Whistleblower Nurse Describes COVID Protocols as Medical Murder- Interview with Gail Macrae

Gail Macrae worked as a nurse in the ICU, MedSurg, and Labor and Delivery for ten years. During Covid, She worked for Kaiser Permanente in the Bay Area of California and saw first-hand that the media was deceiving the public about COVID-related things. She turned whistleblower and was fired for refusing to take the COVID-19 shot.  go to www.StandFirmNow.org

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 (00:00):
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 Egidio.

James Egidio (00:16):
Hi, I'm James Egidio Welcome to the medical
truth podcast.
My guest worked as a nurse inthe ICU.
Med surge and labor and deliveryfor 10 years.
During COVID she worked forKaiser Permanente in the bay
area of California and sawfirsthand that the media was
deceiving the public about COVIDrelated things.

(00:36):
She turned whistleblower and wasfired for refusing to take the
COVID vaccine.
It is an honor and a pleasure tohave on the medical truth
podcast.
My guests.
Gail McCrae.
Hi, Gail.
Welcome to the medical truthpodcast.
How are you doing?

Gail Macrae (00:50):
I'm doing great.
Thanks for having me here today.

James Egidio (00:53):
Absolutely.
Share with the listener andviewers of the medical truth
podcast about who you are andwhat you do.
All

Gail Macrae (01:01):
right.
My name is Gail McCray.
I was a nurse trained bachelor'sdegree RN in California in the
Bay Area.
I went to school at Cal StateEast Bay, graduated in.
2011 and I immediately enteredthe acute care setting as a
practitioner.
I was hired by Sutter Health.

(01:23):
I worked for them in ICUtelemetry and med surg for a few
years.
And then at that point I decidedthat I wanted to follow my
dreams to become a nursemidwife.
And on that adventure I ended upin rural Africa.
I spent a year working in adistrict hospital in the back

(01:43):
roads in the sticks of Tanzania.
And then I returned to theUnited States with the intention
of trying to get hired intolabor and delivery so that I
could end up doing my specialtyand my master's to become a
certified nurse midwife, butthat didn't happen.
I was pregnant when I came home.
And I had some complicationswith my pregnancy.

(02:06):
I ended up really sick.
It was very difficult to work atall and so I ended up back in
telemetry where I stayed until Ijust went ahead and did med surg
telemetry until I started mymaster's program, which was
right when COVID started.
I was working for I was hired onby Kaiser Permanente at that

(02:27):
time, it was 2015, and I workedfor them until they fired me in
2021, and at that point in 2021when they fired me, I was at the
end of the degree to get mymaster's and become a primary
care provider.
And then I ended up Gettingfired and then being dropped

(02:48):
from my master's program at thebeginning of my clinical hours
rotation because I refused totake the COVID shot.
Both of those were because Irefused to take the shot, both
being fired and being droppedfrom that program.
So I did end up excuse me, I didend up Working in the COVID

(03:11):
floors at Kaiser for the extentof the pandemic.
And then also for the first six,eight months after they started
injecting people with theseCOVID vaccines that they call
them.
I've learned that they were notwhat we were told and I.

(03:33):
I've been very vocal from thevery start even when I was in
the hospital, when I waswitnessing the COVID protocols,
which were extraordinary fromday one.
But it was a journey.
It was a real challengingexperience to discover that

(03:53):
things were really not what wewere being told.
And Accept the fact that, I wasbeing lied to by my profession
and by my government and thenmake the decision to stand up
and take the scorn and criticismof the entire world for speaking

(04:13):
about it, but ultimately thatreally came down to my own
desire to, provide the bestpossible example that I could
for my children, sure.
Here I am today, continuing thatpath because I feel that it's so
profoundly important to setthese examples for ourselves and

(04:36):
for our kids.
I love telling the world that,the truth will set them free and
I feel for myself that my spirithas been freed through this
process.
And I don't regret one second ofthe choices I've made, even

(04:57):
though they've been verydifficult and they've challenged
me in ways that I neverexpected.
Yeah.

James Egidio (05:05):
So what I want to do is step back a little bit to
2020 you're working at KaiserPermanente, as you'd mentioned.
And, of course, the outbreak ofCOVID started around, I believe,
February.
Explain a little bit about howthings at the hospital were that
you were working at that time.

(05:26):
And what, at what point did younotice something wasn't right?

Gail Macrae (05:33):
Yeah, so it happened right away.
we had a discussion.
I was, my, the unit I worked forwas it was like a step down unit
from the ICU and we sharedmanagement with ICU.
So I, all of my managers werealso ICU managers.
And so even though I didn't workin ICU, I knew what was going on

(05:56):
there more so than most.
Any, like more so than say theER, I was very far removed from
the ER.
But so in February and earlyMarch, when they first started
talking about locking down thecommunity, I had a specific
conversation with one of mymanagers about how that, how we

(06:19):
had actually.
They suspected that we had beenexposed to and treating COVID
patients since November of 2019.
We had, they had multipleextremely inflammatory
respiratory illnesses that, andin a few in young people.

(06:40):
That didn't respond in ways thatwe were familiar with seeing a
respiratory diseases respond andso that was my first observation
of how, we had probably beenseeing patients before.
They they called the COVIDpandemic and Even at that

(07:01):
through the winter months, ourhospital, 2019 2020, it was a
normal winter and and then whenthey locked down the hospital
and they canceled all theelective surgeries and started
making a big deal out of howCOVID was potentially going to
come in and wreak havoc on ourcommunities there was never a

(07:22):
time when that was the case.
that conversation with mymanager definitely prepared me
to see that, we had seen casesof COVID we could figure out how
to manage it, and The hospitalwas not overwhelmed at any point

(07:43):
during those first, that firstwinter 2019 2020.
And even the second winter in2020 and 2021 we had increased
admissions but, that's whathappens in the hospital every
winter.
And I would say it was probablycomparable to the year of SARS.
One in 2002, 2003, the hospitalswere full, but it was never

(08:07):
anything unmanageable.
And as a matter of fact, duringthat time period when they
canceled elective surgeries fromMarch until November of 2020, I
basically was, the hospital wasso empty that I could have taken
off every single shift I wantedto because there just wasn't,
there was no one there.
Wow.

(08:28):
Yeah.
So it was very chilling, seeinghow the media was talking about
how the hospitals were all fulland they just weren't.
That really bothered me.
Sure.
I didn't have TV so I wasn'treally aware of what the media
was saying.
And then I'd go to work and Iwould see it on my patient's
televisions.

(08:48):
That's really how I got soexposed to it.
And when it happened it was veryjust.
So intrusive, the way that they,I could feel the fear mongering
in the news reports that Iwasn't being exposed to at home,
but then I saw them at work andit was, I remember just being so

(09:10):
floored by how like perpetuallyfearful every single message was
to a point of just I could feelthat there was something really
wrong with the way that theywere talking about things on the
news, not only that they didn'tline up, but also that it was
just so intense.

James Egidio (09:30):
Wow.
Yeah.
Yeah.
They have a death clock.
I remember on a lot of the, onthe news stations.
So it sounds like from whatyou're saying is that the
lockdowns were not justified.

Gail Macrae (09:43):
They were definitely not justified in the
Bay Area of California.
I suspect throughout the state,I've talked to a few physicians
around the country who haveworked at a few hospitals that
were overwhelmed at multiplepoints.
I suspect that and not only do Isuspect, but my experience is

(10:04):
that those, that's maybe onetwentieth of the cities.
The large cities across thecountry where I've met doctors
and practitioners that haveworked in those places.
Not, 19 out of 20 of thehospital of the communities of
the people that I've spoken to,which really is, I'm sure it's

(10:26):
less than 1 percent of thehospitals in the country were
over capacity.
There were a few but it was veryfew.
Certainly nothing to to matchwhat we saw happening, in the
hospitals outside of thosepockets.
Yeah.

James Egidio (10:44):
So what about the emergency rooms?
Were they, did they fill up atall or were there more overdose
cases than there were of COVIDcases and gunshots at that time?
What was the,

Gail Macrae (10:55):
the emergency rooms were just as empty as the
hospitals.
Wow.
Especially, at least in mycounty, I'm for sure of that.
I had friends in all thehospitals in Sonoma County, and
there was just, there was neverreally a point where our
emergency rooms were over whatwe had expected.

(11:16):
And I will say that theemergency room staff that I did
speak to about this they in factcredited.
A good bit of the hospitaladmissions to the emergency room
being related to anxiety andstress over the, the fear
surrounding COVID a lot, I wouldactually suspect there were more

(11:38):
panic attacks and things likethat in relation to other
reasons for hospital admissions.
Yeah.

James Egidio (11:46):
WHen someone did come in for COVID into the
hospital, whether that wouldhave been through, let's say the
emergency room where they wereadmitted to stay in the hospital
what were some of the hospitalprotocols for treating COVID
patients at that time in thehospital that you were working
at?

Gail Macrae (12:03):
Oh, gosh, it was just terrible.
The thing, every single one ofthe protocols seem to basically
contradict modern medicine andcommon sense.
tHe ones that really stuck outto me as being criminal were
isolation of patients who weresick in the hospital, being
isolated from their supportsystem.

(12:26):
We use isolation as a as a toolfor torture.
There is a substantial body ofpeer reviewed data that shows
that isolation of patients whenthey are sick in the hospital
increases their risk for deathand dying, and also creates
worse outcomes when they, withwhatever the disease there's no

(12:51):
reason that I as a practitionershould have been treated any
different than a patient'ssystem because we rely on
families not only to help uscommunicate for patients to help
to help us identify things thatare outside of the normal for

(13:12):
that patient.
If I can wear PPE and take atest to come to work and provide
care for my patients.
There's no reason why the familymember who is just important for
the well being of that patientas I am to be able to do the
same thing.
That was a major human rightsviolation that I will never be

(13:34):
able to accept as a reasonablecourse of action.
They said that it was to protectpeople.
Like I said, patients familiescan also wear PPE and take PCR
tests or whatever, whatever itis that, that the hospital wants
the staff to do, the patient'sfamily members ought to have

(13:56):
been offered that same choice.
In addition to that, the othertwo major violations were
withholding the respiratorytreatments and and steroids,
both.
The hospitals the protocols,they they only allowed us to use

(14:17):
a very low dose IV steroid fortreatment of COVID.
When that COVID coronavirus, theSARS coronavirus, I don't think
it was quite like this one inthe way that COVID 19 produced
the highest number, or thehighest CRP values that I'd ever
seen, that anyone had ever seen.

(14:38):
That's an inflammatory markerthat we use to diagnose a lot of
cellular damage in patients.
So those numbers were multi,multitudes higher than patients
with influenza and otherinfectious disease processes
that I treated for my career.
And the hospitals were bound byprotocol saying we could not.

(15:01):
administer steroids at theappropriate level to treat that.
That was very veryextraordinarily evil.
I can't imagine how any medicalsystem could have justified
withholding high dose steroids.
And then the same thing with thenebulized breathing treatments.

(15:21):
When you have a patient cominginto the hospital in respiratory
distress, our number one drug ofchoice for that, that the
hospitals offer is, nebulizedbreathing treatments because it
really helps dilate the lungsand increase people's ability
not only to get oxygen, but justto calm their nerves when

(15:43):
they're, feeling like they can'tbreathe.
And so that was a.
How can you justify they saidthat they did that because they
were trying to reduce theaerosol particles and reduce
transmission, but they had usscammed up in N95s, it just, and
in addition to that, me as awell practitioner, it's my job

(16:08):
to potentially have to manageexposure, it just, There's no
rationale for it when you thinkabout, how much it increased
their likelihood to go intorespiratory failure and die.
It's oh me, a person who A, hasnatural immunity or B, has been
vaccinated or whatever thecircumstances.

(16:31):
C our, I'm clearly well and ableto manage an infection if I were
to get it.
These are just normal thingsthat, practitioners like this is
our job.
This is part of our jobdescription and to try and they
did, they very successfullyscared us into accepting these
kinds of protocols, aspractitioners even, my

(16:55):
colleagues were just, they wereso afraid to not do what the CDC
and the AMA told them to do, sothey just, went along.
Yeah.
The steroids, and then the lastone that was also pretty
extraordinary.
It took me a minute to identifyit, but the administration of

(17:15):
Remdesivir.
So that's a, an antiviral.
In nursing school, we weretaught that antivirals were only
to be administered to patientswho were less than 48 to 72
hours past symptom onset becauseat that point, antivirals had a
high risk benefit analysis ratioand, they were more likely to

(17:40):
cause harm than good if theywere administered after two to
three days.
And and we were givingremdesivir at 10 days plus post
symptom onset.
Not only at this point had thepatient already recovered from
the viral infection really, theyhad, and this was the case with

(18:02):
most hospitalized patients, theywould recover from COVID, and
then they would come to thehospital because of the
inflammation, the CRP values,the COVID, this spike protein,
whatever this was that infectedpeople, it hit our cells so
hard, so much damage was done ona cellular level from this.

(18:25):
This disease, this spikeprotein, whatever it was in
COVID 19 that caused all thecellular damage, people would
recover from the infection andthen they would come to the
hospital because of the cellulardamage that had gone so bad that
they couldn't breathe from allthe inflammation.
So right off the bat, we weregiving them not only an

(18:45):
antiviral, which was way outsideof, the time period when we
should be administering it.
But it was an experimental useproduct, it had no FDA approval,
and the only clinical trials atthat point that were available
on it were atrocious.
And I didn't know that at thetime, when I first started

(19:07):
administering Remdesivir, whichI didn't do much of.
I was normally, on the telemetryfloors and other areas of the
hospital, but when I didadminister it, not only did I
notice, or I would care for apatient who had received
remdesivir after they hadreceived it and I would have
conversations with the nurses atthe station and we would notice

(19:30):
this, these patients haverecovered from COVID, but now
they're going into multi organfailure.
And so that, It took some timeto really put those pieces
together when I started takingcare of people who were
receiving remdesivir.
But then I started after Inoticed gosh, We'd have these

(19:51):
conversations at the nurse'sstation, all the nurses were
like, why are we giving thismedication?
It makes no sense.
It's not helping.
It's potentially increasingharm.
We're seeing people go intomulti organ failure.
Why are we doing this?
And then at that point, probablytwo or three months into when I
first started caring for peoplewith remdesivir, I started

(20:12):
really looking into the clinicaltrials because I was in grad
school.
So I had access to the data.
I was like, I'm going to pullthis medication up.
So I did.
And I was just astounded by whatI found.
Yeah.
The clinical trials data wasatrocious and that was, it was
huge.
It was just mind boggling.

James Egidio (20:31):
Yeah.
I want to back up a little bitcause you mentioned the
withholding of thecorticosteroids.
I remember early on when COVIDwas pretty much announced and
rolled out in 2020, there was aDr.
Richard Bartlett out of Texaswho had what he called his
silver bullet treatment forCOVID patients that would come

(20:55):
into his office because he hadan office based practice.
And I remember him saying thatwhat he would use was nebulized
steroids, bethamethasone, andthen a Z Pak.
And out of a hundred patients,98 of them basically were,
pretty much fine after a coupledays.

(21:16):
And in fact, when they did thenebulized steroid in his office,
they got immediate results.
And then he put them on the ZPak to protect them from any
kind of infection, pneumonia.
But out of a hundred patients hehad mentioned, 98 of them got
through it and the other, thetwo out of the 100 had
comorbidities.

(21:37):
They were patients that werediagnosed and were being treated
for cancers and whatnot.
So I find that interesting thatthey hold back.
The other thing I want todiscuss with you was the
protocol for ventilators in thehospital that you worked in.
What, how did they qualify apatient for a ventilator in the

(21:57):
hospital?

Gail Macrae (22:00):
Our hospital was much more conservative than most
other hospitals in the countrywith ventilation.
We didn't really, we didn'treally go down the path of
ventilation.
I would, and that's one thingthat I also would add is that I
really felt that out of all thehospitals in the country, Kaiser

(22:25):
Permanente in the Bay area, wehad some great facilities.
They really.
They really did try and applylogic, even to the COVID
protocols.
So what we often did is wewould, and now in retrospect, I

(22:45):
know this to be, wrong, but wewould try and keep patients off
of the ventilator.
And they would use high flow O2.
And they would use CPAP or, andBiPAP.
And we didn't end up, we didn'tend up ventilating people.
And I'll say that in addition tothat we had some of the lower

(23:05):
death rates in the country inour hospitals in Sonoma County.
I believe in the first two orthree months we only had three
COVID deaths in Sonoma County.
And then over the next year, twoyears, even then our death rates
were lower than most other partsof the country.
And I would credit that to thefact that I think that as a

(23:31):
whole, we do have, relativelygood quality practitioners, for
Western medicine in SonomaCounty who I think that Even
though they weren't lookingoutside of the box, they were
still attempting to be as humaneas possible in the circumstances

(23:54):
that they were forced into.
So the ICU ventilator settings,I don't really know the details
of those because I didn't everwork in ICU beyond my early
years as a nurse.
And I'm not too familiar withthe ventilator settings, but I

(24:15):
definitely know that even in ourICUs, the nurses would say if a
patient was put on a ventilator,they were not going to survive.
And that was it was known thatthe ventilators even in our
hospital were causing Causingsignificant harm to patients

(24:35):
with COVID.
Yeah.

James Egidio (24:38):
So we fast forward from, let's say February of
2020, we get into close toDecember of 2020, I believe
that's when they rolled outoperation warp speed.
And they were rev up things withthe, I call it the bioweapon,
not a vaccine.
And so they roll that out.

(24:58):
What was the, or some of thethings that you witnessed and
explain a little bit about whatis called Code Blue to the
viewers and listeners of theMedical Truth Podcast?

Gail Macrae (25:10):
Yeah, that was a very extraordinary experience.
That really, that's really whatbroke me, I would say, as a
practitioner.
So I I got COVID in November of2020 and I was sick for about a
day and then I was tired forseveral weeks and and I

(25:33):
recovered.
And then before Project WarpSpeed was started in our county,
I went to the lab and had myantibodies drawn and I had
robust natural immunity to COVID19.
And considering that Iunderstood that these shots were
experimental I decided and I'm awoman of childbearing age, so

(25:55):
there was no data on, what thatcould have caused to my
maternal, health and wellnesshad I decided to have more
children.
So I, I decided, my robustnatural immunity, which is, this
is what vaccines have been basedon for 200 years was sufficient,
if not better than anexperimental shot, and I had

(26:16):
made the decision not to get theCOVID shot and then to watch and
wait and to see, what I observedin the acute care setting with
these shots.
And it was extraordinary.
Our practitioners got access tothe shots at like the beginning
of January of 2021, and we had avery compliant community.

(26:39):
I would say over 90 percent ofmy community ran out to get
these shots.
Wow.
Yeah, the Bay, it's the Bay Areaof California.
Very liberal, very compliantwith all of the COVID protocols.
Everyone, hid in their homes.
But so then the population, sothe healthcare practitioners got

(27:00):
access to the shots in Januaryand February and they were
released out to the publictowards the end of February in
2021.
And it was around that time whenI was still in grad school, so I
would do per diem, so I wouldwork at the hospital for three
weeks, and then I'd take eightweeks off and study real hard,

(27:23):
and then I'd do this three week,eight weeks schedule to focus on
school.
So when I was in the hospital inMarch, during the first Within
the first month of the roll outof these shots to the public it
was extraordinary.
So I was getting three phonecalls a day.
So like I told you in the firstyear of COVID, I'd been canceled

(27:45):
virtually every shift becausethe hospital didn't need work.
they didn't need practitionersto come to work.
They needed us to stay home sothey didn't have to pay us.
So we wouldn't make those Thosecute dances but so it was a
complete opposite in March of2021.
So at that point I startedreceiving three to four calls a

(28:06):
day from the staffing departmentto come in and that had never
happened in my entire career.
I had never, not even in thebusiest winters.
And that's one of the funnythings to think about is that
usually You know that, anypractitioner who works acute
care knows this, is that in thesummer months, the hospitals are
not full.
Those are always the time ofyear when we get canceled.

(28:29):
And that was not the case here.
The case was just the opposite.
It was that, from March until Igot fired, I was getting
multiple calls a day from thestaffing department to come to
work.
And that had never happenedbefore in my entire career.
And when I did go into work, itwas extraordinary what I saw.
So the code blues was I noticedthat in June when I returned to

(28:52):
the hospital in June after myfinals.
And I'm sure it was happening inMarch too.
I just didn't, pick up on itall.
Cause it's a lot, it's a lot ofthings to really take in when
you're in it and seeing it.
so I know I started noticing inJune there were a lot of things
going on that, but that was abig one.

(29:12):
So on day shifts specifically, Inoticed a massive influx of code
blues, which is when somebodystops breathing or their heart
stops.
And normally in the hospital.
A code blue is called, and it'scalled out on the intercom over
the whole hospital.
And the, it's a call to thespecific location of where that

(29:36):
patient is that stoppedbreathing.
They'd say code blue, secondfloor, room 256, and then the
emergency personnel would rushto that room.
So these codes on the day shiftwere primarily being called down
to the lower level of thehospital, which is where we were
administering the COVIDvaccines.
And That in combination with aconversation that I'd had with a

(29:59):
colleague who worked at adifferent Kaiser location.
She worked she's a friend that,of a friend that worked at the
COVID injection clinics and sheadministered the COVID shots.
And she had told her managersthat she was seeing like an
eight.
8 to 12 episodes of anaphylacticshock per day.

(30:23):
Wow.
And then when she reported it toher manager and asked about how
she should be reporting it, theytold her that if she reported
the adverse events, she would befired.

James Egidio (30:35):
To VAERS, correct?
Correct.

Gail Macrae (30:37):
Yeah.
And we have a mandatory we havetaken an oath to report.
Mandatory reporting is a real.
Part of this and that was reallythe attitude throughout all of
the so even in my hospital Ididn't hear directly from my
manager.
Oh if you report this we'regonna fire you it was more like
oh No, you can't report thatbecause we can't prove that this

(31:03):
is what caused the reaction andwe just can't be reporting
things that we can't prove soeven, so for instance I,
Guillain Barre is a greatexample.
I had taken care of two patientswith Guillain Barre over, the
eight years as a nurse beforeCOVID.

(31:25):
And then within about a month ofthe rollout of these COVID shots
I'd taken care of four patientswith Guillain Barre within a
month after two in eight years.
And I had the opportunity to asktwo of those patients if if they
knew what had caused it.
And two of them said that theyhad just received their COVID

(31:46):
vaccines and that they thoughtthat it was from the COVID
vaccines.
One of the women that I spoke towho said that I asked her if her
doctor had reported it to VAERS.
And she said that he didn'treport it and that he was
refusing to report it.
And I very strongly encouragedher to demand that he report it

(32:08):
because and she had said thesame thing to me in that, he
didn't want to report it becausehe was unsure if they could
prove that it was actually beingcaused by the COVID vaccines.
That's pretty much how all ofthese injuries went.
But I had a, my managerapproached me also in June of
2021.

(32:29):
And he said that our hospitalhad a threefold increase in
hospital admissions, three timeshigher than they'd ever seen
since the hospital opened theirdoors.
And that was that happened inJune as well, and that all
started with the rollout ofthese shots.
There were many factors thatreally came so strongly to me

(32:52):
that these shots were extremelydangerous.
I had two colleagues that wentinto anaphylactic shock after
receiving these shots and theywere scared.
A, they were scared to reportit.
B, they were scared to getanother shot.
I never ended up finding out ifthey did, but one of my
colleagues, I had a conversationwith him about it after he had

(33:13):
that experience and He wasterrified, I just can't imagine
what it would be like to go intoanaphylactic shock after taking
one of these shots and then,being told to take another.

James Egidio (33:25):
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's interesting because Iinterviewed a physician
assistant, Deb Conrad out ofupstate New York, and that
interview was exactly on thattopic of VAERS.
She was reporting VAERS and shenoticed the same thing.
That prior to the vaccine orbioweapons, I call it you'd get

(33:48):
maybe one or two or three, maybereported, VAERS reports that you
would submit per month, maybe,and yeah, maybe.
And she started reporting, for awhile there, three, four per
day, then it was like eight aday.
And then it was up to 10 a dayand she would have to do these
reports at home.
She was overwhelmed with havingto do these reports at home.

(34:11):
And she did this for about twomonths.
And she was reporting theseevents of injury to, through, to
VAERS.
and they got a, they got wind ofit, the hospital she was working
in, and they physically escortedher out of the hospital and
fired her on the spot.
Yeah, for reporting theseinjuries and deaths and me

(34:34):
personally, I know of, and Iprobably parroted this so many
times on so many episodes, but Ipersonally know of eight people
that died from these vaccines.
The youngest was 30 and it was acardiac event.
He had a cardiac arrest.
His brother found him dead onthe floor in his house.
and then, some turbo cancers,people I know have gotten turbo

(34:55):
cancers, so there's no question.
In the past.
If this was any other vaccine inthe past they would have pulled
it right away off the market.
So this was all intentional asfar as I'm concerned.

Gail Macrae (35:09):
Yeah, they really got it into our heads, that we
couldn't report and that theywere safe and effective.
Really I really feel that I wassurrounded by colleagues who
were in a trance.
That was

James Egidio (35:22):
going to be my next question to you, by the
way.

Gail Macrae (35:24):
Yeah.
Yeah, they so all of thesethings I would bring up and I
just Constantly felt that I wasjust hitting this brick wall
with my colleagues.
Like why are we administeringremdesivir?
Why aren't we giving steroids?
Why aren't we reporting theseside effects?

(35:44):
Why are we you know, continuingto recommend that?
You know that these things aresafe and effective.
And every time it just It waslike really just mum is the
word, people didn't want to talkabout it.
It was either that they were tooafraid to talk about it for the
safety of their career, or thatthey really just believed all of

(36:08):
these things were fine and they,there was this just cognitive
dissonance.
These people were just separatedfrom reality and just unwilling
or unable to see what was infront of them.
I have a little, a few theorieson this that I think are really
important to talk about becausesome people I've noticed can

(36:32):
really see what's going on andsome can't.
And the reasons for me that I'vefound for why it was that I
could see what was happeningwhen my colleagues weren't, it's
really interesting.
I noticed it before I left thehospital setting.
That gosh, like this reminded meso much of high school and I'll

(36:55):
say that in that I washomeschooled and I remember
being a teenager and realizingthat my my friends, you know
they really had their peergroups and they really developed
their own value and self worthbased on what their peers

(37:19):
thought of them, right?
And I wasn't one of them becauseI was homeschooled And so I had
to learn at a young age You knowbasically that I was responsible
for determining my own value andself worth And, what other
people thought of me wasn'tnecessarily, determinant of my

(37:42):
value and it really prepared meto engage with this during COVID
because I didn't really care,like my colleagues could think
that I was out to lunch and itreally didn't impact my ability
to make decisions.
Moral and ethical decisions, andthat's really what I saw was

(38:06):
that my colleagues were willingto compromise their ethics and
their integrity in order to inorder to remain within that
group of socially accepted.
Care providers.
Sure.

(38:27):
It was crazy.
Yeah,

James Egidio (38:30):
it's always good to be the outsider.
I think, but it's interestingtoo.
I think a lot of it isespecially with the public
because, we were, you're, youwere in the medical industry and
I was in the industry for a lotof the people that are not in
the industry too.
I think a lot of it was, for along time up until 2020.

(38:51):
At least for the most part,people had a lot of confidence
in the medical industry.
They always looked at the whitecoat as being the authority
figure and that whatever theywould prescribe or whatever
they, for treatment, that waslike, that was gold to the
person, to the patient.
And I think it's really changedand shifted a lot of people's

(39:12):
perception of the medicalindustry since 2020, this whole
thing with the vaccines andCOVID and a lot of the stuff
that's, it's, is getting outthere.
What do you think about that?

Gail Macrae (39:24):
What a question.
It's been I grapple with thisbecause I am born and bred from
that system.
And although I've always.
I've always, wanted to applyalternatives to healthcare.
nOw I find myself in a situationwhere I'm being, I'm a part of

(39:51):
the crumbling of that mentality.
And it's I hope, I know in myheart that I'm doing the right
thing, and that's really what'sguiding me in this, is that
regardless of what thisstructure and this system
determines is, right or wrongwhen it comes to, medical care

(40:15):
and science at the end of theday, I really have to just come
back to doing what's right.
In this moment and not worryabout how this system is going
to crumble because I see it.
I see that people are losingtheir faith in this system.

(40:36):
And it's scary to watch because,we have an entire world who has
You know, put all their eggs inthis basket of Western
philosophies around,pharmaceutical medicine.
In my heart, I understand that,our bodies were designed to heal

(40:57):
and that we are capable of,using the plant medicines from
the land, and the things aroundus to find wellness and that,
that's.
And that this system, thisWestern model really is based on
symptom management, which is notwellness, right?

(41:20):
Symptom management is putting aBand Aid on a festering wound
and leaving it there to end upleading to sepsis.
And that's not wellness.
And so my hope is that.
Perhaps this experience can leadthe world to recognize that we

(41:42):
really need to find a systemwhere we respect the profound,
incredible cellular beings thatwe are and, seek wellness rather
than seeking symptom managementand not just in the medicines
that we use but in the food thatwe eat And right all of the

(42:04):
things that create wellness

James Egidio (42:08):
Yeah, I noticed when 20 in 2020 The immune
system was never put into aconversation preventative It was
just you know draconianlockdowns and mask and all this
stuff and then you know, we havePeople like, Bill Gates involved

(42:30):
in the vaccine programs, who'snot even a medical provider,
doesn't have a medicalbackground.
In fact, I actually have a videoI wanted to share with you to
basically illustrate hisinvolvement in that, which I'm
sure too, as well.
But here's the video.
There are

Video (42:46):
pockets, and significant pockets, of the country where
vaccines aren't happeningbecause of those You know, the
anti vaxxers, or whatever youwant to call them, who have made
significant headway in trying toconvince parents they shouldn't
vaccinate children.
I was just looking at new datatoday from Orange County,
California, with more than a fewschools showing between 40 and

(43:09):
60 percent children notvaccinated.
You could say this is a, we're avictim of success.
In the countries where you havemeasles all the time, nobody
gets confused about this.
Do you get mad about it?
I get more mad about the deathswe're not avoiding.
I spend, my time on thecountries where you still have,

(43:31):
in the case of measles, over300, 000 kids dying a year.
In the case of diarrhealdiseases, over a million a year.
There's six million kids a yearstill dying.
Why aren't we getting vaccinesout in Africa?
For diarrhea, for respiratorydisease.
Why don't we have a vaccine formalaria?
Those are the things that I Ipush forward.

(43:53):
I wouldn't say I get angry, butI'm really impatient that we're
not moving as fast as I'd like.
You can catch the full interviewthis weekend on One on Saturday.

James Egidio (44:03):
What's your take on this, Lunatic?

Gail Macrae (44:08):
Oh, man.
He said it himself that hisinvestments in vaccines have
been the best decision he's madein his life.
I think that's really the bestthing to bring up here because
Bill Gates has shown in hisreputation over and over and

(44:28):
over and over again that hisprimary goal is to make money.
And it's not for the wellness ofthe people.
He has criminal charges againsthim in multiple countries around
the world for experimenting ontheir populations with children
and vaccines.
He has, he just has a trail ofof immoral choices and his life

(44:53):
is littered with with proof of,the lack of morality in his
decisions.
I would apply that to everythingthat he says, because I can't
trust that man.
He has too many red flags.
Very strong proof of his lack ofethics and morality in so many

(45:16):
different circumstancesthroughout his life that I just
don't trust him.
I wouldn't I would honestly, Iwould almost do the opposite of
what he suggested in everysituation because I have so
little respect for him.
And like you said, he's noteducated in these sciences.
He doesn't really understand howthe immune system works, what,

(45:40):
necessarily what it means to bewell.
If he does, he certainly doesn'ttalk about it.

James Egidio (45:46):
Yeah, and I wanted to share something else with you
and I wanted to get your take onbecause in your professional
opinion, that is, where do youthink this is all going?
And as far as the future ofmedicine this whole thing with
pandemics, I know you don't havea crystal ball, but what's your
take on the future of medicine?

Gail Macrae (46:08):
I'm a dreamer.
I have decided to completelyexit Western medicine and really
start focusing my energy andexpertise on developing, private
parallel infrastructure.
And I don't know if that'snecessarily the path either.

James Egidio (46:28):
Whoa!

Gail Macrae (46:29):
Lightning storm.
That felt like it was rightoutside my door.
Yeah! Yep, the storm juststarted here in Yeah, we're
getting

James Egidio (46:40):
it here too.
That's good.
I'll keep that in the, I'll keepthat in the recording, by the
way.

Gail Macrae (46:47):
That was really impressive.
Did you see the flash too?
I

James Egidio (46:50):
did.

Gail Macrae (46:52):
Interesting.
Yeah, so you know, I'm aneternal optimist about wellness.
I mean I think that more thananything, this is going to be,
this is going to need to be aspiritual transition because
until we really realize anddiscover that.
We are divine and that all ofthese low vibrational

(47:15):
frequencies like fear and angerand revenge and things like that
they just don't, in order forhumanity to really get beyond
this place where we're in rightnow, we're really just going to
have to let those things go andstart realizing and respecting

(47:37):
each other as sovereign beings.
Building this foundation ofwellness on that respect for
each other and recognizing, Itell my patients this all the
time, I tell them, this isactually probably one of the
hardest things for me steppinginto the realm of being a
primary care provider is helpingpeople understand that they need

(48:01):
to take responsibility for theirown wellness.
No practitioner is going to healsomeone, each individual has to
take on that power and thatresponsibility and recognize
that, they have it inthemselves, I'm here as a guide

(48:22):
and my goal is to give peoplethe tools to find wellness.
But.
I think that's a big part of thefailure in Western medicine is
that, like you said, we have allthese practitioners up on a
pedestal and it removes thepatient's own capacity to find

(48:43):
and create wellness forthemselves because they're
looking to their practitioner todo it for them, which of course
we can't.
It's a That's where I would loveto see medicine go, is in a
direction of autonomy,individual respect, and finding
wellness for ourselves with thesupport of practitioners who

(49:05):
also understand that, wellnessis attained through balance.
And not being afraid of theworld around us, that's a big
part of this for me, too, is whyare we so terrified of the
environment around us in thefirst place?
We are part of the Earth findinga place of equanimity with, All

(49:26):
of these bacterias and virusesin the world around us.
If we're not well in ourselves,we aren't going to be able to
find that wellness.
And yeah, so these are I getreally optimistic about these
things.
And yeah, you're

James Egidio (49:42):
a lot more optimistic than I am.
I know they're trying so hard.
And I say they, these so calledglobalists, which is part of the
WHO, the World HealthOrganization, United Nations.
they really, they've spent justbillions, they've spent billions
and billions of dollars through,through the media and even
through pushing the narrativesthrough with scaring people with

(50:06):
future pandemics and whatnot.
That I could see why people getfixated on the fear factor
because of that.
And in fact, I actually, I haveanother video I wanted to share
about that.
But, I think too, that there,it's I don't see them stopping

(50:27):
at this point.
And my answer to that, to a lotof people in a lot of episodes,
and even some of the currentwritings that I've been posting
on Substack is that it's simple,don't comply with these people.
This is a ruse.
This is, that's why I call itthe plandemic.
thEy're.
This was never about COVID, thiswas about the vaccine, and they

(50:49):
used COVID.
They could have used H1N1, theycould have used swine flu, they
could have used Ebola, theycould have used any of those.
That was the vehicle to getpeople to use to, for them to
administer the vaccine, thevaccination or the bioweapon as
I call it.
And then, to go as far as thispotted plant that we have in
office in Washington Biden hepushes it with mandates.

(51:13):
Don't listen to these people.
Don't even, same thing withDonald Trump.
Donald Trump was all part ofthis Operation Warp Speed, never
apologized about it, never tookresponsibility for it.
And this was after there were alot of injuries and deaths, and
still pushing the vaccination orthe bioweapon again, as I call
it.
So you don't need to listen tothese people.

(51:34):
You have a God given right notto listen to these people.
We have a God given right to notlisten to these people.
And I'll repeat that.
yeAh, so I wanted to just sharea video real quick with the
World Health Organization andwith this Tedros from the World
Health Organization ispredicting the

Video (51:53):
phase of COVID 19 was declared over the head of the
World Health Organization isurging countries to make changes
and start preparing for the nextglobal pandemic.
When the next pandemic comesknocking, And it will, we must
be ready to answer decisively,collectively, and The 194 member

(52:17):
states of the World HealthOrganization, including Canada,
are currently negotiatingreforms to the binding rules
that help the organizationrespond to international
threats.
Countries are being urged toboost funding for the UN Health
Agency and to ensure smallernations are not left behind for
future pandemics

James Egidio (52:37):
so again, it seems like it's about control.
Implementing all theseamendments through the World
Health Organization and peoplehave to, I guess you can look at
it from a macro level, which isthat the WHO and the United
Nations.
And then you want to look at itlike you were saying earlier

(52:57):
from a micro level, from apersonal level, from a spiritual
level.
How does someone how doessomeone juggle those two things?

Gail Macrae (53:09):
Yeah, that's quite the predicament we're up
against.
I hear this treaty they'retrying to implement in May of
this year, and it could havesome really profound impacts on
every country in the world whosigns on.
It's a scary thought, if thistreaty can You know, overtake

(53:34):
our constitution in thiscountry.
That's profound.

James Egidio (53:38):
Yeah.
They're meeting again, I believethe 27th of this month,
actually.
I interviewed James Roguski on apretty much a frequent basis to
get updates on, cause he's anexpert on that.
And I believe it's the 27th ofJanuary,

Gail Macrae (53:54):
but yeah.
And if this goes down, the oneworld.
The One World Government willdefinitely have treaties in
place.
I I had a friend remind merecently about how, all these
treaties and laws and all thesethings that are put in place to

(54:19):
corral societies.
That's that's really like thephysical aspect of life.
And then there's the other side,which is the spiritual aspect of
life.
And I look at I try to use thosetwo kind of philosophies to
think about it.
They're taking they're reallyPotentially already have

(54:43):
complete physical control.
I've seen court cases where, itshows that if your genome has
been altered, you become theproperty of the of the company
who owns the product.
And the physical world, itreally seems to be coming to
this point where they, they mayhave complete control and I

(55:08):
guess what I would say to thatin my optimism is that They can
use whatever tactics and lettersand notes and Jurisdictions and
lawyers and all of this they cando all of these things for
themselves But ultimately at theend of the day, you know We're

(55:28):
still free sovereign Souls andwe can choose to go along or not
go along and I try and justremember that and just choose to
not go along with this and yeah,I mean I am up against this
constantly of trying to bringawareness to this treaty that

(55:50):
could potentially completelyremove our sovereignty, you know
on the physical side of thingsand Can we stop it?
I hope so.

James Egidio (56:03):
Yeah, me too.
I pray that we do.
So share with the viewers andlisteners of the Medical Truth
podcast as to what you're doingnow with your organization.

Gail Macrae (56:15):
I am doing some awesome things with
StandFirmNow.
org StandFirmNow is a nonprofit, it's a, it's one of
these private organizationswe're attempting to build expert
witness testimony because as anexpert witness I've come into
this realm of complete and utterfailure in the legal world.

(56:39):
Where, we are filing lawsuits,we it's the same thing really in
the legal world as it is in themedical world in that, the
lawyers are scared to litigateagainst COVID crimes and the
judges are, too concerned toallow these cases to go to
trial, for their reputations.

(57:00):
so The purpose of stand firm nowis to gather expert witness
testimony to put an end to thecourt's ability to continue to
perpetuate, fraud and lies inthe courts.
Because if we have, so what theykeep saying to us is that we

(57:21):
haven't set precedence.
And we don't, we haven'testablished a fact pattern with
COVID related cases.
And so they won't proceedforward with litigation because
of that.
So Stanfirm now is a legalprocess to set precedence and
establish a fact pattern.

(57:42):
If we can get thousands ofpractitioners to sign a document
that pretty much spells out allof the atrocities of COVID.
and attest to it.
And that's the difference I'llsay between what I've done here
with Dr.
Christiane Northrup and LynetteMadison and what other people

(58:03):
there's a legal group, I forgetthe name of it now, but they had
something like 16, 000 doctorsaround the world sign a document
to state that COVID was a scam,basically.
I'm forgetting the name of itnow.
It's not Tom Renz, is it?

(58:24):
There have been a few.
Yeah, he might be on that casebut those types of signatures
don't really carry weight.
And that's really thedifference, is that when you
sign, when you have a document,an affidavit, and you get it
notarized, I can take that intocourt.

(58:45):
And it will stand as a statementof truth to the judge.
And that's not the case with anyof these other, Oh, sign this
document things around COVID.
They don't carry the legalweight that an affidavit does.
these affidavits, if we can getthousands of practitioners to

(59:07):
notarize these one of theseaffidavits and send them in
we'll be submitting them intothe courts in an administrative
capacity and then at that point,we'll be able to appeal them
into international jurisdictionto make this evidence available
to every litigating attorneyaround the world.

(59:28):
So that's really the point, isto set precedents and establish
a pa a fact pattern with a legaldocument that can't be disputed.
So it's a very powerful action.
I've had a circuit court judgereach out to me about it and
offer, we continue to update andimprove the document.
In addition to the document, wehave 400 more than 400 pieces of

(59:51):
evidence to support everystatement in the affidavit.
In addition to that, if there'ssomething that, somebody doesn't
like in the affidavit, they cancross it out, they can add what
they want.
We created this boilerplatedocument to make it easy for
people because, we know thatit's hard to take the time out
of your day to create a legaldocument.

(01:00:12):
But this by no means is the onlything that one can use.
And we've done this to try and,like I said, make it really easy
for people to submit theirvoices to this, to some kind of
action that can actually setprecedence in the courts.
Another thing is that it doesn'tmatter if you're active or

(01:00:32):
retired as a practitioner.
These affidavits are targeted atat people who could be
considered medical medical orscience experts.
So it's not relevant to yourexperience.
It's relevant to your expertiseand your knowledge base.
It, it can extend to a widerange of people who are willing

(01:00:53):
to get involved.
It's I'm looking forward togetting this evidence to
establish the fact pattern sothat we can start winning in
court.
So hopefully that'll happen thisnext, this year.

James Egidio (01:01:06):
Yeah.
We have some great attorneysthat are looking at some
loopholes with the rollout ofthe vaccine.
I know one of them is, I'veinterviewed him Warner
Mendenhall.
I'm not sure if you're familiarwith him, but I interviewed him.
He's representing Deb Conrad,the physician assistant that I
mentioned who Report at theVAERS injuries, as well as

(01:01:28):
Brooke Jackson, who was thewhistleblower for Pfizer.
Yeah.

Gail Macrae (01:01:33):
Yeah.
I would like to speak more withhim.
I am in contact with him.
Yeah.
Great guy.
Yeah.
I'm hoping that we can worktogether to really start taking
down the Goliath here.

James Egidio (01:01:46):
Absolutely.
You mentioned too on yourwebsite, I noticed about PCR
tests.
What's that about?

Gail Macrae (01:01:54):
The PCR tests there are so many things about those
that are fraud.
Yeah.
So we ran those first of all,the PCR test, the creator, the
PCR test, said that they couldnever be used as a diagnostic
test.
In addition, which is what wehave done with them, with covid,
we're using them as a diagnostictest.

(01:02:15):
They are not they are notequipped to do that.
in Addition to that, we run themat cycle thresholds that are,
like, double what accurate rresults would be produced at.
So the, I think the CDCrecommended a cycle threshold
less than, I believe it was 40.

(01:02:36):
It could have been 36.
Either way the manufacturers ofthe PCR test stated that, If it
was run over a cycle thresholdof, I believe, 18, it could have
been 16 the results would beinaccurate, which is basically
every single PCR test that hasbeen taken in the world.

(01:02:58):
Yeah.
They've all been run at cyclethresholds that produce
inaccurate information, on topof the fact that PCR tests were
not ever designed.
To diagnose.
So

James Egidio (01:03:12):
I have some video footage to from the inventor of
the PCR test to actually back upyour statement there.
Carrie, how

Video (01:03:22):
do they misuse PCR to estimate all these supposed free
viral RNAs that may or may notbe there?
I think misuse PCR is not quite,I don't think you can misuse
PCR.
The results, the interpretationof it.

(01:03:42):
See, if you can say if theywanted if they could find this
virus in you at all, and withPCR, if you do it well, you can
find almost anything in anybody,it starts making you believe in
the sort of Buddhist notion thateverything is contained in
everything else, right?
Because if you can mo amplifyone single molecule up to a, to

(01:04:02):
something that you can reallymeasure, which PCR can do, then
there's just very few moleculesthat you don't have at least one
single one of them in your body,okay?
So that could be thought of as amisuse of it, just to, to claim
that it's meaningful.
But the real misuse of it isthat you don't need to test for
HIV, you don't need to test forthe other 10, 000 retroviruses

(01:04:23):
that are unnamed, also in thesubject.
See, somebody that's got HIV,generally is gonna have almost
anything that you can test for,because they have definitely
been, HIV is a fairly rarevirus.
There's only one million of usout of 250, 300 million people
in America that have that virus.
So you have to get around,either your mother had to have

(01:04:43):
it and pass it to you, or youhave to really be paying a lot
of attention to people that dohave it and paying only
attention to them and get apretty good chance of getting it
that way.
It's hard to get it, but if youhave it, there's a good chance
you've also got a lot of otherones.
Because you've been in themarket for, it's been possible
for you to get a lot of it's, totest for that one and say that

(01:05:05):
has any special meaning is whatI think is the problem.
Not that PCR has been misused,it's Is it an estimation?
It's not an estimation, it's areal, it's a really quantitative
thing.
It tells you something aboutnature and about what's there,
but it allows you to take a veryminuscule amount of anything and
make it measurable and then talkabout it in meetings and stuff

(01:05:26):
like it is important.
See that's not a misuse, that'sjust a misinterpretation.
iT is.
There's very little of what theycall

James Egidio (01:05:33):
HIV.
So there you go, he pretty muchtalks about the fact that, you
could test for thousands ofdifferent things with a PCR test
and it's not accurate.
At that time, it was HIV.
Yeah,

Gail Macrae (01:05:48):
Dr.
Rainer Fulmich also intervieweda woman who was a PCR expert.
And she said some things that Iwill never forget in her
analysis of our PCR tests.
She stated that our tests theyhad been programmed to react
positively to three differentfragments.

(01:06:11):
of the DNA of the of thecoronavirus and she stated that
those were three of the mostcommon genetic markers in any
virus in existence.
And when I got that informationfrom an expert I really, it
really helped me understand howflawed they created these tests

(01:06:35):
to be.
I'm sure they could have createdPCR tests that may have been
more accurate had they beenproperly created with one
genetic marker that was uniqueto coronavirus rather than three
separate markers that wereprevalent in the genetics of
pathogens in nature incombination with running these

(01:06:57):
tests properly.
You know at cycle thresholds ofwhatever it was 16 or below, you
know Maybe that would haveproduced some accurate
information, but as it stands Iplace zero stock in PCR tests.
I've never taken one I won'ttake one because they're utter

(01:07:17):
nonsense in my professionalopinion in the state that
they're in, sure there may be atime or a place where I would re
evaluate, the science and theevidence and I would understand,
this has actually been correctlyformulated and, let's re
discuss.

James Egidio (01:07:36):
And there was no discussion.
It's all censorship and, thisdoesn't exist and it's just,
it's gone it's crazy.
I don't know where any of thisis going to end anymore.
Like you said, I'm beyondgetting mad.
It's just nice to talk toexperts such as yourself, people
that were in the profession, andat least get some, there's some

(01:07:58):
glimmer of hope.
Like you said, you want to beoptimistic as much as you can.
And like you said we'resovereign beings, so we can make
decisions for ourselves.
And you just hope and pray thatpeople don't fall prey to this
again.
And if they do, I've warned alot of family members about it.
Some listened, some didn't.
I don't know.

(01:08:18):
I don't know what the answer is.

Gail Macrae (01:08:21):
Yeah.
I'm in the same boat.
Yeah.

James Egidio (01:08:24):
Yeah.
But thank you so much forjoining me for this episode of
the Medical Truth Podcast, Gail.
I really appreciate it.
Thank you, James.
Absolutely.
Keep me updated on everythingtoo, please.
Will do.
Alright.
Thanks

Outro (01:08:38):
Thanks for listening to the medical truth podcast for
the latest episode, go to www.
medicaltruthpodcast.
com.
You can also find the medicaltruth podcast on rumble YouTube,
as well as the major podcastplatforms like apple podcast,
Spotify, Substack, and I heart.