don't like using the wordimmune response and our immune
system did it.
I don't like using that becausethe immunologists think
everything is the immuneresponse.
In science it's about detailand they just say it's the
immune system that did it.
Yeah, but we got to get details.
We have to have details.
If you don't have the details,then you don't really know,

(12:53):
you're just saying, of course,if somebody healed, you're
saying you can say the immuneresponse did it.
How is that different fromsaying the body naturally healed
itself?
How is that different fromsaying God did it?
Yeah?

James Egidio (13:05):
because they never even mentioned the immunity
during COVID in 19, actually in20.
That was never even brought up.
When that was brought up, itwas poo pooed.
They had to bury that.
When they start talking aboutimmunity and the immune response
and your immune system, thatwas a total cover-up back in

(13:26):
2020, from what I remember,because we were still actively
involved in the medical practiceas well.
I remember every detail aboutit.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (13:37):
Yeah, what I'm saying is they didn't know
molecule destroyed the COVIDviral RNA inside our lung cells.
If you don't know how the humanbody did that but you want to
keep pretending that you'rehelping, you're not really
helping.
The chance of you being able tohelp when you don't I'm the
certain.

(13:57):
If the assistant doesn't knowwhat I'm doing, she might
accidentally help, sometimes byhanding me a scalpel right when
I need it.
The chance of that happeningare 100 million.
If you think you're helping thehuman body but you don't know
what it did, you're not in aposition to say you helped.

James Egidio (14:12):
We went through a COVID outbreak in 2003 and 2004.
I remember when we had ourmedical house called Practice
and those two flu seasons andthose two fall years was COVID.
It was a COVID virus at thoseparticular years.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (14:28):
RNA viruses are very common.

James Egidio (14:32):
Yeah, covid's been around since 1963.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (14:36):
Before that we just didn't know that but it
didn't just evolve in a year.
No, of course not.
It's been around millions ofyears.
The RNA world came before theDNA world, so RNA viruses have
been around forever.
Sure, it's not a new thing, butwhat I am saying is everyone
wants to say your antibodiesfrom having a previous infection

(14:58):
is what helped you.
No, because there was always afirst time, and the first time
you got infected with a virus,you had no antibodies.
And how come you still healed?
See, this is Tom Hanks 70 yearsof no training for any kind of
COVID-19 virus, and he getsCOVID in 2020 and he takes care

(15:19):
of it in 10 days.
And he had no training of anysort, not with a natural
infection, not with a viralvaccine.
He had no training and yet heovercame it in 10 days.
Did he need training?
As the point, you've got asix-month-old baby, never had a
viral illness, gets COVID andtakes care of it in seven days,

(15:41):
wiped out 10 billion virusesfrom his body.
My point is they keep thinkingyou need training.
I say you don't need training.
I say this six-month-old infantits lung cells are the latest
version in a billion years ofevolution.
It didn't have to face theenemy to know how to deal with

(16:02):
it.
It wasn't by chance that oh,let me try this, let me, try
that.
And it got it right.
It knew exactly what to do andit did it.
Because if you want to say thisinfant got it right by chance,
that means half the time it'sgoing to get wrong.
That means half the infectedcells have to die.
That didn't happen.
The infant took care of it veryeasily.

(16:24):
Half the lung cells, okay.
If it's by chance that it knewwhat to do and it got wrong half
the time, then the times thelung cells didn't know what to
do, it would have died and thenthe alveolus would have been
full of fluid.
There's 300 million alveoli andyou're saying half of them got
filled up with water, salineblood and the baby's still
survived.
No, the baby would have beenICU for 10 years.

James Egidio (16:49):
Okay, we're into 2020, right, and you stumble
upon this theory that you'retalking about, right In what was
it June?
You're saying maybe.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (17:00):
I reported to Falksian in September of 2020.

James Egidio (17:02):
Oh, September of 2020.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (17:04):
Yeah, I had the emails to do that and I had
the replies.

James Egidio (17:06):
yeah, so you get stonewalled by all these
so-called experts that arenationally being publicized as
being experts in medicine, ofcourse, and so I guess you start
to more concerned about thevaccine, right?
Because I know they started toroll out and Trump, of course,
was with Operation Warp Speedand emergency use authorization

(17:30):
of this, he couldn't wait to getit rolled out.
And then what do you discoverabout the vaccine?
I think that's why you reallystumble upon some major stuff,
right?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (17:40):
Okay, basically, the COVID antibody
not having a path into the lung.
That's huge information.
That should have just stoppedthought sheet in its tracks.
Sure Should have stopped thevaccine that didn't work.
I find the cure for COVIDbecause what I discovered was,
like I said, is the RNAs enzymethat destroyed the viral RNA.

(18:00):
And when I was convinced ofthat, I looked at it very
heavily and I realized this is ascience that I found.
When you're fasting, reactiveoxygen species and your cells go
up.
It's like a stove, wood stove.
If you have less fuel, you havemore oxygen.
If you have more fuel, you haveless oxygen inside that wood

(18:22):
stove, inside our cells.
If you have less glucose, youhave more free reactive oxygen
species and those oxidized.
The ribonuclease inhibitorbecause ribonuclease is an
amazingly strong molecule.
It'll zip through RNA, evenours, so it's inhibited all the
time.
It's like a pit bull and it'son a leash.

James Egidio (18:43):
Hence, that's the reason why people who are
morbidly obese have a hardertime to get through COVID than
people who are, let's say,thinner and more fit, correct?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (18:53):
Exactly, yeah , okay, because they couldn't
stop eating.
Look at every human infant inthe world that gets sick.
They get fussy and they don'teat.
Because evolution already foundthis answer For me, it was like
, okay, I know, it's RNAs.

James Egidio (19:08):
How did?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (19:08):
I connect it to fasting.
I connected to fasting becauseall I did, I reverse, engineered
what evolution already found.

James Egidio (19:16):
Right, I know exactly where this is going.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (19:19):
Yeah, it's so useful to trust what evolution
did to think that way.

James Egidio (19:25):
Aerobic versus non-aerobic oxidation is what
this is leading to.
Correct Say it again.
Aerobic versus anaerobicoxidation.
Is what this to the cells andin the production of the
ribonucleic acid?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (19:39):
Okay.
So what happens is this thisRNAs enzyme is a pit bull.
It's on a leash.
It has an inhibitor.
That's the leash that keeps itfrom doing anything.
That inhibitor, when it'soxidized, it comes off.
That's not my science.
Again, remember, the RNAsenzyme is the most studied
molecule in biological chemistryand what I'm telling you right

(19:59):
now it's established science.
They know that when theinhibitor is oxidized, it
releases this ribonucleaseenzyme.
It's in hundreds of papers andthey've been fastened with this
enzyme forever and they'vestudied it really well.
And that ribonuclease and itsinhibitor, the bonding between
it, is the strongest knownbonding that's not covalently

(20:19):
linked between two molecules inour body.
So it's incredibly strong.
Because it has to be, becauseit's RNAs can zip through a cell
, destroy all the RNA and youcan't grow.
And why is it there then?
It is there because sometimesit has to be used right away.
We don't have time to have themRNA for ribonucleic acid

(20:42):
enzymes and have the proteinmade and then have it work.
We need it when we need it, weneed it right away.
We can't wait two days.
When we need it, we need itright away.
That's why it's there andthat's why there's an inhibitor
on it.
We didn't evolve this inhibitorbecause we don't need it.
We need it but we don't alwayswant it.
But when we want it and we wantit right away, because when the

(21:05):
virus RNA is there, it canbecome 50,000 copies in a day.
So you need it right away.
So we have it in there, it'savailable for us.
This cell, interesting is out ofthe hundreds of thousands of
proteins we have in our body.
Inside the cell there arehundreds of thousands of
different proteins.
That means each protein shouldhave 0.0001% of the total

(21:29):
proteins inside the cell becausethere's so many different kinds
of proteins.
The ribonuclease inhibitormakes up 1% of all the proteins
inside our cell cytoplasm.
It is that important because wedon't want the ribonuclease.
It's a pit bull.
We don't want it to just runaround anytime it wants.
We want to inhibit itconstantly.

(21:51):
But when we want it to work, weneed it to work and this is why
this is the incredible part ofthis ribonuclease enzyme.
Let's say, 100,000 years ago,james, you have only 500
calories the whole day.
You don't get a lot of food.
I only get 500.
There's not a lot of foodaround.
What happens is if you use halfyour calories to grow your
cells, then you only have 250calories to move.

(22:13):
If I don't grow my cells at alland I use all 500 calories only
to move, I can cover twice thedistance as you and I'm going to
find the food, and so then Iwill survive and you won't.
Sorry, james.
So the point being, evolutionalready found a way for us to

(22:34):
stop our cell growth when wedon't have a lot of food, and
every DNA cell on earth doesthis.
Because imagine if a cell keepstrying to grow and waste
resources when there's no foodaround, it's going to kill
itself.
Whereas we can go for fourweeks, we can easily go for a

(22:55):
month without food and not die,because our ribonuclease enzymes
start being activated.
We destroy our human RNA.
Without RNA, you can't makeprotein.
Without protein, without moreprotein, you can't divide a cell
.
With the two.
70% of a dry weight of a cellis protein.
If you have no RNA, you're notmaking more protein.

Intro (23:15):
If you're not making more protein, you're not dividing
that cell and making it two, andyou're not growing.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (23:19):
So we have perfect ways to control our cell
growth.
Every DNA cell on earth doesthis, and the master.
There's many ways, but themaster way to stop cell growth
is to destroy the RNA.
That's the master way.
So there's a master off switch.

James Egidio (23:36):
What did you discover with the vaccine?
Because I know we have somevisuals here shows listeners and
viewers for the Medical Truthpodcast.
Let's go through and walkthrough several of these.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (23:46):
So basically, yeah, this is fat off and I'll
put up a diagram on mywhiteboard.

James Egidio (23:57):
Okay.
Here's the first oneIllustrated on the whiteboard
then.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (24:02):
So let's say you had a vaccine.
Okay, so you have a vaccine.
Then you have a lot ofantibodies to the spike antigen.
You have antibodies, the wholething, everywhere.
Now you have a lot ofantibodies in your blood and too
much later you get a booster.
So remember, you haveantibodies in your blood.
They're going to give you theirMornay that makes spike.
Now you're going to have spikeantigen in the blood.

(24:24):
So I only have two components Iuse Antibodies and the spike
antigen.
Here's the first antibody,right.
Then it's going to stick to thebottom of the spike.
But now the top of the spike isexposed.
Why can't an antibody to thetop stick?
It can.
Now it sticks there.
Now it has another arm.
So why can't another spikestick to the other arm?

(24:47):
It can.
Now the bottom of the spike isexposed.
So then why can't that stick?
And then why can't the otherarm bind another bottom spike,
sure, and then why can't that?

James Egidio (24:57):
You see how it won't stop growing.
Sure, it's a cascading effect.
Is what you're talking about,exactly.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (25:04):
And when I wrote the string theory up I
didn't know they had alreadydone these experiments, so this
is not new stuff.
This is called a precipiton.
You take a beaker of saline,you add polyclonal antibodies,
you add its antigen and it'llstick.

James Egidio (25:23):
Which we're looking at right here, correct?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (25:25):
Yes, there's so many versions of this.
They're never going to be ableto scrub the internet free of
this, because you're going tofind tens of millions of results
when you Google it.
Just Google precipiton andantibodies and it's everywhere.

James Egidio (25:42):
Is this what's causing a cytokine and storm
with people, and this is whyyou're getting a lot of people
who've been boosted landing inhospitals with COVID-type
symptoms.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (25:53):
I think this is a reason for clots.
For clots, yes, because aprecipiton according to their
literature, a precipiton isvisible.
Okay, so you put antibodies andantigen together and they'll
clot, they will coagulate,they'll stick together.
You'll see if it's visible.
It's considered 0.1 micrometersor 100,000 nanometers, as small

(26:17):
as you get with it, and thatyou can still see.
So, 100,000 nanometer clump ofantibodies and antigen.
100,000 nanometers the antibodyis 10 nanometers long, so can
you imagine a clump of 100,000?
How many antibodies andantigens are stuck in there?

James Egidio (26:35):
I forget it.
It's a matrix, it forms amatrix.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (26:38):
Yeah, it's this huge mesh work and
capillaries are only 10,000nanometers in diameter.
A barely visible precipiton is100,000 nanometers.

James Egidio (26:51):
And that's what we're looking at there in this
illustration, correct?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (26:55):
Yeah, this is slightly different.
I don't think it has to stickto the side wall or anything, it
just is so large it's going to.
It's like hair at the bottom ofyour bathroom bathtub drain.
It's going to eventually stopwater flow.
Sure, and in blood you haveplatelets that get caught in
this mesh work of antibodies andantigen.

(27:15):
The platelets are activated byantibodies and then, when
platelets are activated, theyactivate, initiate coagulation,
fibrinogen to fibrin.
You've got this nitus, thisbarely visible clump of
antibodies and antigen that theycall precipitons.
You put that in blood,platelets stick.
The whole cascade starts.

(27:36):
Now you have a big clot and noone else has a mechanism this
type to explain only going fromthe vaccine to a clot.
I don't use any weirdpreservative, I don't use any
weird contamination, I don't usemercury, I just use their
antigen.
And the vaccinologists cannotrefute that an antigen exists in

(27:59):
their vaccine.
And then my next point is Ionly use their best science
after that that an antibody andits antigen will stick.
And when I first put thisstring theory up on Twitter like
four months ago, I didn't evenknow about precipitons.
And College NICKEY found thatfor me.
It shows the exact diagram thatI showed and it's in all their

(28:23):
textbooks.
I don't even have to prove thatthis is happening.
They already know, right?
They just didn't apply it totheir vaccines.
They knew it about antibodies.
They just didn't know.
If an antibody and antigen willbind in a big graph saline, why
wouldn't it stick in a child'sblood at the vaccine they have?

(28:45):
Now you have antibodies.
Three months later, when theygive the antigen again, if the
antigen molecule is small enoughand almost half of them are
then it's going to create thescenario.
And I don't have to prove it.
I already did it.
They proved it for me in theirliterature.
I just found what they alreadydid and I applied it to their

(29:07):
vaccines.
So you ask a pediatrician youjust gave a DPT vaccine, the
child has antibodies.
Three months later you give thebooster, you're adding the
antigen.
What did you think was going tohappen when you put antibodies
in this antigen in the sameblood?
What were you thinking?

(29:27):
This is the medical equivalentto saying oh the apparatus, no
clothes on.
There is nothing in medicinethat is this straightforward and
this simple and this huge of amistake.
That was under their very nosesfor 200 years and they didn't
see it.

James Egidio (29:44):
Don't you think they know that the researchers I
don't need to get into theirbrain.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (29:49):
I don't need to get into their brain because
the only thing I have to show isit's wrong, whether they did
the wrongness out of stupidityor evilness, it's not really.
The moment I send thisinformation to them, it's clear
that it's evil.
But before I send it to them,were they just stupid?
I don't know and I don't reallycare because I'm never going to

(30:09):
be able to prove it one way orthe other.
But I can prove.
Once I send them theinformation and they keep
vaccinating, I can prove thatthey're evil.
Then, which they are doing.
They can't deny it.
Now, if it's science, that meansI say your antibody and your
antigen are sticking inprecipitants, just like in your
textbooks, and you have to showme where the string mechanism is
wrong.

(30:29):
Because if you can't show mewhere it's wrong, that means
it's correct.
And what the string mechanismsays is this antibody from your
first vaccine.
The chances of it sticking to avirus in your blood is not even
there one in a million, I'llgive you even one in 10,000.
So the chance of this antibodyfrom your first vaccine sticking

(30:49):
to the antigen from your secondvaccine is almost guaranteed.
So this precipitant is the maineffect of your vaccine and
booster, and the main effectleads to clots.
Now I give you this information, now you know it.
You can't refute it Now.
If you keep pushing it or youdon't call for a press
conference to stop it now,you're evil.

James Egidio (31:11):
Which they're not doing.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (31:13):
Exactly.

James Egidio (31:14):
Right.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (31:15):
And see it extends past the vaccinologists,
all the anti-vax leaders.
Why aren't they promoting this?
Jay Cooley did the firstpodcast with me on this Sure and
it got 260,000 views already.
Now why does he?
He was pushed by my followers.
He was pushed.
Why aren't you reposting this?

(31:36):
Why aren't you promoting thisand his one?
He had a lame post.
He says it's overly simplistic.

James Egidio (31:44):
It is, but despite it being overly simplistic, you
have to keep it simple, right.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (31:50):
The question is it just simple or is it
fundamental?
Because now this affects notjust the COVID vaccine.
This issue affects every futuremRNA vaccine Sure, Every one of
them and half the currentchildhood vaccines.
So is it a simple issue or isit a fundamental issue that they
missed?
Fundamental is a lot strongerthan simple.
Simplistic is actually stupid.

(32:11):
Yeah, I don't believe they'restupid.

James Egidio (32:15):
I don't believe they're stupid.
I think this is all doneintentionally.
Have you read a package inserton the ingredients in this stuff
at all?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (32:23):
Oh I know, it's crazy.

James Egidio (32:25):
It's insane.
I interviewed Dr Maria Mehlchaand she was talking about these
vaccines being formulated withhydrogels and graphene oxide,
and I just truly believe thatthere's more to it than just
this vaccine program for betterhealth.
I think we're looking at tyingin biometrics and technology

(32:49):
with what they're injecting inus or not in me, but in people
who were takers of this vaccine.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (32:57):
Yeah, I don't like.
The conspiracy theories aregreat.

James Egidio (33:01):
It's not a conspiracy theory.
There's a lot of research onthis stuff.
Bill Gates talked about theBill and Melinda Gates talked
about quantum tattoos andquantum for vaccination records
underneath the skin.
So this stuff is not conspiracy.
It's been researched for manyyears.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (33:17):
Yeah, I don't see them ever being able to
control a person very easily byimplanting somebody in a person.

James Egidio (33:24):
You don't think so .
Biohacking you don't think it'spossible.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (33:28):
I think it's a lot more difficult than people
say.
Just because you can show howsomething occurs, the
probability of it happening isgoing to be very different.

James Egidio (33:37):
Yeah, I truly believe that they're tying in
technology with biology forbiometrics.
I truly believe that, and thisis what the push is, from what I
can see, if it's about controlover people.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (33:52):
I do think the vaccine passports was a way
for them to get control overpeople.
Yeah, and I do think that theywant to control the people.
I do think so, but is it easyto control somebody and make
them a zombie and do what youwant, just based on some kind of
injection into their body?
I don't think so.

James Egidio (34:09):
I think it goes beyond just injecting into
people.
They're already doing it withsatellites, they're already
doing it with quantum computing,we're already into the six and
seven generation.
Basically, the use of thesecell phones.
We're already into that,they're already into that,
they're already using that.
It's in the one terahertzfrequency band frequency already

(34:30):
.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (34:33):
Yeah, I stick to just science.
That I am absolutely certainabout yeah, but I'm talking.

James Egidio (34:37):
They're looking to mesh the biology of the human
being with, and they've made itclear.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (34:44):
They've made it clear the United Nations and
the World Health Organizationand the IEEE has made it clear
that they're looking to tie usin with Technology yeah, and I
think the easiest way for themto tie us in like that, the
easiest way is, like you said,the phone right, sure, they can

(35:04):
track what we do and where weare at all times, right, sure.
And then the Evie, becauseright office, go anywhere we
want to sure, so sure with.
If they control when we go andwhat we talk to other people
about and what we say and how,if they can limit, if they can
control us with the phone andthe electric vehicle, they can

(35:26):
pretty much stop us Right so, toactually get into us and try to
Program us to do a certainthing.
I don't know about all that,but I know, that but.
I know it's fine now.
Go ahead.
I know in China they controltheir people because if you
don't have the app, then youcan't do anything Right.
You can't do banking, you can'tcommunicate with your friends,

(35:47):
everything is they trackeverything via the app.
So I don't agree with givingbig companies that much power
over what you do.
Sure, because I don't.
They ever think it's going tobe good, because One thing is
consistent powerful leadersdon't care about us, they carry
themselves.

(36:08):
Right, and how much they want tokill us all off on them, I
don't know, but I know thatpowerful leaders are greedy and
they want to make a lot of moneyoff the backs of their people.
That's what China did.
I know everything they did wasfor that right, sure, and their
CCP members are wealthy andtheir average person is dirt
poor.
And when Trump went to war thattrade war with China I Think

(36:32):
that was his greatest move.

James Egidio (36:36):
Sure, because sure , the very same side effects
that you're talking about Withthese clots and what I've been
doing, a little reading aboutgraphene oxide, which is being
used in medical technology,which is and I've done just
scratching the surface right now, has points in that direction,

(36:57):
with all of the Signs andsymptoms that people are
receiving from these shots.
Okay, so it's hard for me notto believe that they're not tie,
trying to tie in technologywith these vaccines and with
quantum tattoos and With centralbank, digital currency and

(37:17):
payless, because you have toremember, think about all the
buzzwords that were used Back in2020 with the great reset and
Changing things and changing theway we're gonna be living in
the future up until up toStarting in 2030 really is where
they want to usher in.
All this technology isContactless payment was one of

(37:40):
them, about the scare withhandling money and picking up
Viruses and all this, and whenwe've been handling money for
how many years?
Decades, right, but all of asudden out's becoming an issue
With getting infected with avirus.
So now we have to usecontactless payment, central
bank, digital currency.

(38:01):
How do you do that?
You and chip and plan a chip.
There's two publicly tradedcompanies that are involved with
the RF chip.
We've been chipping animals,our pets, for years.
They want to chip children,bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation, like I said again,with the quantum dot tattoos for
vaccine records for children.

(38:22):
Dr McHugh out of RiceUniversity in Texas has been
doing this research for years.
He published a paper in 2019,december of 2019, and again, lo
and behold, it was all aboutvaccine passports.
World Health Organization talksabout that a lot and, of course
, as our friend James Riga ski,who's on the leading Edge of

(38:47):
providing information about theWorld Health Organization, who
I've interviewed several times,talks about the changes that are
going to take place.
So this, I believe, is all tiedinto the technology, this whole
vaccine thing.
This is just one entry.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (39:03):
I just have a very simple view.
I know that the moment Iinformed Fauci the Antibiotic
can't enter the lung and yet hepersisted and pursued it, even
in spite of my 73 pages.
I sent them, outlining everyaspect of this issue and any
scientist who reason.
Now there is no rationalresponse to me giving him this
information but to stop it.
There is sure the rationalresponse because the animal has

(39:25):
to get into the one.
That was our hypothesis and Iblowed out of water.
Then why do they think it works?
What's your advice to anybody.

James Egidio (39:34):
About as a patient , like what's your advice to, to
taking this back so-calledvaccine?
You're a physician.
What's your advice on?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (39:44):
If they've already had it or if they're
gonna.

James Egidio (39:46):
They haven't had it, or yeah, what's your advice?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (39:49):
I can be here all day because I wrote 150
page document that explainsAntibodies were never useful in
our fight against viruses.
For the very first, they weremisled.
Edward Jenner, the father ofmodern vexology what was a liar?
And I can prove it because acowpox antibody has no

(40:09):
similarities with a smallpoxantibody and he gave a boy a
cowpox virus.
He inoculated him, he said Nowhe's immune to smallpox and he
gave the boy smallpox and hesaid the boy was fine.
But we know, oh, even assumingtheir science is correct, that
the cowpox antibody and thesmallpox antibody are completely

(40:30):
different.
It could never have worked.
So see that in a one they gave,he gave the boy a cowpox virus
as a vaccination.
The boy is supposedlyvaccinated to smallpox and the
boy, he says, doesn't sufferfrom smallpox.
All a lie, because it could nothave worked even the way they

(40:51):
describe it, because we knowtoday that the cowpox Antibody
in the smallpox and I'mcompletely different and there's
no cross reactivity.
Okay, so they're gonna make allsorts of other arguments, but I
think he just lied.
Yeah, I think Edward Jenner hadan idea.
Oh, milkmaids weren't gettingsmallpox.
Okay, this is my hypothesis.

(41:12):
My hypothesis is very simplemilkmaids were very happy about
their complexion, very happythat they were pretty.
And when a fellow milkmaid gotthe cowpox and got red bumps all
over her face they're small butthey're still bumpy and they're
still annoying.
If she spent time with thatgirl she got it.
So she learned if my friendgets cowpox I'm gonna stay away

(41:35):
for a week or two, I don't wantto get it.
Yeah, she learned that stayingaway means you don't get it.
So then this milkmaid withbeautiful skin, she sees a
smallpox patient with thesehorrible, disfiguring deep
lesions and they scar horriblyand it's just whoa, scary as
hell.
It's like horror fiction movies.
It's just crazy ugly.
You think she's gonna get near,he's gonna stay, she's gonna be

(41:58):
the furthest away, she's notgonna be interested in looking
at it.
So there are going to be somecurious people that don't know
and they get close right, she'snot going to be one of them.
So the reason why she hadimmunity was because she knew
that isolation works.
Staying away from the virusmeans you don't get the virus
and that's all.
Smallpox was Sure.
And then, if the vaccines areso effective and they eradicated

(42:21):
smallpox from the world, whycan't they eradicate measles?
Oh, because the antivacuresdidn't get it.
There are plenty of people whohad the measles vaccine.
Millions of mothers willtestify Sure, but their child
still got measles.
So what does it?
We?

James Egidio (42:38):
know that from.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (42:38):
COVID.
You get the vaccine, you stillget COVID.
But see, they thought that thesmallpox vaccine took care of
smallpox.
Look, I have a great hypothesis.
And you'll never get over ahuge red legions and you stay
away.
You're not going to get it.

James Egidio (42:52):
Yeah, I just published a real simple paper
recently on Substack Post abouteight deadly and contagious
diseases from illegalimmigration and again we're
starting to see an uptick in alot of things that were dormant
for such a long time.
Polio and, of course,tuberculosis is at the very top
of the list.

(43:13):
So we're starting to see a lotof these diseases that were,
like I said, dormant for a longtime being ushered in, and
they're creating a lot ofvaccines and they're using the
messenger RNA technology tocreate these.
So this is all donedeliberately.
As far as I'm concerned, it'sobvious at this point.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (43:33):
Well, this is , this is-.

James Egidio (43:35):
So we've got to quit burying our heads in the
sand and believe that this stuffis just all good and these
vaccines, and it's for thegreater good.
It's not for the greater good.
None of it is not the illegalimmigration or the making of
these messenger RNA vaccines,these poisons, so it's just an
excuse to usher in thesevaccines.
And God only knows what they'reputting in these vaccines.

(43:56):
Again, like I said for the, forwhat the ultimate goal is,
which I believe is to tie inbiometrics and use fear porn for
people to go out and get thevaccines is what they're doing.
I'm sure about one thing thethe solution.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (44:13):
The vaccine industry.
Yeah, the vaccine industry atleast 20 or $30 billion.
It's a huge industry.
Every year, huge.

James Egidio (44:20):
Gates admitted it, gates said it.
He says he makes more money inthe vaccination industry with
vaccines than he did in thecomputer industry.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (44:28):
So this string mechanism.
It affects half their vaccines,sure, and any parent that sees
this is like whoa, you guys haveto have an answer for this.
No one has so far.
So this is that powerful.
It destroys every future mRNAvaccine, sure, okay.
So if they don't have an answer, that means they're agreeing,
acknowledging that it's correct.
This is correct.

(44:50):
The vaccine industry is goingto lose $15 billion a year, sure
.
You think they're just going toroll over and let it happen?
No See, okay.
So now how will they fight it?
Will they come out in the openand hire the smartest
vaccinologists on earth torefute this, rebut this?
They can't, because they don't.
There's not a rebuttal possible.

(45:11):
The antigen how can they refutethat Antibody?
And antigen sticking how canthey refute?
They can't refute it.
So what are they going to do?
They're going to.
This is what I think.
Do I have proof?
No, I think they're going tofight dark.
They're going to fight not inthe open.
And how are they going to fight?
By spending money.
Sure, the computer virus,antivirus software industry is

(45:34):
huge.
Sure, now, do any of us thinkthat they don't release computer
viruses?
Of course they do.
Okay, the vaccine industry canthey release a measles virus?
Of course they can.
I agree with you.
There's dark conspiracies hereat work.

James Egidio (45:50):
Well, you have to just keep the gates open down in
the southern border and that'sit.
You've got your diseasespreaders.
Everybody's coming in unchecked.
Let's think about this for aminute.
The borders are wide open,there's?
No.
It's not like it was EllisIsland in 1920, where everybody
was going through Ellis Islandto get quarantined and checked

(46:10):
for health checks.
When you've got a wide openborder, people are coming in.
You see an uptick intuberculosis, smallpox, measles,
all this stuff.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (46:20):
You're just allowing people to spread
disease.
I've never heard of smallpoxbefore, because it's right.
You're right about everythingelse, right?

James Egidio (46:26):
Yeah, not to say that the number of people that
are dying from fentanyloverdoses and the drugs that are
coming in methamphetamine,cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, all
the other drugs that are comingin unchecked it's a recipe for
disaster, and anybody that'slistening and watching this
knows this.
What do we do?
What do you do?
When it comes to vaccines, Iwould say you have to think

(46:49):
twice about getting them.
I know I did.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (46:52):
I didn't even have to think twice, just once
you have some amazing points.
It's like this the Democrats.
I hope you're a Republican.

James Egidio (47:01):
I stay out of politics because I think they're
all shit.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (47:04):
Excuse my language they don't even want to
do anything for anybody anymore.
None of them, I know I agree.
See, the Democrats want.
They don't care about a border,they want a porous border and
they want as many people comingin through the border as
possible Of course they do.

James Egidio (47:21):
They don't want a single.
And the Republicans too?
The Republicans did the samething.
Both parties are guilty ascharged.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (47:27):
I'm just saying they don't want a single
lung cell infected by the virus,but they want the borders to be
completely porous.
Everything they do isinconsistent.
Everywhere I look, they're justnot consistent.
I'm not saying the Republicansare perfect by any means.
I'm a strong Trump supporter.
I think the guy is amazing.

James Egidio (47:48):
Sure, I think he did a great job.
He did A lot of his policieswere good.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (47:53):
The hate that people have for him is because
is the way he speaks his words.
But to me he got a lot of stuffdone and I know how he thinks
because I'm always askingquestions.
I always ask questions andsometimes they sound stupid when
I ask questions, but by the endof my conversation with
somebody they'll know I'm notstupid because I don't care if I

(48:15):
ask dumb questions, if it'ssome area I don't know,
eventually I'm going to ask themreally smart questions.
And so Trump has that basicattitude because most
businessmen do that.

James Egidio (48:26):
The only thing I disagree with him is his pre and
post vaccination rollout stance.
Because he was so eager,because he was in an election
year in 2020.
And he was just so eager towant to become the hero with
this vaccine and, of course, hewas probably being pushed and
prodded by the deep state to sayyou better agree with this
vaccine, nod your head and sayyes, you better go along with

(48:49):
this.
And that's what he did.
And we look back now.
We see the deaths and injuriesdue to this vaccine and what's
going on, and it's still beingrolled out.
Professionals like you who aredoing a great job and being
courageous to come out, submitpapers and try to get a hold of
the right people.
I commend you for that.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (49:10):
Yeah, and in my defense of Trump, this is
what I would say to that BecauseRFK Jr got all my information.
Okay, so I have this papertrail that's super tight with
copyrights and thousands ofemails, and August 2022,.
Rfk is excited to get myinformation Because I sent it to
his lawyer.
I spoke to his lawyer because Ifigured out this is the best
way to get through to peoplecall their attorney, because

(49:31):
their attorneys have phones thatthey answer.
So I called up his attorney.
He gave me two minutes, Ispelled it, I emailed him my 73
pages and everything else heported to RFK.
Rfk forwarded to all hisconsultants, including me.
I was CC'd on that.
And then Paul Alexander says ohmy God, dr Lee is 100% correct.
Oh yeah, I completely back him.

(49:51):
And then there was a lot ofarguments about that information
, but to me it was this simple Igive you the best information
at the time to stop the vaccine,because the antibody doesn't
even enter the lung.
And you guys are acting likeyou don't want it and I was
getting frustrated with them,and then they ended up not using
it.
But then it was Corey Malone,mccullough, nas.

(50:13):
Okay, so to me they're allguilty RFK, because RFK Jr has
said himself many times I canread the vaccine science, and
how hard is this to read?
The antibody doesn't enter thelung.
How hard is that?
And so I look at blame Trump.
I'm gonna blame RFK.
There's a million people toblame before I ever get to RFK,
because you know what Ananti-vaxxer is considered dumb

(50:35):
and stupid, and whatpresidential candidate wants to
be dumb and stupid?
What average person wants to bedumb and stupid?
Who wants to be labeled ananti-vaxxer?
No one.
So why does Trump have to beanti-vaccine about anything?
If RFK had not even agreed withme but had a public press
conference that there's thiscrazy stuff going on, that this
doctor has all this information,and then all these scientists

(50:59):
look at it and they're like,whoa, this is crazy and stop the
vaccine, then Trump wouldn't bein this position of having to
say whether he supports ordoesn't support the vaccine.
Why does Trump have to come outand say he's anti-vaccine when
that's stupid?
He doesn't?
If all the other people, theanti-vaxx leaders, were doing
the right thing and the commonconsensus among the general

(51:21):
public was whoa, this is stupid,then Then Trump would have
never had been in this situation.
So I blame RFK much more thaneverybody.
Trump.

James Egidio (51:30):
Yeah, when you think about it too, when you go
back to 2020, the emotions wererunning really high because
there was a lot of capitulationwith mask versus not wearing a
mask, which we know masks theydon't work.
It was ridiculous, and therewas a lot of early adopters on a
lot of this stuff, such as DrTempani, sherry Tempani and Dr

(51:50):
Kerry Maheus when it came totranshumanism theory and the
whole thing with the vaccinesand how they operate it.
And then there was Dr JudyMikevitz, who wrote a book early
on in March of 2020 about masksnot working, and that book got
censored.
You're over the mark when youget censored by social media

(52:11):
platforms or you get your lifethreatened.
You're over the mark for sure,but we know by now that we're
being censored.
People are being censored thatare coming out with the truth
and this stuff.
When I hear conspiracy theory,it's not conspiracy theory.
I see I know eight peoplepersonally that died from the
vaccine, the youngest being 30years old.
That's not conspiracy.

(52:32):
These are people that diedAbsolutely.
They died suddenly.
They're not faking their death,it's not they're not backing.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (52:39):
My brother had a heart attack.
My dad had a heart attack.
I had to have his body by mymom.
I had to have two strokes.
I get it.

James Egidio (52:44):
Yeah, that's not conspiracy theory, that's fact.
Those are facts.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (52:49):
Those people are not coming back but see what
pisses me off about theanti-vax leaders.
They're supposed to use thebest science to take it down
right, then why wouldn't they?
There's culpability to goaround, there's accountability
to go around, and there is.
I'm sorry, but RFK is going tohave catch hell because of all

(53:10):
my paper crills.
And I am not going to back offon him because he was in the
position to take it down and hedidn't do it.
And now he avoids me studiously.
He is scared to death of me andI got canceled last year off
Twitter.
I had $50,000 followers in fourmonths and March I lost my
account writing a thread aboutRFK.
And then I find out later hisdaughter-in-law was an executive

(53:34):
at Twitter before, and all thatmakes sense to me.
They want to control themessage.
They want to be the heroes thattake down the COVID vaccine.
They don't even have science,they just have a dislike for the
vaccine, which is great.
But they don't have the scienceand it was their responsibility
as a leader.
When the good science comes,take it and run with it.
But they didn't.
So they have accountability.

James Egidio (53:57):
Sure, there's a reason for controlled opposition
, there's a reason for all thisand, like you said, it's all
controlled by vaxxers versusanti-vaxxers.
It creates a lot of distractionwith what's really going on
behind the scenes and, like Isaid, I think behind the scenes
this is my, I'm putting thepuzzle together and looking at

(54:20):
the pieces is this all has to dowith technology and biology?
They're trying to mesh thosetwo eventually for control.
There's definitely a reason why.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (54:32):
This is the way I look at it.
They don't have to implantanything in us.
They just gave us a phone andno one wants to be anywhere
without it.

James Egidio (54:39):
It's almost in the they want to go beyond that.
They want to go beyond that.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (54:42):
Yeah, but beyond that is a lot harder than
people realize.
What I'm saying is in biologyyou have to have a perfect
explanation and people don'tright now.
But what I'm saying is thecontrol they have over us is
plenty with just the phone andthe EV.

James Egidio (54:56):
So what if they say to you tomorrow, Dr Lee, in
order for you to access yourbank account, you got to get
chipped with a-.
I agree with that.
What are you going to do?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (55:06):
Of course I can what?

James Egidio (55:07):
are you going to do?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (55:08):
What I'm saying is they can't control you
, but they can know where you'reat.

James Egidio (55:12):
But I'm asking you a question.
If they said to you tomorrowyou have to be chipped in order
to access your bank account, ok,a chip underneath your skin,
but what are you going to do?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (55:24):
You're right, you got to the point Once they
know where you're at once, theyknow where you're at at all
times, then they can control you.

James Egidio (55:29):
But that's to control you that's the control I
can Putting out informationabout vaccines.
Oh, we don't like what Dr Leeput out, so we're going to close
his account.
Yeah, now, what Exactly?
Now what Then?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (55:41):
I'm screwed.
I'm screwed and they havecontrol.
I'm screwed, so I would neveragree with somebody putting
anything into me.

James Egidio (55:48):
You go to chapter 13 in the Bible, verse 18.
You see that when you explain,there, I completely understand.
But you know, on the it'scalled the mark of the beast,
but on the molecular level it'salways-.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (55:57):
On the molecular level, it's a lot
harder than that.

James Egidio (55:59):
No, it's not.
It is, it's not.
You think it is, but it's not.
It's around the corner, myfriend and I think we're very
close to it.
We're very close to it.
This is what they're frettingfor, this is what they want.
This is what and I say they, weknow who they are.
So it's not they and it's notconspiracy.
We know what they want.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (56:21):
They want it, I can tell you they will never
get off because of stringmechanism.
If you want a weapon to stopmRNA, that's string weapon,
that's string theory.
That string mechanism is like anuke to their whole vaccine
industry.
Yeah, it just shows how stupidthey are.
You did put antibodies in thatvoid.
Now you're adding antibodies.

(56:41):
What do you think will happen?
They'll stick and it's thatsilly.
So they really don't know whatthey're doing.
But if they're doing all sortsof other things and you want to
stop it, the way to stop it isto show how stupid they are.

James Egidio (56:52):
Give a lot of power and money to stupid people
and they can do a lot of damageto a lot of people.
We know that from previousexperience with Stalin and Marx
and all these other people.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (57:03):
I completely agree.
Now they got the-.

James Egidio (57:05):
Now they have the technology to do that.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (57:07):
That's why there's bodily autonomy laws and
that's why anyone who thinksthat they I have this analogy I
always use.
I say if I tell my neighborabout this amazing medication,
miracle drug, and give it to allmy kids he uses it too His kid
gets paralyzed.
That neighbor's going to hatemy guts, of course.
But let's say I hold his sondown by force and shove it down

(57:29):
his throat and make him swallowit, and then he's paralyzed.
You don't think that dad willhunt me down to the ends of the
earth and flame me alive, sure?
And torture me for 10 years.

James Egidio (57:41):
Sure, what about the people that, during these
mandates, had no choice but tooh, I have to feed my family and
lose my job take the vaccine.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (57:50):
It's so hard to stop that.

James Egidio (57:53):
Yeah, that Biden and Newsom pushed it too in your
state, I know.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (57:57):
So this email everyone?
Kaiser got thousands of emailsfrom me.
I was emailing everyone.
La County, barbara Ferrer Ican't report her to the
California Medical Board Foundout she's not even an MD.
I tried to report somebody anyorganization I didn't even know
what she was.
I couldn't figure out why shewas being called a doctor.
I left hundreds of emails withher faxes, called them up.

(58:19):
They're all bizarre.
And you know what?
When she was appointed, I'mlike why would you appoint
somebody who doesn't have anymedical background?
Why is she that?
Because you know what.
If it was a physician, I couldhave gotten through to them
because they would have apractice, they would have phone
numbers, they would have otherpeople around them and I would
have been able to get through tothis.

(58:40):
Whatever position BarbaraFerrer had, if it was a
physician, I would have beenable to get through to them and
I would have made embarrassedthem and they would have had fax
numbers and I would have hadproof that I gave them all the
information and all thesurrounding people around them.
Because this way it's theCalifornia Medical Board.
I called up every one of them.
Harold Katz was anophthalmologist.
He's like oh my god, you makesense and he emailed me back and

(59:02):
said OK, I'll try to help you.
So I'm never worried about theCalifornia Medical Board taking
away my license, because I hadone of the board members agree
to help me because I sent himall my information.
Ok, so if he doesn't call mesome information and he's trying
to help me, then how is itmisinformation?
Just because you make a law?
All right, I was fine with it.
But, oh my god, huge company.

(59:26):
I had done LASIK for themedical director, so I thought I
had some pull.
So I'm like OK, here's acompany I can get through to
Call up.
Ok, they changed the medicaldirector of some other women.
I explained everything to her.
She understood it.
She said it's not my duty.
I'm like OK, I'm trying to helpyou, help your employees who
are forced to get a vaccine.
They don't want to.

(59:46):
They're going to get fired.
I'm trying to help you.
Why are you giving me thisattitude?
You should just run with it.
Just help me, because do youjust want to fire these people?
It sounds like that's what youwant to do.
You just want to fire thesepeople.
And that's when I got more andmore upset at Democrats, because
these were Democrats I'm likeOK, so you're going to have such
loyalty to your party that,even if I show you exactly where

(01:00:07):
your party from, you don't wantyour party to be embarrassed,
so you're going to just notstick to science.

James Egidio (01:00:13):
Yeah, I try to tell people don't make a
decision on these vaccines froma political standpoint.
Don't do that, Don't makedecisions.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:00:23):
There is that it became completely political
on both sides right.

James Egidio (01:00:27):
Yeah, because the worst decision you can make is a
health decision based on apolitical decision.
Take advice from a physician,from a professional who has some
valid points or makes validpoints about the dangers of this
and, of course, personalexperience of people you may or
may not have known that diedfrom it or were injured from it.

(01:00:49):
So there's enough evidence outthere.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:00:51):
I try to spend $50,000 advertising that
the antibody doesn't even enterthe lung and the RNA.
Since I was originally, wesurvived 2020.
And even the Orange CountyRegister was too afraid to put
out an info commercial for meand I was willing to spend
$50,000 with them.
So this campaign againstmisinformation that the
Democrats did they have to takeresponsibility for what they did
.
That prevented me from gettingall this information out, and so

(01:01:14):
, no matter what they say, inscience and medicine, actually
in any democracy that kind ofcensorship is over the top.
They were ridiculous and theycaused all this.
I say they have to takeresponsibility for it.

James Egidio (01:01:29):
Yeah, I think the only politician in Washington
that's been vocal about all this, and I'm not even sure how
valid his is.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:01:38):
Rand Paul, no just a minute, but Rand Paul is
an ophthalmologist.

James Egidio (01:01:42):
Yeah, he's an ophthalmologist as well.
And I reached out to himthousands of times and what
happened?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:01:47):
Never a response.
You know how much time I wastedFor me to call up their offices
and chat with a secretary orassistant.
I did that at least four times.
Wow, and left great records andthen faxed them and then
emailed them nonstop and theneven on Twitter, reached out to
him.
He's going to say later hedidn't see any of my stuff.
Look, my mentor is a directorof ophthalmology at Johns

(01:02:09):
Hopkins and the chief editor ofophthalmology at times, and Rand
Paul is an ophthalmologist.
My mentor should have some pool.
He says I can't reach him.
Rand Paul is not what you think.
He is.
Ok.
He's got complex relationshipswith big farming.
You really think he wants tohave the vaccine industry lose
$30 billion next year?

James Egidio (01:02:30):
No, of course not.
So is he helping?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:02:34):
No, of course not.
He's just spinning.
He's just doing what he thinkshe needs to do.
He's I don't think he's thesame person.
Ego is ego, but he's not.
If he wants to take down DrFauci, no one on earth has been
better paper crowed than I do.
I have responses to.
So why won't he use it?

(01:02:55):
Because he doesn't really wantto.
If he really want to, no one onearth has a better paper trail.
Yeah, and my paper trail withFauci says it was thorough, it
was 70 pages and there is nobacking out of it.
Every concern he had I hadaddressed before he even made it
.
He can't get around it.
He'll go to prison because atsome point he's all going to

(01:03:16):
come out.

James Egidio (01:03:17):
Yeah, he's going to go to prison for it.
I don't know about that, theseguys, they never go.
They're so insulated from anyrecourse.
It's sickening anymore.
It's disgusting.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:03:31):
This is what I did.
The PREP Act gives all theseorganizations vaccine legal
immunity.
But the SHER Act also includesa major exception the Wolfful
misconduct.
So I informed Big Pharma,Moderna, Pfizer, all these
companies.
I informed them, even viaattorneys, and I said look, your
hypotheses for why your vaccineworks is the antibody
neutralizes the virus before thevirus infects a lung cell.

(01:03:53):
That means the antibody has tobe in the lung and I show it
can't get in there.
Now you are informed.
You didn't know this before,but now you know this.
Now if you don't have aresponse for this and you still
want to sell your vaccine butyou can't show how the antibody
enters the lung, then that'sWolfful misconduct and you can
be sued and the PREP Act cannotcover you.

(01:04:16):
So this paper trail can destroyPfizer Because no one else
preemptively, proactively,created a paper trail.
They're all saying, yeah, what'sfine is it's bad.
But did you tell them they werebad before they did it?
Yeah, I did.
And so now there's a lot morecopability.
If you tell them after the factthey can say there were side

(01:04:38):
effects, but I told them before.
You don't even know how itworks.
There's a major flaw in yourhypotheses.
And if you still want tocontinue, and I explained the
prep back to them.
I explained all this in writingand said no mother on earth
would have their baby vaccinatedif they knew the antibody
couldn't enter the lung.
And if you still want to sellit, there's something very dark

(01:04:59):
and evil about you and it's wolfor misconduct, and you will
void and negate your prep actlegal immunity.
And yet they continued, right,and I even have some responses
from them, One of the sideeffect profile hotlines.
They gave me a reference numberand they try to explain it.
We modeled it after the fluvaccine.
I'm like the flu vaccine hasthe same flaw.
I'm not saying you've coveredbecause of flu.

(01:05:21):
I know you modeled it after theflu vaccine and I'm saying the
flu vaccine has the same flaw.
Why do you think the resultswere so horrible?
Just look up on Wikipedia.
They had horrible data and I'mexplaining.
Their excuse was oh, the strainchanged on us.
So no one really found the realflaw with their vaccine.

(01:05:42):
Their flu antibody doesn'tenter the lung either.
And I tried to respond and then, of course, they stopped
emailing me, but they're on thehook.
Sure, they are and they know itand I gave them the information
before anyone else did and noone else gave it to them before.
Because that's what makes it ahuge issue for the NEIH, FDA,

(01:06:04):
CDC, because I gave all thisinformation to them very
carefully and I had responses,like the epidemiologist at the
CDC.
I explained everything.
She understood it.
She was in shock and I said I'mgoing to email you everything.
Please respond to confirm thatyou got it and please move it up
the chain of command.
She said she would and the oneI emailed her.
She emailed me back.
That's proof that she got it,Of course.

(01:06:25):
So, I did all that, even withthe FDA, the chief legal counsel
.
I had three or four emails, thedirector of the FDA.
I had back and forth emails.
They got the information.
I said if you don't have oneFDA scientist that can explain
how the antibody enters the lung, you need to put a warning
label on every vaccine that saysthat.

James Egidio (01:06:45):
Yeah, you know what that's called, don't you?
It's called censorship.
It's called censorship.
Like I said, you're over themark, so that's why you're not
hearing back.
It's an echo chamber for them.
Let me ask it Do you have awebsite or a sub-stack that
listeners and viewers of theMedical Truth podcast can go to?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:07:05):
Oh yeah.
So lungviruscom is my website Alot of information but
obviously I put out 50,000tweets every three months.
My Twitter is LasikEyeCenter,with the number one, because I
had an account last year and Ihad 10,000, my first viral
thread.
It was like three weeks after Igot on Twitter and then three

(01:07:28):
months after that, four monthsafter that, they canceled me, of
course, and so I had a nullaccount from one of my practices
.
I had a null account that I hadset up and never used.
So I got on about four monthsago with that one because I
didn't want to Twitter's goingto just I'm going to press our
new account, they're just goingto cancel me again.
So I had this account thatstarted so long ago.
They don't even know that wasmine.

(01:07:49):
So I'm using my professionalbusiness account.

James Egidio (01:07:55):
Are you on sub-stack as well?

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:07:56):
Sub-stack too , josephyleemd.

James Egidio (01:07:59):
JosephYLeecom Okay .

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:08:01):
JosephYLeeMD yeah, md and sub-stack Forward.

James Egidio (01:08:06):
slash sub-stack right.
Yes, I think it's forward slashsub-stackcom.
Yeah.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:08:11):
I don't have a huge following on sub-stack,
but what I do is I put all theinformation on there because, as
I write threats to the AmericanAcademy of Pediatrics, to Texas
Children's Hospital, to the NIHdirector, I email them, but I
also publish the thread becausethat's for me, it's legal
information, legal evidence inthe future.
Of course, my emails arestronger to them and certified

(01:08:33):
letters are better, but I wantpeople to be able to read it and
so I put it up there.
Yeah, sure.

James Egidio (01:08:39):
It's interesting in strange times.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:08:42):
Wouldn't you agree?
Never anything stranger in mylife.
It seems like we're winning alittle bit, so I'm happy yeah we
are, We'll be all right.

James Egidio (01:08:50):
It's just one, that famous Chinese proverb a
journey of a million milesstarts with one step.
So that's where we're at rightnow Exactly.
And that's what we have tocontinue to do is just get the
word out, and I'll continue tobring you on.
Just keep me and my audienceupdated on what's going on your
end.
I know I'm going to get JamesRogusky back on and get to give

(01:09:13):
updates on the World HealthOrganization on their antics.
So things are moving along.

Dr. Joseph Y. Lee (01:09:19):
They were very corrupt because remember
they were too close to the CCPright.

James Egidio (01:09:23):
Of course, they're of course when the money comes,
you have to follow the moneyright.
Absolutely.
Thank you so much for joiningme for this episode of Medical
Truth Podcast, sir, thank you,thanks, thank you.
Thanks for listening to theMedical Truth Podcast.