4/5 Natural Nurse or Toxic Influence? The Paloma Shemirani Story

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
So Dear Call It Conspiracy.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
Welcome to the s Dear Call It Conspiracy podcast, hosted
by Brentley and Neil Sanders. After nearly twenty years exploring
the world of conspiracy culture, we are taking our guests
and listeners on a guided tour of the rabbit hole,
our mission to discover where the truth lies.

Speaker 3 (00:42):
So welcome to Part four of the ongoing saga of
Kate Shremrani. And we're now on to July the second,
and as you may remember, there's an upcoming inquest into
the death the untimely death of Paloma Sheremrani who died
a sadly very young age twenty three, and the consensus

(01:04):
from the NHS was that she died of non Hodgkins lymphoma. However,
Kate Sheremrani has different ideas, and on July the second,
she went on The Resistance podcast, and the Resistance podcast
entitled this interview how the NHS killed her daughter. And
you must remember that recently there's been a Panorama show

(01:26):
exposing the accusations against Kate, and Kate says that basically
the Panorama show was a complete fantasy and she accuses
them of attempting to pervert the course of justice because
in her mind, they are covering up for the NHS,
the NHS who murdered her daughter with an overdose of adrenaline,

(01:49):
even though technically that was actually what revived her and
she then went to the hospital where sadly, she died
about a week later. But Kate also says she's been
receiving death threats since the Panorama show, although she doesn't
elaborate on how or why or where by which I

(02:10):
mean whether she's getting them through Twitter or whether he's
phoning or what, but she says that this is kind
of a sort of occupational hazard, particularly if you're a
professional that's turned whistleblower in what could be termed the
conspiracy world, and she references somebody as a sort of

(02:31):
an example to bolster her position on this. Do you
want to have a guess who? She references.

Speaker 1 (02:38):
Russell Brown?

Speaker 3 (02:39):
Not quite no, she references the former doctor Cartland, now
simply known as mister Cartland, and she basically says that
due to stress from the lying press, not only was
he struck off because of his bold stance against the

(03:00):
evil of the COVID vaccines, which Kate says, kill you,
but also that recently she puts his business on Front Street.
To be quite honest, she says that she was told
that doctor Cartland was found on the kitchen floor unresponsive
by his wife and so an air ambulance had to

(03:22):
be sent in order to get him, and she intimates
very strongly that this was a suicide attempt, although whether
it was or not, who knows. But the problem with
this is that she actually says that he was struck
off for his stance on COVID nineteen in the vaccine,
and that simply isn't true. What he was struck off

(03:43):
for was seventeen proven allegations, which included harassment of fellow professionals.
Between twenty twenty two and twenty twenty five, Cartlin engaged
in threatening and harassing behavior towards three doctors and a
practice manager across social media on platforms like x Intagram, Getter,
and telegram. So he was pestering these people from all

(04:06):
sorts of different things and also spreading lies about them.
This included posting or reposting content that caused alarm or distress,
such as accusing one doctor of pedophilix sympathies and another
of having an interest in having sex with animals. He
also created fake profiles on Twitter in the name of

(04:27):
one of his victims to post stuff that would one
assumes would be there to sully the reputation of this
person by him then showing these tweets and going, oh,
look at this, this disgusting behavior by this person that
I happened to be harassing. He also showed hostility towards
the LGBTQ community. Cartlan's actions included posts motivated by hostility

(04:52):
towards the LGBTQ community, such to sharing an image stating
Pride Month can fuck off and comment mocking non binary individuals,
and he did a causimodo on this. He cited his
Christian beliefs as justification for persecuting other human beings. You know,
he decided that that obscure passage in what is it

(05:15):
fucking Leviticus or something like that, that's what we're going
to while it's wearing you know, mixed fabrics and probably
like he's seen many many cheeseburgers, exactly. Yeah, but to
ignore the things about treating your fellow man like you
would want to be treated yourself and judged, not lest

(05:35):
you be judged fucked off those parts of Christianity because
they didn't suit his purpose. Oh what the Jesus parts.
The Jesus parts, Yeah, fuck the Jesus parts. We want
the wrathful Old Testament shit. That's the stuff that we're
talking about, unless, of course, it happens to encapsulate us
in their wacky shit, in which case we ignore it.

(05:56):
But basically, the tribunal found that he's actually constituted harassment
and were completely incompatible with professional standards. He also was
completely dishonest regarding COVID vaccine exemptions, and this also came
up in the tribunal. Cartland offered to provide COVID nineteen
exemption certificates to individuals without medical justification, which undermined the

(06:20):
exemption system. For example, in September twenty twenty three, he
indicated he would list medical exemption for anyone to acknowledge
bodily autonomy, which the tribunal deemed dishonest and serious misconduct.
He also encouraged online harassment. He posted the personal details
of a fellow doctor to encourage his three hundred thousand

(06:42):
X followers. Actually, he hasn't got three hundred thousand, a
huge amount of them a bots, probably that he has
bought himself the pathetic shit, but he's still encouraged his
followers to pile on and to harass people. And this
was because she rejected his job application, and so rather

(07:03):
than like an adult or a professional, what he decided
to do was get people to harass this person, which
was deemed as a further escalation of his misconduct. So
doctor Carland is not a hero, nor is he a whistleblower.
He's a stupid person that decided to sacrifice his his

(07:25):
professional reputation, his job, and his children's secure futures because
he preferred to get praise from fucking idiots on the internet,
because his ego is more important to him than professionalism
or the continuation of a career, even even if it

(07:45):
affects those that he holds dearest and nearest. And that
is who Kate decides to bring up in order to
sort of compare herself to. And I think that's apt
because in both of these cases, what we're actually seeing
is somebody's ego distring opportunities for their children.

Speaker 4 (08:07):
I would like to add one important thing about Cartland
mm hmm, and.

Speaker 3 (08:13):
That is that he is a bell End. Absolutely yeah,
fuck that man. Fuck him in the ear. Anyway, KOs
also says that COVID was caused by do you know,
do you want to know? Obviously we really know this
five G five G and she knows this because basically

(08:35):
wu Han was the trial city four five G. It
was the only trial city that she says, and that
correlated and coincided exactly with the rise of COVID. But
there's a problem with this theory. It didn't wu Han
didn't have total five G coverage. It did have some,

(08:57):
but it wasn't the first city. Is like Beijing, Shanghai,
jiang Zhao, and hang Zo had all had almost total
five G coverage, and some of those cities had five
G coverage before Wuhn. So logically, if that was the
cause of COVID, it wouldn't have shown up in wu

(09:20):
Han first. So the very first step her theory seems to,
you know, disintegrate because it's stupid. And speaking of stupid,
she also decides that again to reiterate her support that
Lucy let Bee is innocent, Beverly Alett, another nurse who

(09:42):
murdered babies, is innocent, and also that Harold Shipman is innocent.
Howard Shipman widely regarded as well. Harold Shipman widely regarded
to be one of the worst serial killers in English history,
who actually went to the same school as my dad,
though that's not connected. She decides that, yeah, he's absolutely innocent.

(10:06):
She doesn't she doesn't say why, but this is what
she feels. She goes on to say that when she
was fined for her COVID breaches, she received three fines
of six hundred pounds each, which is somehow connected to Satan.
She also said that she had right. She also said

(10:31):
that she had costs of one hundred and eighty pounds,
and she says that one eighteen one hundred and eighty.
So if you remove the zero and you think of
how you get to eighteen, it's an encoded Yeah, it's
an encoded six sixty six. And she says that this
is proved that the British government is Satanic and that
they were essentially mocking her when they issued these fines.

(10:55):
But there is a problem with this that that that's
just not true. Like we spoke about this in previous episode,
Cheyenne from BBC Verify had reported that she was fined
one hundred eight, eight hundred and seventy five pounds, so
she's just fibbing to make herself seem more interesting, which

(11:16):
is silly. She then goes on to say that the
COVID vaccines were experimental and not tested, which is simply
not true. And she says that the doctors and nurses
killed people with morphine and that they also all knew
that the vaccines killed, but none of them cared because
the doctors and nurses who administered these vaccines apparently got

(11:39):
huge financial incentives to stay quiet and obviously to go
along with the mass murder of well everybody almost really
like and there's a number of reasons that again, this
theory falls down. One that that's stupid and there's no
evidence to support it. Why he is the only whistleblower

(12:01):
to this fact somebody that wasn't involved in this? Are
you telling me that not a single doctor or nurse
in the entire country had a conscience? And when I
don't want to be involved in this mass murder, some
might say that, oh, they were forced to sign non
disclosure agreements. It's like, so that's what's stopping them from
like blowing the whistle on the mass murder and the

(12:22):
government sort of you know, culling operation that went on.
It's like, well, my conscience is one thing, but I
don't want to be civilly libel, like there's ridiculous, Like
it's it's I mean, it's just made up, isn't it,
to be quite honest. And also this this concept of
financial incentives is just simply not true. She's mashing together

(12:42):
the concept that in America when COVID patients were treated,
money went into the system, and it's like, that's because
the American system works like that. It's an insurance based company,
so when anyone gets treated for anything, money is given
to pay for it. And that was misinterpreted wilfully to say, oh,

(13:05):
the doctor's pocket that, oh the nurses pocket that, as
if like they were in some sort of scheme where well,
you really need to pull up your numbers, Carol. You
know you've only murdered fifty people. June here has murdered
seventy five. And so she's on the leaderboard and looking
to get looking to get a set of steak knives
at the end of the month. Like it's it's beyond belief,

(13:29):
it's so so stupid. But she was told that now
you do you want to know why some people didn't
die from the COVID vaccine placebos Somewhat yeah, And she
doesn't explain whether this was too because of good doctors
and nurses sort of getting involved, or whether this was
due to the evil government trying to hide their tracks,

(13:53):
but she said that she knows that what was happening
was some of the vaccines getting watered down. They were
getting diluted, you know, you know, like if your vinto
was too strong. That's what they were doing to negate
the lethality of these vaccines. She didn't say rich vaccine

(14:16):
because obviously, again there are lots of different types and
such like that. But anyway, she also says that she's
been told that doctors are treating vaccine damaged patients privately
whilst continuing to make their day jobs, and off the
back of this secret cottage industry of treating the vaccine damaged,

(14:38):
they're making up to nine thousand pounds a day exploiting
these poor people that they themselves damaged with these vaccines.
She doesn't provide any evidence to this, but like, you know,
that's what she says. She goes on to say that,
like we know that governments around the world will do

(15:00):
things like this because in the nineteen seventies in the
United States of America, the Department of Defense made a
deadly compound that was sent all over the world, and
it was proven to cause incidents of leukemia, lymphoma and
also AIDS, which is pretty fucking impressive because they're completely

(15:20):
different things. But anyway, I think she doesn't elaborate. I
think she's talking about something. It was called the h
I'm going to butcher this Sarah Tia Mars sensens experiment,
which is se r r A t I A m
A r c s CNS. This was a thing, but

(15:44):
in a now famous expose, the US government released s
Mars sensens over both civilian population centers and military training
areas from the late nineteen forties to the mid nineteen
sixties in hopes of gathering data on the potential spread
of BioTime errorsm agents used against the United States. These
experiments were on earthed by investigative journalism in the mid

(16:07):
nineteen seventies, prompting a congressional investigation that studied the US
government testing on the public in the meantime. Mars and
sends was revealed to be a pathogen capable of causing
a full spectrum of clinical disease, from urinary tract infections
to pneumonia. S Mars and sens is now an accepted

(16:27):
clinical pathogen and a multi antibiotic which is resistant a
multi antibiotic resistant isolate. So what this thing is is
a bacterium that has been using various experiments, including biological
warfare simulations as a tracer organism in medical studies. So

(16:48):
it's got like a red pigmentation and apparently this makes
it quite easy to identify, so it's useful in tracking
its spread in experiments. Although it is a known pathogen
known to cause a range of infections, it was used
in several experiments, one called Operation Sea Spray. In nineteen fifty,

(17:10):
the US Navy conducted a secret biological warfare experiment called
Operation Sea Spray where they released S. Marson Sen's over
the San Francisco Bay area to study the spread of
bacteria in an urban environment, and the purpose was to
understand how vulnerable cities were to biological weapons attacks. Now,

(17:31):
whilst the Navy claimed the bacteria was harmless, some individuals
in San Francisco developed unusual infections. A one person died,
leading to controversy in questions about the experiment safety, but
it wasn't clear that this was the cause, and this
was made public in the nineteen seventies, which basically sparked

(17:53):
an investigation into other government testing on the public. It's
used as a tracer of organism, So before the pathogen
nature of Saratamarus Marston sense was fully understood, it was
used in medical and other experiments to track the spread
of microbes in various situations. These situations included tracking the

(18:14):
spread of germs during dental work or in other scenarios
where airborne transmissions were being studied. The understanding of S.
Marsen sens is a pathogen developed over time, with studies
revealing its ability to cause various infections, including urinary tract infections, pneumonia,
and even potentially meningitis outbreaks. What was it that Kate

(18:35):
said that it caused when they experimented on people in
the nineteen seventies, aids, Yes, Now that's various types of cancer, yeah,
which is not true. And it also wasn't carried out
in the seventies. That's when it was revealed to the public.
Now there was bad outcomes to it, but she's hyping

(18:58):
it up. Essentially, it's now recognized as a clinical pathogen
and it's got multi antibiotic resistance strains. But despite its history,
search continues on seri Art and Marston SEMs, including studies
on its ability to survive in different environments, it's interaction
with the human immune system and its role in infections,
and the understanding the behavior and pathogenity of Seriart and

(19:20):
Marson sense is important for preventing and treating infections caused
by this bacteria, including something called no so common old infections.
So yeah, so again, she's just hyped that up because
she's vague enough so that nobody will will go and check.
Now only wrong. The American government and no doubt other governments,

(19:41):
have done dreadful things to people, including spreading actual pathogens
on subway systems and also driving around pumping them out
of the back of cars as part of certain mk
ultra experiments. Let us not forget the worst is the
fact that they killed a lot of people by essentially

(20:01):
blowing up nuclear bombs down wind from where they lived,
not only people in the military that they were there
to sort of observe these tests and essentially to be
human guinea pigs, but also to civilians who just happened
to be in the sort of draft of the radioactive material.

(20:24):
So don't get us wrong, We're not saying that the
American government has never killed its own civilians, like it
absolutely has. But that is not a great example to use.
Is better. She goes on to tell the same story
of asking for Paloma's histology, but she and again this

(20:45):
will be important as we go on, but she adds,
for some strange reason, just before I left, when I'd
asked them about the histology and the bloods, I wanted
them to absolutely assure me that my daughter was for resuscitation.
And the doctor, senior house officer, doctor Christine Anderson, he
turned the entire screen around, the computer screen on a

(21:05):
mobile screen, and he showed me that every single patient
in the unit. I mean, talk about a breach of confidentiality,
and right across I could see that every patient on
the entire ward had do not resuscitate. So what we're
supposed to believe there is that basically, not only as

(21:26):
the doctor breached the confidentiality of all these patients, but
that all of these patients regardless of the severity of
their condition, were down for do not resuscitate, which you know,
big if true. She then goes on to so that
ras Buria case, which is the drug that she claims

(21:47):
is triggered the conditions that ultimately led to Poloma's health deteriorating,
is a newly licensed and very dangerous drug. Judge to
know when it was first use in the USA two
thousand and two. So it's not a newly licensed nooriedge,

(22:07):
is it. I mean, you could make the argument that
all in every medicine can be dangerous in the wrong
doses and used in the wrong way, but it certainly
isn't considered new nor is it considered particularly dangerous. She
done knows what to say. These people are saying, oh,
it's an eighty percent survival rate, Please do your due diligence.

(22:31):
Forget the eighty percent. Put five people around a table
that's one hundred percent. Kill twenty percent of them, and
you're going to kill one in five. That's a big number.
Now I'm no mathematician, but I think that there's a
flaw in her logic there, because she seems to have

(22:52):
missed the obvious counter to that argument, which is that
four out of five of them will survive. So hm.
She then goes on to say, and then they wanted
her to organize straight away to go and have all
her eggs removed. They called it fertility pre preservation, but

(23:17):
I call it eugenics. And again we've discussed this on
previous episodes, but it doesn't make sense because it's not eugenics, right.
What she's suggesting is that they're going to sterilize her
so that she can't have children in the future, because well,
one would presume that they've determined that she is not
a viable, you know, subject for promoting the future of

(23:41):
the human race. But that's not true because the very
opposite is true. That's why they would be harvesting eggs
so that if the treatment does cause infertility, she has
the opportunity to use I don't know, would it be
IVF or something like that. But again, this is just
she's being very sensational and very dramatic in order to

(24:05):
give the idea. And again it ties in with this
idea that they're stealing her organs and they're harvesting eggs somewhere,
they're using her daughters as a resource like you know,
like an animal that's been killed in the wild or
something like that. This is the imagery that she's trying
to sort of evoke. She then goes on to describe
the afternoon of Poloma's death. So she had all that trauma,

(24:29):
and she said, I can't breathe. I can't breathe. And
then I believe that the trauma is referring to the
upcoming court case or the potential court case that was
trying to get her out of the custody of her mother.
She says, I can't breathe, I can't breathe, and then
her eyes rolled back and saliva came out of her

(24:49):
mouth and the rest I couldn't get a pulse, so
I put her in the recovery position, ran and got
an airway. You've been in my house right at the
bottom of the steps. I rang my friend at the
same time, I had my phone in my hand. As
I'd gone upstairs, I took the chain off the door
at the same time, ran upstairs. Within thirty seconds, I

(25:11):
put her on her back, I put the airway. I
did a sweep of her mouth in case it was warm.
She choked. I put her on her back, put the airway,
the good la airway in her mouth, which I have
in the treatment room, and her airway was open. I
couldn't feel a pulse, but she wasn't clammy and cyanoseed
and I began CPR and we rang an ambulance. My

(25:33):
friend arrived and we rang an ambulance. I carried on
doing CPR basic life support, and I stopped to check
and I thought, she's not clammy, she's not cyanosed. So
I told my front the friend, run and get my
pulse oximitter and out of my treatment room. It's not
a cheap one. It's a really good one on my stethoscope,

(25:55):
which she did in seconds. Downstairs and back up. I
told her how to put it on, I said, and
we'd had oxygen when she was really unwell. It's just
one that anyone can use. And it was still pushed
onto the table in a room. I said, grab that.
Plug it in. We put the nasal canula on her
nose and we turned the oxygen forty five fifty. It

(26:16):
started going up. She had a pulse, and then the
oxygen's saturations and it was then that it was one ten,
one forty and then our oxygen SATs were going up
on this oximeter, and I put this dethoscope in and
held it over the apex over her heart. I could
hear a pulse just really fast, and I thought she

(26:37):
was only ever under seven stone, and she was now
just under six stone. She'd lost a stone from when
she was really sick that first two months. And so
you noticed that there's a bit of a confusion there
because it's not clear whether she found the ambulance before
her friend arrived, or whether it was after her friend arrived.
It was actually after her friend arrived that they then

(27:00):
decided to find an ambulance. She's also trying to explain
that she revived her daughter, that she did have a pulse.
In fact, not only did she have pulse and normal
oxygen saturations or you know, indicative of life oxygen saturations,
but that her heart was beating really really fast. Now,

(27:20):
there might be a protect a problem with this, a
sort of a logical fallacy with this, is that, well,
then why were the paramedics trying to revive her? Why
did you allow them to try and revive her if
her heart was still beating? Doesn't make any sense anyway,

(27:40):
She says that the ambulance sat outside her house for
twenty minutes after they'd administered adrenaline to Paloma. Why, she says,
because they were administering more drugs in that ambulance, and
the same drugs that are now used on death row.
No idea. Anyway, when we arrived at the hospital, she's
got a huge surgery em pisma now on her neck.

(28:03):
She tried to say, oh, it's the tumor. I have
a timestamped photo of her taking at two in the
afternoon the same day, and that wasn't there. I believe
we discussed this on a previous episode. She showed that picture.
Paloma does not look the same. She has very swollen features,
and she doesn't look well. She doesn't look like the

(28:24):
same girl. She's got very swollen face, very puffy features,
which when you note realize that this girl is actually
under six stone as well, is like, oh, that paints
a very different picture. As as I said, she showed
the picture, and it was She tries to play it
off as if like, look, there's absolutely no difference here.
When I saw the picture, I went, I gasped, I

(28:46):
audibly gasped, because it was very clear that there was
something wrong, and that was before the paramedics arrived. She
also says that she has signed papers giving her the
power of attorney, but the doctors didn't accept it as
it hadn't been to the courts despite having a wet signature,

(29:07):
which is an appeal to Freeman on the land ship
that basically nothing is real unless it's got a wet signature,
which is just seatless.

Speaker 1 (29:16):
Really.

Speaker 3 (29:17):
She then reiterates the lie. Brainstem death is a lie.
You cannot take an organ from from a cadaver. If
the heart is beating and you are metabolizing fluids, you're
passing urine feces, metabolizing a liquid feed, you're not dead.
Life begins at conception. Death begins with secession of the
respiratory system, the cardiac system, and the neurological system, and

(29:41):
then decay begins. She also has ideas. She says, so
what might cause people to collapse? Well, we know that
during lockdown, let's talk about the elephant in the room.
What did they do. What was the one thing that
as an extempt from the Boogeyman virus that they could

(30:02):
continue working all night? The laying of the five G
in every town in every city, on top of every hospital,
every school, it's on the top of every single street lamp.
Even though you're they're not inshored. Every single city has
now been replaced with LED lights known to make your
blood sticky. So you're going to have a lot more

(30:25):
people that said are going to be having seizures and
are going to be having anaphylaxis. So have you noticed
that your blood has been a lot more sticky since
sally D lights have been installed in the streets around
where you live, Brent, No, And that is I'm swear
that's the first time I've heard that. It's the first
time I've heard the bloody sticky stuff. You know. Where

(30:47):
she gets the idea that like the CAUs iiness and
they're not inshured. It's from Mark Steele, that guy who
pretended to be a weapons expert and tried to take
various councils to court saying that led right, mister sunglasses,
mister former bouncer that shot a teenage girl in the head,
albeit by accident, but that really doesn't make it any better.

(31:10):
He also lied about his credentials working in the military
industrial complex. What he did was he had a private
firm in which he wanted to put and see if
you could see the irony of this an LED screen
into motorcycle helmets that would essentially work as like a
rearview mirror or a rearview camera. When that didn't take off,

(31:33):
he suddenly decided that he was a weapons expert and
that LED and five G were going to kill everyone
on the planet. So that's where she's got that crap from,
which is needless to say, not even remotely true. But
she says ultimately that she doesn't believe the official cause
of death, and she doesn't believe that there was a

(31:54):
tumor inside poloma, and she doesn't believe that this ultimately
led to the blocking of her air which induced a
cardiac arrest. She says that she was murdered by paramedics.
On July the twelfth, she and Mike Yeden they go

(32:17):
on a show called The Sons of Liberty, which she
sometimes as a host on, and the title of the
show is this is more concerning than anything COVID brought,
And they basically say the same shit. They mis represent
the donor procedure, and they claim the organs are being stolen,
and Yeden says that bone marrow injection will probably almost

(32:42):
certainly cause a fatal embolism. And what he's intimating is
that is actually what happened when Palema was given the
injection of adrenaline. So I checked and according to the
interweb well intarsius, which is into the bone marrow. Injection
of adrenaline or any substance can potentially lead to fat

(33:04):
and bone marrow embolism. It's generally not a major clinical concern,
particularly in the context of life saving emergency procedures. These
emboli are common after intriosis suffusions, but are usually small
and don't cause significant problems. Right, And it is. It
is boring, but as I said to you before we started,

(33:25):
it is totally worth it just to hear the song
that they play.

Speaker 5 (33:30):
At Oh my Days.

Speaker 6 (34:10):
Oh my God, stop, let's go on most stage, taxi.

Speaker 1 (34:56):
Stop.

Speaker 3 (35:00):
She's she's Kate Tremurani. She's not in it for the money,
but she's the most dangerous woman in the UK. Those
are the lyrics, so you know, interesting, But yeah, I
told you there was something. It's brilliant, isn't it. It's

(35:24):
absolutely brilliant. You can see that, like when they're recording
that someone's turned around and gone, this is a little
bit like Bowie, you know. So yeah. So the following day,
on July the thirteenth, Kate is up early and she's
on Twitter, and she's tweeting out, wake up. They have

(35:49):
no intention of your loved one waking up. They're worth
more just before they are dead. Yes, you read that correctly.
You cannot take an organ from a cadaver from a
dead body. And then she retweets another tweet, which is
a video of her spouting lies about spinal movements proving

(36:10):
that you're not dead. And this is from an account
called Refuge of Sinners, And it says Kate read from
page forty one of the NHS National Standards for Organ
Retrieval from Deceased Donors. Here is an image of that page.
The full document is here. Read page forty as well.
So I read the paper and can you believe that

(36:31):
they've both completely misrepresented it. Page forty says comical features
of spinal movements in the brain stem death. Brainstem death
leaves the spinal cord from descending central control, allowing the
emergence of spontaneous and reflex movements from neuronal networks within
the spinal cord, so called spinal movements. Spinal movements are

(36:53):
seen in circumstances where brainstem death has been confirmed by
four vessels, cerebral and yoker angiography. For this reason, clinic
glicians can be confident that spinal movements in no way
invalidate the diagnosis of brainstem death. Spinal movements often appear
after an initial period of complete flacid paralysis. For this reason,

(37:16):
they may be seen for the first time after brainstem
death has been confirmed, for instance, during donor optimization, transfer
to theater, or organ retrieval. Spinal movements may be triggered
or exaggerated by hypertension or acid based disturbances, and are
often reported during apnea testing or following the withdrawal of

(37:37):
mechanical ventilation in patients not proceeding with organ donation. Spinal
movements can be abolished with anesthetic muscle relaxance. So that
doesn't say what they say it says. In fact, it
actually says it can also happen following the withdrawal of
mechanical ventilation in patrons not proceeding organ donations, so they've

(38:02):
basically said that this is an admission of stealing organs
and that spinal movements are indicative that the patient is
still alive. But that's not what the paper says at all.
It says the complete opposite. The paper goes on to
say the spectrum of spinal movements seen in brainstem death
are flex or extensor plantile responses, triple flexion responsors, abdominal reflex,

(38:27):
cremorasteric reflex, tonic net reflexes, isolated jerks of the upper extremities,
unilateral extension, pre nation movements, asymmetric opheohistonic posturing of the trunk,
undulating toe flexion, myoclonus lazarus sign head rotation, respiratory like movements,

(38:47):
quadriceps contraction, eye opening response, leg movements, miocking, periodic leg movement,
and facial myochemia. When it says head rotation that gave
me images of the exorcist, I don't think that's what
they're saying there, So so yeah, so the paper just

(39:07):
doesn't actually say this. She also prints a page from
the National Stones for Organ Retrieval from Deceasedoners and she
underlines something which she feels proves her case. So you
can spot the inherent floor in the logic behind us
spinal movements are reported to occur in as many of
fifty percent of brain stem dead patients. Please ensure that

(39:30):
AUSTA basically that they clearly understand that such movements do
not invalidate this diagnosis. And so she's basically saying that
this is a lie, that's the logic behind us. But
it's like, but that it says the opposite of what
you're saying. It says, and so you're only so exactly
or what plane of reality are we doing this? It

(39:53):
says it's this, which so it must mean the opposite.
It is ridiculous. So all sorts of things that can
cause spinal movements after brain stem death. There's physiological there's
neurological mechanisms, and this can happen and has been observed
to happen long after the brain stem is no longer functional.

(40:17):
Spinal reflexes are automatic responses mediated by the spinal cord
without involvement of the brain or the brain stem. These reflects.
These reflexes can persist even after brain stem death because
the spinal cord remains intact and capable of functioning independently.
Movements such as the Lazarus sign, where a patient appears
to sit up, Flexion or extension of limbs, or other

(40:39):
spontaneous movements can occur. These are often triggered by sensory
stimuli or changes in the body's internal environment. The spinal
cord contains neurocircuits called central pattern generators that can initiate
rhythmic or reflexive movements. These CPGs can be activated by
residual neuralactivity or external stimuli, leading to observable movements modulary

(41:03):
hypoxida and hypercapnia. In some cases, the lack of oxygen
and the build up of carbon dioxide in the modula,
which is a part of the brain stem, can indirectly
stimulate the spinal cord, and this can occur during procedures
like an apnea test, which is part of the brain
death diagnosis process. These changes can excite cervical coordinurons, leaving

(41:25):
to reflex movements, and this is particularly noted in studies
where patients exhibit movements during or after such tests. The
disinhibition of spinal cord activity. Normally, the brain stem and
brain stem exert inhibitory control over spinal cord activity. When
the brain stem is nonfunctional, this inhibitory control is lost,

(41:46):
potentially leading to increased spinal cord activity. So it's actually
the brain and the being alive and being functional that
stops some of these movements, and that's why you sometimes
see them after death. Also, residual neural activity. Even after
the brain stem death, there can be residual neural activity
in the spinal cord. This activity can be triggered by

(42:08):
various factors, including mechanical stimulation. Movements such as head turning,
limb movements, or respiratory like actions can be observed which
are not anative of brain function but rather spinal cord responses. Also,
certain medications, such as neuromuscular blocking agents or seditives, can
influence muscle tone and movement. However, in the context of
brain stem death, these are typically absent or minimized. Changes

(42:32):
in body temperature or residual circulation could also affect muscle
tone and lead to movements. For instance, cooling or warming
of the body can trigger muscle spasms. And so that
this is the thing, Like, there's lots of studies into this.
So either we're to believe that basically Kate has stumbled

(42:54):
across something that the rest of the medical world doesn't
really agree with and the over she's got to prove
it doesn't say the thing that she's saying, but is
indicative of a massive cover up or she's wrong. It's
one of those too, isn't it. Basically, so spining with

(43:16):
himself to brainstem death are primarily due to spinal reflexes,
residual neural activity, and physiological changes such as hypoxia or hypercapnia.
These movements do not indicate brain function, but are the
result of a spinal cause independent capabilities. Understanding these mechanisms
is essential for accurate diagnosis and ethical medical practice, particularly
in the context of organ donation. So, just like she

(43:38):
did with the heart, she's doing it with the spine.
She's saying that these movements they're indicative that the person
is actually alive, and they just aren't. And somebody actually
responded to the thread. Somebody called Jennifer Irwin. She said,
I have an open mind regarding the concerns about organ donation,

(43:59):
but the example she gives is just nonsensical. She's comparing
patients on life support, which maintains cardiac functions, respiratory function, etc.
So that the organs are able to be transplanted to
patients who have no circulation and rigormortis present and likely
spent days in a refrigerator. These two examples are not
the same thing. So Refuge of Sinners decides they're going

(44:23):
to jump in, and they say, I understand what you're saying.
That the examples of movements that Kate gave here are
the same as what is on page forty of this
NHS document. The analogy with the pathologist is not perfect,
but she's done it to really make us think about
the difference between really dead and not ex So she
hasn't done that, She's just simply said that I don't
believe this is a thing anyway. Jennifer responds, well, certainly,

(44:51):
I agree that doctors make mistakes and the incentive structure
with organ donation is flawed, like practically everything in healthcare. However,
I think that she uses in logical metaphors to illustrate
her point. She gives the opposition plenty of material with
which to discredit her entire argument. Now, Kate has been
watching this and she's been sort of sat there waiting,

(45:13):
so she decides to jump in, and she essentially accuses
this woman of being involved with the cover up. She says,
I think you're working with that service. You cannot take
organs from a cadaver. After three minutes, death begins to occur.
Life begins at conception, and life ends with cyan of

(45:34):
the respiratory, the cardiac, and neurological system. The entire organ
donor is a lie. Writing on the back of brainstem death.
The only people I've ever seen or heard supporting with
it are those involved in it. And Jennifer says, yeah,
I worked as a nurse on a trauma surgical iceed
to you for eight years. I now work in a hospice,
so I did take care of patients who later donated

(45:56):
their organs, but the dodation team would take over their
care death was declared. I know many people who support
donation who aren't in the service. So to speak. Parents
of children who donated often speak proudly of their child's
donation as a small light spot in an otherwise tragic situation.
Their child was gone but saved. Several others having said

(46:18):
that if the criteria for brain death doesn't provide an
absolute certainty, then we need to cease the practice that
it can be That's why I'm talking with you today.
I'm trying to understand what flaws the current CRITERIAA has
and apply some critical thinking on the subject. And there
are other responses as well. James Lynch, who is excellent
at sort of calling out misinformation on on Twitter, says,

(46:40):
you cannot take organs from a cadaver a dead body.
Still with this lie, you can. It's the way that
the majority of people donate. Stop lying, Kate. He then
retweets Kate saying you cannot take an order from a
cadaver from a dead body, and James Lynch's points out

(47:00):
you can. That's how fifty two percent of all donations
are made. So she says, you can just continue. Kate says,
you could continue to justify your practice, but the truth
is in their own documents and it's not true. Like
even the documents that she's presented, they don't say what

(47:22):
she says. They say as a James Link basically responds
by saying this countless times that I've corrected you on
this nonsense lie, and still you continue with it, which
is accurate. Kate says, James, you don't get to correct
me or so many others and mostly medical professionals who
have worked in this and with the documents from those

(47:43):
entrenched it, and he says, well, yes I do. When
you're spouting rubbish, I have and still do work in this.
You're wrong and I have demonstrated as much. So do
you know where she gets the idea that this brainstem
brainstem does not indicate death. She gets it from a
guy called Paul Burn. And the reason that Paul Byrne

(48:08):
doesn't believe that brainstem death indicates death isn't necessarily to
do with his medical training. It's more to do with
can you guess his religious sort of in a very
specific area. So Paul Burrn said, the truth is that

(48:32):
a person is living until dead. He wrote in nineteen
ninety nine. No one can change this truth by saying
or stating that irreversible cessation of the functional functions of
the entire brain, including the brainstem, or irreversible cessation of
cerebral activity or anything else's death. In American magazine earlier
this year, which is two thousand and nine, when this

(48:54):
article came out, Paul Burn, MD, a former president of
the Catholic Medical Association OH and a longtime opponent of
brain death criteria, published a letter on the website where
New America, arguing the God's Law and the natural law
preclude the transplantation of unpaired vital organs, an act which

(49:15):
causes the death of the donor and therefore violates the
fifth commandment of the Divine Decalogue, thou shalt not kill.
The letter was signed by over four hundred individuals, including
at least three Catholic bishops and many pro life program directors. Right, so,
can you see the sort of the internal sort of
like the circular sort of nature of that. He doesn't

(49:40):
believe that brainstem is death. So he doesn't believe the
organs should be transplanted at all, because you have to
kill somebody to take the organ out of them, and
that violates God's law. Now, in the year two thousand,
Pope jump All the second expressed support for organ donation
and the use of neurological criteria. He wrote that criterion

(50:04):
adopted in more recent activities for asserting the fact of death,
namely the complete and irreversible cessation of all brain activity,
if rigorously applied, does not seem to conflict with the
essential elements of sound anthropology. The Pope concluded that a
health work a professional responsible for astaining death can use
these criteria. Moreover, he strongly reasserted his support for organ donation,

(50:27):
calling it a genuine act of love and noting that
he had earlier called it a way of nurturing a
genuine culture of life. So the Pope seems to think
it's all right, but Dr Brn thinks that this goes
against Catholic doctrine. In the Catholic Free Press. Dr burn
the past president of the Catholic Medical Association of the

(50:49):
United States of America, has directed the neo Nutology and
Pediatrics department at Charles Mercy Hospital in Oregon and Ohio.
He is also the president of the Life Guardian Foundation,
a pro life organization based in Van Kieva, Washington. He
has appeared on television's Good Morning America and Crossfire opposite
Dr Jack Kevorkian, a promoter of physician assisted suicide. The

(51:12):
BBC interviewed him for a segment titled our Donors Really Dead.
Organ donation is a multi billion dollar industry. Dr Burns
stated it's larger than the abortion industry. Every organ that's
transplanted is a healthy one, and every organ that is
transplanted comes from a living person, he said, adding that
these are taken out of bodies with a beating heart

(51:34):
and full circulation. Every single donor is killed in the process.

Speaker 1 (51:38):
He stated.

Speaker 3 (51:40):
Although the medical profession declares patient's brain dead after following
an accident, doctor Burne insists that there is absolutely no
such thing. Brain death was false.

Speaker 1 (51:49):
He said.

Speaker 3 (51:50):
Brain death was a lie from the beginning. It has
always been a lie. Brain death is not true death.
Organ transplant is the reason you have to have brain death.
Dr Byrd said that this term crept into the medical
profession following the world's first heart transplant in nineteen sixty eight.
It has since been defined and redefined and is now

(52:10):
being replaced by another term known as cardiac death, he noted.
He said donated organs, without exception, must come from a
living person. Within minutes of true death, which he explained
is the cessation of circulation and respiration, the organs will
begin to die. This is why when organs are removed
from a donor, the beating heart is always taken last.

(52:33):
You cannot get any organs from cadavers. If you're really dead,
then no organs can be extracted. So he's talking about
extracting actual beating hearts from people's chest like that dude
with the horns from the Temple of Doom. Which so anyway,

(52:58):
AAP fact check had a response to this. This is
a viral video suggests that brain death is aliing that
all that brain dead patients can breathe and have a
beating heart. This is very misleading. Brain death is widely
recognized medical condition. While medical definitions differ slightly, brain death
is the total and permanent cessation of the brain function.

(53:20):
A brain dead person can only breathe and maintain a
heartbeat with the insistence of a life support machine. And
so this is the fundamental flaw that he has in
his argument that he says you're not dead until you
stop breathing and you're heart beating. It is the brain
function that allows the breathing and the heart beating to continue.
So he's actually got it ass backwards. He's saying that

(53:43):
people who are on life support should be considered still
alive even if you were to take if you took
them off that life support, they would die anyway. One
minute twenty four second viral video is a heavy a
version of a one hour, fifteen in a minute video
featuring neonatologist Paul Byrne. In the long video, he sets

(54:05):
out an argument that brain death does not equate to
the biological death of a human being, which does continue
to be the subject of academic debate. However, the short's
video provides a misleading summation of his argument, suggesting the
medical condition is a fiction and that brain dead people
can still breathe and have a beating heart. He says
in the video, everyone is called brain dead has a
beating heart, circulation and respiration. If they didn't have that,

(54:28):
you wouldn't have to call them brain dead, would you?
You would call them dead, which is again, don't be stupid.
Cassandra Suzek, a consultant neurologist. Neurologist, told AAP fact check
the brain death is a specific medical condition, distinct from
coma or being in a vegetative state. So explain that

(54:49):
brain death occurs when brain cells a brain stem reflexes
are no longer functioning and a person is only breathing
and they're heart beating because of external life support machines,
different from a coma, where the patient is unconscious but
still has functioning brain cells and breathe independently and could
regain consciousness. She says that two doctors need to independently

(55:12):
verify specific criteria to diagnose brain death. You would have
to be in a coma for starters that so completely unconscious,
and you would have to have no brainstem activity. So
they're just wrong. That they're just wrong, and they've got
absolutely nothing to back it up other than them saying so.

(55:35):
On July the fifteenth, Kate Schremerani tweeted out an apparent
text message from Paloma to Sebastian. She says, this is
my son Sebastian on the twenty second of the tenth,
twenty three, also being invited over for dinner by Paloma
on our home on the second of the fourth, twenty

(55:57):
twenty four. Is he compromised? What on earth is happening
to him? And he is under great pressure from some
greater or authority. So you must remember that she's basically
trying to imply that m I five or six tapped
up her one, if not both of her sons, and
that are actively working against her on behalf of the
government who you must remember connected to the NHS, murdered

(56:18):
her daughter and then tried to cover it up. Essentially,
because Kate is so brilliant and great. That's why there's
this attack on her. That that's it, that's her theory.
So this is the text message supposedly from Coloma to Sebastian,
and it shows Sebastian, so it's obviously somebody's texting, and

(56:45):
the person who purports to be Paloma text, sorry, the
dogs will bark during the show, not a good idea.
I'll be finished at one pm. Sebastian responds, one pm,
I will be there. On the twenty second of October,
Paloma responds, glorious South downs today. Sebastian responds, very nice.

(57:13):
Thank you for the bread yesterday we all all get
We all enjoyed it with some organic butter. Then on
the fifth of November, Paloma tweet that say, text Sebastian,
the best place to be at sunset? Do you need
any furniture for your flat? No response. On the second
of April, and this is where you might spot something.

(57:39):
On the second of April, Paloma text to Sebastian, Hi, Sebastian,
I trust you all well. Paloma wanted to invite you
over for a little something to eat on Friday tea
time as a birthday celebration and then you can't see
the rest of the message because it's been cut off
by the screenshot. Did you spot it?

Speaker 4 (57:58):
Well, that wasn't by Paloma because it's referenced dos Paloma
and says hi Sebastian.

Speaker 3 (58:05):
Yeah, yeah, so U les Paloma talks in the third person,
she's it's clearly Kay texting him, which begs the question,
why would you lie about that? That's bizarre. The following day,
on July the seventeenth, she's somewhat ups the ante in
case Schermarani tweets out, this is a message from my

(58:29):
eighty two year old mum and the nana to my children.
So this is the grandma of Coloma, Sebastian and Gabriel.
Just let everyone who is supporting my daughter. Sebastian and
Gabriel have told the biggest load of lies about this.
They had a great childhood, much better than most as

(58:49):
their child as their father had a well paid job,
their mom didn't have to work so was there for
them all twenty four to seven. I just don't understand
where they're out to destroy their mum and even worse,
their behavior towards Paloma while she was alive and now
destroying memories of her. Now, with their blatant lies, keep
on supporting Kate, and this is all starting to get

(59:13):
very grubby and a little bit unnecessary, to be quite honest.
Gabriel and Sebastian respond to this by saying that they
haven't actually had any contact with a Grant in years,
So it's what they suggest is that this person doesn't
know anything about the situation. They've not spoken to her
for years. They seriously doubt that ploma has spoken to

(59:35):
them for years, and so what they're suggesting is that
essentially Kate has employed her elderly mother to try and
denigrate to the reputation of her sons in order to
make it seem that she is the wronged party in this.
Now so many tweets to Sebastian, does your mother actually

(01:00:01):
believe any of the things that she says? And Sebastian
responds by saying, this is a very important question. My
mother does not have beliefs in the same way that
normal people do. She's not your average conspiracy theorist. Growing up,
there were endless times I watched her not only change
her mind in seconds, but fully believe whatever new thing

(01:00:23):
she was saying. Despite saying something that contradicted it seconds ago.
You can see it in her eyes, Gabriel and I
remember this well. She does this with her political views
and also the web of lies she spins for her
personal life. For example, is how she hid the physical
abuse she subjected me to. I'd get teachers, neighbors, and

(01:00:43):
police to question her, but she convinced them. Every time.
She can change her beliefs like flicking a switch, with
all the facial expressions, emotional investment, and more outrage when
doubted that you expect from a normal person. She uses
this skill to believe whatever views benefit her most at
that single moment. So yeah, he goes on to say

(01:01:10):
she isn't just a liar or a lunatic, She's a
semi talented psychopath. I say semi because anyone who grew
up with narcissitic personality disorder parents can see through it easily.
It takes some training for the average person to see.
Look at her spin on how she killed my sister Paloma. First,
it was Poloma's fault that she had cancer. Yep, that's

(01:01:31):
what she told my sister. Then the NHS murdered Paloma
because Poloma was proving that cancer could be cured naturally.
Then Polovan didn't have cancer, but for some reason, the
NHS murdered her. Anyway, the story will keep changing to
suit k and Kay will believe what she's saying in
the way her sick mind is capable of beliefs at
every step. So to answer your question, her mind is

(01:01:53):
broken in a way that you can't fully understand unless
you have spent years around her. She believes everything and nothing,
but in the end it's all for money, fame, and clout.
She's a psychogrifter, but a grifter nonetheless. On July the eighteenth,

(01:02:14):
the inquest into Paloma's death begins, and there's a journalist
is the wrong word? Twat is the correct word, called
Will Coleshill of a channel called gb Resistance, and he
decides that the best use of his time is to

(01:02:37):
go along to this inquest, and he records or he
tweets afterwards and records a video and the tweet says
Paloma Sheremeranni, daughter of Kate Sheremerani midway of day one
shocking NHS doctor narrative effectively calls Paloma a liar. In
Poloma's signed court statement preceding her death, which which isn't

(01:03:01):
what was said, but anyway, so he posts a video
and in this will cole Shure says Hello and welcome
to outside of Kent Midway Coroner's Court, where we may
see the BBC hip piece on Kate Schremaran who blown
apart today. I've been down, I've been inside the court.
This is my midwave report through the first day of
the court. We may also see the NHS narrative Crumble.

(01:03:22):
It's going to be very interesting day in court, especially
this afternoon. One of the first things that I noticed
was the ex boyfriend Anda, when we were logging ourselves
into the book. He just wrote down boyfriend in the book.
He just wrote down boyfriend. So Anda wrote himself in
as Coloma's boyfriend, despite having been dumped by her, and
despite this from what I am told, ongoing sexual assault

(01:03:44):
allegations against him. We've seen. Dr Mohan, who was one
of the original doctors treating Paloma, testified that she seemed
very clear on how despite not having examined Paloma herself,
given all the information she needed and she relied on
what other people have heard. However, but when talking about
Poloma making her own choice and choosing a natural path.

(01:04:04):
Suddenly he became became very hesitant and hazy. Now she's
made it clear that Paloma gave informed consent. This directly
contradicts what Paloma said in signed High Court statements when
her brothers took Paloma to court and tried to take
away her medical bodily autonomy. I can actually read your
statement here if you give me one second, which is

(01:04:25):
signed the sign statement of Poloma Shammarani. I was held
in Mason Hospital between the twenty second of December twenty
twenty three and the twenty fourth of December twenty twenty three.
And at no point during my hospital stage did anyone
did I say to anyone that I want to do chemotherapy,
nor did I ever imply it. Now this is the
signed statement of the High Court. So effectively it appears

(01:04:46):
that doctor Mohan is calling Pa Schamerani, the girl whose
inquest this is into her death, a liar and arguing
against the evidence. This is just one statement, but there's
multiple statements, diary entries, there's relatives and friends that would
also be in Polma Schremarani's favor. So it's going to
be very very interesting today and what we're going to

(01:05:07):
see is hopefully those statements can be read out in
court and put and put into the court. I was
quite shocked that the mainstream media had absolutely no clue
about podcasts that are done with Kate where we expose
these statements, where we put this out to the public.
But I guess that's what you get from the mainstream media. Yeah. Yeah,
he's angry that the mainstream media and the coroner don't

(01:05:32):
watch gb Resistance and what was that other one with
that twat I can't remember, but like you know, he's
also lying about what they showed in these podcasts. But anyway,
they really don't know what's going on. I mean, there
was local guy here who seemed very nice and affable,
but he's already headed off. He's just gone. You've got

(01:05:53):
to he's just gone. We've got a guy down that
we've got from the BBC down here, and I don't
know whether they're still around, but this seems to be
the most important of our day, part of our day
coming up, where you're going to hopefully get these statements
read in court. There's going to be a fight of
how much he's going to be in and how much
is going to be allowed to be admitted and there
will be chances to question Dr Mohan from the interested party,

(01:06:15):
which includes Kate herself. So we're probably going to see
a very interesting afternoon here at the court. We could
see these statements included anyway, but keep pilled. I'll do
another report afterwards and we're going to continue following the trial.
I believe the next day is not until the twenty eighth,
but I'll be doing another report this afternoon. Thank you.
Keep your eyes peeled, make sure you watch the podcast

(01:06:37):
if you haven't seen it, and yeah, if you want
to support us, please support us. There are links. That's
a link tree, so you know I can keep coming
out doing this and reporting on the news because well
we're the only alternatives down here, all the best. So
details of the inquest start to come out, and can
you believe it's not entirely how we'll Cole Shaw has

(01:07:02):
represented it. The BBC News wrote the article Uxfield woman
died after seeking alternative cancer treatment. Dr Aaron Doyer Mohan,
a consultant hematologist at Maidston Hospital, told the Inquest that
she was concerned that the former nurse to her conspiracy
theorist was influencing her daughter's refusal for treatment. Dr Mohan

(01:07:23):
told the inquest, I didn't want to discuss with mum
because I didn't think it would be helpful to her.
Alison Hewett, who's the counsel to the inquest, later asked
were their concerns that Miss Schremrani was influencing Paloma, and
Dr Mohan replied that's right. She told the inquest that
Miss trem Ranei had mentioned wanting to be her daughter's

(01:07:43):
power of attorney and was asking for copies of her
blood records. Cross examining Dr Mohan, Miss schrem Ranney said
that her daughter's account of her treatment at Madison Hospital
refutes everything that the witness said in evidence. Miss sherem
Ranney said that Dr Mohan kept trying to contact Poloma
after she'd delighted declined chemotherapy. When asked about this, Dr

(01:08:05):
Mohan said, yes, it's my duty of care to treat her.
Dr Mohan had told Poloma in December twenty twenty three
that she had an eighty percent chance of recovery she
had chemotherapy, adding so that she didn't initially have any
concerns raised by Paloma about going ahead with the treatment.
She told the inquest that she recommended steroids and a
pet positron, a mission tomography scan, adding that Paloma nodded

(01:08:30):
in agreement, but soon after that, Paloma told Dr Mohan
that she had not made up her mind about the
treatment and wished to explore other options. Miss Sewart asked
Dr Mohan if she questioned Peloma on whether the decision
was influenced by anyone. Doctor Mohan said that she was
very confident it was all her own decision and she
was not influenced. But so fine. What Polomas said there

(01:08:54):
is that's she's come to her own decision. Now, whether
she didn't mention that Kate had already texted her and
that her dad had already texted her and told her
to refuse chemotherapy, it doesn't really matter because because we're
responding to what Will Coleshaw said that what he said
is that Poloma is a liar. He's not said that

(01:09:14):
Parloma is a liar. It's very clear that she changed
her mind. She initially not in an agreement and then
decided that she wanted to wait and think about it.
Whether that was influenced by her own beliefs, so whether
that was influenced by her parents. We don't know at
this stage. There is evidence that you could use to

(01:09:35):
suggest that either was possible, but that's not what was
being said. So again they're being disingenuous with what they're
actually saying. The Daily Mail Online published medigs feared anti
vax mother had helped her model daughter out of chemotherapy
before her cancer death at twenty three. Health workers raised

(01:09:58):
concerns that an anti vaxed mother talked to her daughter
out of chemotherapy before her death. Councer at the age
of twenty three and the Inquest had heard. An inquest
to her death heard that medics did raise safeguarding concerns
that Poloma may be influenced by her mother after she
asked for time to think about chemotherapy. A nurse specializing
in teenage and adult care had arranged to meet Paloma
in the following days because of unexpected family circumstances and

(01:10:22):
interference with the treatment. However, by the time of the meeting,
Paloma herself discharged. Nurses had also raised concerns about safeguarding
after report mentioned there had been there had been a
history of physical abuse between Poloma and her mother, which
had caused the young woman to move out of her
family home. The inquest heard, which is interesting because if

(01:10:42):
there's a report, that means that it didn't come from
Gabriel or Sebastian, which is what Kayash claimed. She says
that never happened. That's a lie. Gabriel and Sebastian have
claimed that social services were involved. This tends to suggest
that is the case. During the questioning, which took over

(01:11:05):
an hour, Miss Schremerani referred to herself as an independent
and qualified nurse practitioner, telling the coroner that he was
qualified to discuss medical information. Yet the Coroner, Catherine Wood
spoke up to correct missus Tremorani and to tell the
inquest that she was struck off by the Nursing and
Midwifrey Council. In twenty twenty one, after being given hour
and I have to ask doctor Mohan questions, Miss Tremorani

(01:11:26):
was placed on a mute on the online courtroom after
she continued to speak after her a lot of time,
which is really embarrassing. She's had to be cut off
by the court because she was literally shouting. Her son
Gabriel was then given an opportunity to speak where he
firstly apologized for his mother's behavior. Coloma's twins said, I
would firstly like to apologize for my mum's disrespectful conduct.

(01:11:51):
He went on to acts Dr Mohan if she had
directly seen any cohesive behavior. The doctors told the that
should be coerced if the Daily Mail's misspelled that. The
doctor told the inquest there was no cohesion that we
could prove, or maybe it is caesion, but there was
more than one instance from the mum, saying that that
would use the power of attorney on to act on

(01:12:13):
behalf of Paloma and her wanting to see blood results
for herself and wanting to be considered the next of kin,
as well as the alleged abuse of physical abuse at home.
The doctor added that she was concerned that Paloma had
changed her mind so soon after going home to consider
the treatment plan. She added, I was quite concerned because

(01:12:34):
at the time in the hospital she had not declined chemotherapy,
but a few days after being discharged she declined. In
four or five days time, I was quite disappointed with that.
So now we're getting a bit of an inference of
the timeline. So she initially agreed to it, or didn't
decline it. Then she must have received the text from
her parents, at which point Kshammarani turned up at the hospital,

(01:12:58):
asked to become power of attorney and next of kin,
asked to see the histology, and took Paloma home. This
was after Anders's mother had tried to take her home,
if you remember, but Kate had refused and said that
she'd taken her back to her house. So although the
doctor didn't see any coercion, which is what has been

(01:13:20):
picked up here, the concern was, well, I'll say her
decision was something that I was not expecting that she
would completely decline treatment. I thought that she would have
a think and continue with the treatment in question to
the death of Ploma Shirramarani after refusing concert emergency hospital.
Here's concerned that her mother influenced her. And this was

(01:13:44):
from the Kent Online newspaper Aaron Doya Mohana because a
sult hematologist at made to the hospital confirmed with medical
records that Paloma had first resported to Mason Hospital in
October twenty twenty three with the right sided chest pain
and shortness of breath. She presented again on on December
third with similar symptoms and was given a CT scan

(01:14:07):
which revealed a significantly large mass measuring six centimeters by
five centimeters by seven centimeters on the right side of
her chest. It was close to her heart and the
mass was displacing the ate the aortic arch. A biapsey
was carried out, which revealed the mass to be non
Hodgkins lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph nodes. She recalled

(01:14:29):
telling Paloma of the diagnosis, the treatment, and also the
possible side effects, which could include nausea, vomiting, hair loss,
but also sometimes damage to heart and kidney functions and
to fertility. She told Paloma she could have been she
could be offered fertility preservation or the freezing of her eggs,
and she said that Paloma had been happy to take

(01:14:50):
up that offer. Dr Mohan said that the twenty three
year old had raised no concerns. So it's clear to
see that the will coleshow is not representing what happened
entirely accurately. And we're also starting to see more of
the actual facts of what happened to Poloma at the hospital,

(01:15:10):
what the timeline was, and what our actual symptoms were.
And they're saying that there was very clearly a tumor there.
On the second day of the inquest, Will Coleshaw tweets
out Paloma Schremeranni in Quest Part two Kate Shremerani fiery
clash all in caps with coroner. Exclamation point, exclamation point,

(01:15:31):
exclamation point, fire emoji, fire emoji, fire emoji because apparently
this bloke is a secondary school student. Okay, now it's
time to wrap up. This is what he says in
the video. Court has wrapped up for today and we've
seen some really fiery scenes here at Kenton Midway Coroner's
Court for the inquest into Paloma Sheremarandi's death. Kate had

(01:15:53):
been battling with the coroner over video link, getting muted
multiple times, asking question after question of Dr moh one
of the key doctors who is testifying in the case.
It was absolutely astonishing, Honestly, like volley after volley from
Kate Shremrani. You saw the coroner stepping in to almost
stop her from making her statements to set up her questions.

(01:16:14):
Kate was reading from her statements that she made when
her sons tried to take away their sister's liberty, and
Kate had been asking a number of questions about procedure
and why her daughter was not given a wristband? Why
was it that her daughter and wasn't asked to sign
a form before she was given any drugs as she
should have been according to the hospital policy. Why was
it that there weren't further tests done given the fact

(01:16:36):
that there was a differential diagnosis. That's because she took
her out of the hospital, is the answer to all
of those questions anyway? Why is it was it that
certain drugs have provided given the potential of heart problems
and where she had a growth in her chest? These
have been really interesting questions and most of all, this
a very interesting question as to what is going on

(01:16:56):
with Dr Mohan. This is the last day that he
can appear. Which is going on? This is a question
that we've been asked by many people, and I think
there's no more testimony to this question, which was extremely interesting.
Kate also pursued the line asking why Dr Mohan, once
her daughter had discharged herself, kept trying to get her

(01:17:17):
to take chumotherapy rather than a natural route and essentially
pressured her daughter into her opinion the fucking irony. Now,
all of this is backed up by the statements that
Poloma made. It's been a very interesting day. But this
is just part one. Obviously, if you haven't seen the podcast,
you know how a lot of this goes. Poloma left,
went to live with her mother, Her mother looked after her,

(01:17:39):
but there were further complications and there was a much worse,
further incident leading to her death. But this may just
be the start of the road. We'll see where it goes.
We're going to be back down here to cover this
court case again. It's been interesting. However, as I said earlier,
many of them have buggered off fairly early, and we're
the last ones here. The last one's covering it. The
only independent meus. So if you like what we're doing, YadA, YadA, YadA,

(01:18:03):
Patreon anyway, Kate reposed this video and tweets out the
coroner is public is a public official paid by the taxpayer,
and there is therefore accountable to the public she serves.
Her duty is to conduct proceedings with openers, transparency and impartiality.

(01:18:24):
Is wholly inappropriate and indeed disrespectful for a coroner to
roll her eyes while an interested person, a grieving mother
is raising serious questions about the medical evidence, particularly when
I questioned a key witness such as Dr Mohan, I
was compelled to chastise her on two separate occasions for

(01:18:46):
this behavior. This is the coroner that we're talking about.
Such conduct undermines the dignity of the court. That's true,
but not in the sense that she means. Such conduct
undermines the dignity of the court, breaches the obligation to
treat all participants with respect, and raised the serious concerns
about bias and procedural fairness. I'm not having it. Mohan

(01:19:08):
legged it. I bet her case and her flight bag
were parked outside the course. So there's several things here, right. One, Okay,
she's been ranting and raving to the point where the
coroner has rolled her eyes at her and neuted her. Now,
most people would be mortified, thinking, well, this is terribly embarrassing.

(01:19:30):
This isn't how an adult, or a professional person or
a serious person conducts themselves. But for some reason, Kate
has decided that this sort of petulant response, this sort
of childish tantrum, is somehow an indicator that she is

(01:19:51):
righteous and is holding truth to power, which it isn't.
She's also suggesting that there's some suspicious about Dr Mohan
basically having a life outside of this court case and
not having to go away, not be able to be
there for further questioning. But that isn't the most sinister thing.

(01:20:16):
There is a response to this tweet from above from
someone called the Real tim Brown and they say, and
I quote, God, find Dr Mohan's address shouldn't be too difficult.
I don't think why on earth. I mean, we don't

(01:20:39):
need to explain that, but that is that's fucked up. Now.
Obviously most people would look at this and go, that's
embarrassing behavior, just completely just cringe worthy behavior from Cape Schramani.
They would also suggest that essentially what she's trying to

(01:20:59):
do is shout people down because given a you go,
then I go, then you go, then I go, there's
huge holes in her story, and so she wants to
control the narrative by screaming and shouting, which is not
the way that you conduct yourself in any court, particularly

(01:21:21):
when you're trying to get to the bottom of whether
you were in any way culpable for the death of
your own child. As I say, I instantly saw that
and thought, oh my god, oh that's embarrassing not only
your behavior, but the admission of that behavior and the
lack of self awareness that you think that this is

(01:21:44):
some way impressive. And a lot of people also responded
like adults would. There was one person, though, one person
who decided that she was actually very proud of Kate
Tremeraney the way that she behaved by screaming and acting
like a brat in court. Do we do we know.

Speaker 7 (01:22:07):
Which which first? And this was I'm gonna I've got
two guesses. One is going to be Sonia Poulton, the
other is going to be Jackie Devoy. It was Jackie Devoy, Yes,
jack Jackie.

Speaker 3 (01:22:19):
Devoy's tweeted out and see if you can notice the
flaws in this logic. Despicable behavior from a coroner. Well
done to Kate Tremrani for pulling her up on it.
One of the key witnesses, Dr Mohan has now left
the country on holiday. It's not on holiday. These doctors

(01:22:41):
seem to have a habit of this during or immediately
before or after inquests. The same thing happened before, during
or after at some point like, yeah, bring it back,

(01:23:03):
I want to hear the whole thing. Bring it at
the bars again to speak up a behavior from a coroner.
Well done to Kate shan Rhani for pulling her up
on it. One of the key witnesses, Dr Mohan has
now left the country. These doctors seem to have a
habit of doing this during or immediately before or after
in quests. The same happened in the Dimmick in quest

(01:23:25):
to be resumed on August the eleventh at souther Coroner's Court.
Fucking hell like, so hang on like, but if it's
going to be resumed in August, it doesn't matter that
they've left the country. They're going back and you can
ask further questions if anyway. She finds this going out

(01:23:46):
of the country very very suspicious, and one of Jackie
Devoy's followers, called amm and Aj, has thoughts on this.
This is where she thinks Dr Mohan might be. She says,
or he says, I have a feeling my intuition, My

(01:24:08):
intuition is screaming that she Dr Mohan has been taken
away by the military for a tribunal. So what she
thinks is going to happen is that in some sort
of we've got a Q and honor, We've got a
Q and honor. Yeah, she's going to be taken away
and either Guantanamo bayed or executed away from the public eye,

(01:24:29):
which serves absolutely no purpose at all anyway. On July
the twentieth, Kate shrem Uri continued with her nonsense. The
best organ donors are under thirty years of age, with
a beating heart of circulation on event later. You cannot
take an organ from a cadaver, from a dead body.
Someone has to be very much alive. You are not anethetized,

(01:24:52):
as this will damage the organs. You are just paralyzed.
You feel all of it. You just do not live
to tell the tale. Tell me, is it right to
murder one to give another an organ? If you answer yes,
God help mankind. And she tweets a video from someone
called Heidi Clessi and this is the transcript of the video.

(01:25:17):
First of all, you cannot take an order from a
dead body, from a cadaver. Within three minutes of no oxygen,
you're going to start damaging brain cells, and within five
minutes you're going to have cell your death. You've got
to be alive to take organs. That's the end of it.
Hang on, doesn't that contradict their idea that basically like,
so what, you've got a five minute window if they

(01:25:38):
don't believe in brain death, if they believe that it's
breathing that has to stop for death. But they're saying
that after breathing stops, then the brain starts to die.
I think that contradicts what they're saying, but it's nonsensical anyway.
It doesn't matter. There is not such a thing as
brain death. If your heart is beating, if you are
metabolizing fluids, if you're metabolizing a liquid feed a soy

(01:25:59):
of which they give you, and you're having bowel movements,
you're not dead. It's a lie. They're talking about the
brainstem where you've got the hypothalamus, the center that controls
your blood pressure, your heartbeat, but the rest you're not dead.
It was a lie that was manufactured so that they
could do their eugenics, taking organs from one person to another.

(01:26:19):
Who makes the best organ donor under thirties with a
beating heart, a circulation, and ideally on a ventilator when
the decision is made, When the decision is made to
take your organs, very early on, probably before you're even
aware that they're doing it, because the treatment to preserve
your organs is very different from the treatment to save
your life. In the UK, everybody became an organ donor

(01:26:42):
on the May the twenty second. Unless you make that
nine nine nine phone call. Everything is up there on screen.
They know who you are. This is why they want
a digital system. Your entire medical history is going to
be fed through AI. How much tax you pay and
what you're worth to this system, and that's what's going
to come up with the whether you're gay or a
nay of getting life saving treatment or are you on

(01:27:04):
an end of life care? What age are you?

Speaker 1 (01:27:06):
Then?

Speaker 3 (01:27:06):
For the organ donor? So you have to ask what
is this? It's eugenics. So I want to find out
that this woman is so, according to Grock. Heidi Klestig,
MD is a medical profession with the background in anesthesiology
and pain management. She attended a medical school at the
University of Wisconsin, Madison and completed a residency program in

(01:27:28):
anesthesiology there. She also received the American Board of Anesthesiology's
Certificate of Added Qualification in Pain Management. Doctor Klessig was
a founding partner in the Pain Clinicue of Northwestern Wisconsin
and served in an instructure for the International Spine Injection Society.
But doctor Klessig has become a notable figure in discussion
about medical ethics, particularly concerning the concepts of brain death

(01:27:48):
and organ donation. She's also authored The Brain Death Fallacy,
a book that challenges the medical and ethical foundations of
declaring brain death has equivalent to biological death, especially in
the context of organ transplantation. Her work argues that individuals
diagnosed as brain dead may still be alive, raising significant
ethical concerns about the practice of harvesting organs from such patients. Additionally,

(01:28:13):
doctor Klesig has been involved in public speaking and advocacy,
including speaking at ncbc's symposium in Washington in twenty twenty five.
Her perspective aligns with broader criticism of the current medical
protocols for organ donations, suggesting that the definition of brain
death was established to facilitate organ harvesting rather than reflecting
a true state of death. This stance has positioned her

(01:28:36):
as a critic of the medical establishers practices in this area. Now,
the thing about everyone being signed up to be a
donor is correct unless you opt out of it. Everybody
is considered an organ donor now, which sort of goes
against the idea of them. If everybody's an organ donor,
why do you need to kill people in order to
get organisms and they're going to be plentiful. Are they

(01:28:57):
going to been off road accidents and stuff like that
provide them, Well, apparently not, because apparently they need to
murder people to take these organs away, which they then
sell or make money off keeping other people of a
similar age alive, which doesn't make sense because those people
have a similar age, they obviously need that organ to survive. Yeah,

(01:29:20):
which means they would have died, which means what you've
done is you've just Yeah, you've just swap one out
for one. If you've killed somebody, like by pretending that
they're brain dead in order to take their liver and
give it to somebody who needs a liver and would
die without that liver, you've just blanked it out. You've

(01:29:41):
not reduced to population or anything. It just seems slightly pointless,
to be quite honest, Like this is respect for human life.
This is from her website that sells a book, The
brain death Fallacy. When is someone Dead? In nineteen six eight,
doctors at Harvard Medical School proposed redefining irreversible coma as death.

(01:30:04):
They did this for several reasons, one of which was
to increase the supply of organs for donation by simply
calling people in an irreversible coma dead. People in an
irreversible coma have beating hearts and breathing lungs, so their
organs are kept in good shape for harvesting. What was
the phrase that she's used there, irreversible coma? Right, So
let's take it as red right, Okay, that she's absolutely

(01:30:27):
right that these people are still alive. What is the
confounding factor of this particular coma? That means that that
might be somewhat of a moot point. Well, it's the
apparent irreversibility of that situation that to me suggests that like, uh,

(01:30:49):
what we're talking about? Like anyway, here we see Now,
this is where we start to see the foundation of
her beliefs. I wonder if you can guess where it
comes from. Most people recognize that human beings possess an
immaterial life essence, a soul, a spirit, or a consciousness
in addition to their physical bodies. We maintain that people

(01:31:12):
in an irreversible coma are still present in their physical bodies,
and that harvesting their organs is an act of homicide
against these vulnerable neurologically injured patients. These procedures are often
pre performed without the benefit of anesthesia, meaning these people
may be awake and aware during the harvest surgery, but
unable to move due to the use of paralyzing drugs.

(01:31:36):
Do you see what she's saying. You cannot allow someone
in an irreversible coma. You have to keep them alive
because there's a soul in there. They're not going to
come out of the coma, and if there are live support,
that means that they cannot function without that live support.

(01:31:58):
But for some reason, and due to this concept of
a soul, they think that that person should be kept
on live support indefinitely. It's stupid. It's very very stupid, right, Okay? Anyway,

(01:32:20):
Kate goes on say, I've published many more articles and
had a long conversation with Mike Mike Yadin about this.
The problem here is that the overdose of adrenaline, which
the World Health Organization is adopting. The paramedic to ran
by Gavin Perkins from Warwick University, everyone is going to
be given one milligram of adrenaline every three to five
minutes up to tennis via and io in the bone.

Speaker 1 (01:32:44):
Gun.

Speaker 3 (01:32:45):
I don't know what the tennis means, but yeah, into
the bone. Even Perkins himself in one study talks about
how the small positive use can only be justified for
use as an organ donor. One French study states that
after the third dose, you you sacrifice the brain to
return systemic circulation. Effectively, this means that they're delivering a

(01:33:05):
bag of organs to the hospital because your brain is toasted.
So whether you opt in or opt out, the adrenaline
is making everyone into a potential donor. One document that
we've scrutinized states that they will have a go at
everybody because they see it as practice. Doctor Heidi Klesig responds,
absolutely correct. Organs can only be harvested from a donor

(01:33:27):
who's still alive. In nineteen sixty eight, thirteen men at
Harvard redefines certain coma toast people to be dead as
to remove the controversy over taking their valuable, viable organs.
Brain death is an ethical choice masqurading as a medical fact,
which is ironic because her concept of the soul has
to be borne out of her religious ethics, has to

(01:33:50):
be has to be. So this is the point, and
we've discussed that paper that said that she misres represented
in previous episodes. It didn't say that this is the
only benefit. It said that this is an added benefit
that you must think about when thinking about the broader
cost of trying to save people's lives. What the paper

(01:34:12):
was saying is that adrenaline sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, and
is very very expensive, and so can we justify those
sometimes working well, yes, if you think of the broader
holistic concept of the NHS, because viable organ donation would
mean that less money is spent on, say, treating people

(01:34:32):
on dialysis because they don't have a viable alternative. So
it's again it's a gross misrepresentation. And also the post
a video of Michael Yeden which appears to be from
the interview with the Sons of Liberty. Yeden says, one
tiny creepy thing that I can't remember if Kate mentioned

(01:34:54):
or if I found it independently. So the British National
Health Service is long core for people to donate organ
and being a fine supportive citizen all my life, I've
carried a donor card all my organs on the ground
that I could die in a bike accident or just
keel over in the street and I want someone to benefit.
But now I have learned that you can't remove organs

(01:35:15):
from a person for transplants unless you're bluntly, you still
have to be alive. Blood circulation must be must be oxygen.
Blood circulation must have oxygen in the blood. So either
a machine is ventilating and your heart is pushing the
blood around because you are. Because once you're dead, after
a relatively short period of time, pretty much all the
organs are useless. And I think that that's something that

(01:35:37):
showed me and shown you the protocols, and what Cater's
taught me and shown to prove is sometimes I don't
know what you would call them, but the ar staff
that travel like we have something called an air ambulance.
These people are sent out to places where one person
can't easily be recovered by conventional ambulances, but they have
a protocol of what to do. It seems to me,

(01:35:58):
just to cut to the chase, that if if you're
a person who has organs that the system wants and
I'm not saying that the er people have anything to
do with this. But if the system detects that your
medical records say that it's available, will have all of
your organs because we've got customers, then they will treat
you very differently then if you're not a person of interest,

(01:36:19):
and then they will just try and stabilize you. And
I know that this is true because I was reading
one protocol right. Kate will correct me if I got
this wrong, will she? It said something like, there may
be occasions when they're preparing to start to remove someone's organs.
There may be occasions when movements that appeal purposeful we start.
And you know that some people say, oh, that's just

(01:36:41):
neurological switches of the dying or a dead person, but
you and I know that that can't be true. They
all be alive. So the protocol says that you should
withdraw from the operating table and call the base, and
then you'll take advice for the base. And the next
paragraph is absolutely shocking. It says, we understand that will
be occasions where the team will be unable to continue.

(01:37:03):
And I think that that is telling you is that
something alarming is happening while they were preparing the allegedly
dead patients, and they possibly started coming around or were
giving an impression of movement that you and I would
classify as dead. Yet, I mean, that's one interpretation of it,
or you could interpret it with the words that were
written in the document that said that this is a

(01:37:25):
thing that happens after death. We understand if seeing a
dead body suddenly twitch might be somewhat unsettling. That's it.
It's not said like, In fact, it doesn't even say,
but hold fast, chop away. It doesn't say that. It

(01:37:45):
just says, be reassured that these are normal things. Go
and sort yourself out, maybe have a cup of tea
or whatever, and come back. It doesn't say, hold the
sodder down so that no one else is disturbed by this,
hack the head away from the body, so that like
a vampire, you can stop them. It doesn't say anything
like that, like it's ridiculous. So it says, this is why,

(01:38:12):
when it really hit me, you can only remove the
best quality organs if they're taken out of a living
perviously obviously completely sedated with pain relief to the nines,
but beyond a no understanding the active harvesting organs which
is what they call it. Harvesting organs removes them from
a living person. Now I don't need a Bible to
know that this is murder. I wasn't very religious at

(01:38:34):
the start of twenty twenty, but I've done an interview
on this. In the middle of twenty one. Something happened
to me that has completely reconnected me to the divine
and I know what I'm doing is for a purpose,
no matter what happens to me. And when Kate describes
what was going on, they had some sort of ghastly
resident evil feeling, so I'm sure that's what they're doing.

(01:38:55):
So we noticed that all of these people think they're
on a divine Now there's two ways of looking at this, right, okay.
Either yeah, fair enough, you've come to Jesus, although you
appear to be rather narcissistic about it by suggesting that
you have been imbued with some sort of holy quest.
Or alternatively, you've gone a little bit Tonto and you've

(01:39:20):
started to think that you are in some ways the
center of the universe. Do maybe to the trauma of
I don't know, a stress or situation like I'm pandemic.
Could it be that like that's where I would fall
on that particular argument, Kate says, Micah's referring to the

(01:39:40):
documents which I've sent to him, discussions I've had with him,
and my published articles on substat You cannot take an
organ for a cadaver from a dead body. People are
being murdered for their organs. So the big question is
are you going to be saved or is it going
to be too costly? And are you worth more to
preserve and harvest your body parts. We have the document
that proves this exactly what they're doing. They don't. We've

(01:40:03):
discussed these documents at length. They just simply don't say
what she thinks that they say. July the twenty first,
Kate decides to tweet out our daughter ploma Scarlet Schremrani,
twenty three year old polyglot and Cambridge graduate, an amazing

(01:40:23):
young woman with full capacity. On Friday in the coroner's court,
Dr Mohan, who has now left the country, admitted that
Paloma had full capacity, was confident and stated that she
could not be influenced and that she had no evidence
of coercion. She admitted that she'd never met me. She
admitted that she'd been told not to contact Paloma again
and the hospital is now unnotice that Paloma initiate eating

(01:40:45):
proceedings for harassment and medical battery. Doctor Mohan admitted that
she had not had assigned sacked consent form required not
only by the United Kingdom but by the hospital it
sales for administration without consent in Poloma's words. In Paloma's
own statement, a high dose of ras buier case and
predale s, PREDS and something else, along with a list

(01:41:08):
of other drugs which Paloma believed to be painkillers and
blood thinners but turned out to be prophylactic chemotherapy drugs.
Dr Mohan also admitted that she had not seen Poloma's
ECG and taken a couple of weeks before in the
indicating partial right bundled branch block which contradicted to give
rasbuier case un less an absolute emergency because he can

(01:41:28):
damage the heart. I do apologize to you again. This
is as badly written as that that letter that Paloma
sent that time. Remember that one within a few days
of coming home after these drugs, Polomic became very ild
symptoms of heart problems. Yes, Dr Mohan has now been
allowed to leave the country. They wanted her eggs. They
pressured and attempted to coheerse her with endless emails, text

(01:41:49):
and phone cause until she issued a cease and desist order.
They wanted our home now. Someone responds this, responds to
this and points out two things. The tweet response says.
The way RASPIRAA case can cause heart issues arrhythmias is

(01:42:10):
by electrolyte imbalances. These would have been checked on regular
blood work in the hospital, so it is very unlikely
to be a factor. However, the partial right bundle block
on the ECG's interesting. Did Paloma get an editor echo
cardigram as part of her work up? Most right bundle
branch blocks are benign, but if she had an echo,

(01:42:32):
we would know how healthy her heart was prior to
leaving the hospital, and quite damningly. She points out that
in a very polite way, that Kate doesn't have a
clue what she's talking about. She says, by the way,
there is no such thing as prophylactic chemotherapy. Drugs prophylactic

(01:42:52):
means to prevent, So what you're saying is that she
was given a drug to prevent chemotherapy. It's because as
far as this person who seems to know what she's
talking about. She's saying that Kate is just throwing words
at the wall and hoping to blind you with science. Essentially,

(01:43:13):
so Ks then tweets as a response to this, No
vaccine has ever been proven safe. No vaccine has ever
been proven effective. The fact that there is a government
scheme paying out for vaccine injury tells you everything. Viruses
are a myth. They were sold to you to accept.

(01:43:33):
They were sold to you so that you accept their
poisoned dart and take your children to the sacrificial altar
of Moloch. Now, several things. One, she spells molack incorrectly.
She spells it with an A, which is not great.

Speaker 1 (01:43:54):
What molach?

Speaker 3 (01:43:56):
Yeah molac? Yes, yes, so she's got that wrong. No
vaccine has ever been proven safe. That's weird because I've
had loads and I'm still here. No vaccine has ever
been proven effective. Well, I think we've done this joke before.
But yeah, Polio enters the chat and smacks you around

(01:44:18):
the head with the injuries walking stick. The fact that
there is a government scheme paying out for vaccine injury
tells you everything. No, he doesn't tell you everything. It
tells you, like with all medicines. Some people are allergic
to it. My mum's allergic to penicillin. Are we suggesting
that we shouldn't have penicillin because some people are allergic
to it. It doesn't tell you everything at all. Also,

(01:44:41):
basically I thought there was no vaccine injury compensation scheme
because they were all protected because it's part of trying
to kill you. Viruses are a myth. No, no, no,
they aren't. You spectacularly silly person. They were, but you
were sold the concepts of viruses to accept their poisoned art. Well,

(01:45:04):
that's interesting because I'm pretty sure viruses existed before even
the concept of vaccines were thought of. So the Illuminati
evidently playing the long game with that one. It's very,
very silly. She then tweets this Pano drama lies again.

(01:45:28):
Dr Mohan admits she was very confident that it was
her own decision and she was not influenced, referring to Paloma,
and she retweets out a BBC article that says, but
soon after that, Poloma told Dr Mohan that she had
not made up her mind about the treatment and wished
to explore other options. Mon Sewett asked Dr Mohana She

(01:45:50):
questioned Poloma on whether her decision was influenced by anyone,
but Dr Mohan said she was very confident that it
was her own decision and she was not influenced, which
is very confusing. Have you noticed what's confusing about that?
Like it that would suggest that Kate was suggesting that
her decision was wrong. Because here's the thing. If Kate

(01:46:16):
was correct and that Gerson treatment was the correct treatment,
or that she didn't have cancer, and so going to
see all her other friends, you know, these clinics that
she spoke of, if that was the correct thing to do,
why would it matter if Kate had influenced her. Wouldn't
she have influenced her in the correct way. So that

(01:46:39):
to me is a bit suspicious because it seems like
you're trying to weel out of something which doesn't doesn't
make sense. It doesn't track. If you were right that
she didn't have cancer, or that the alternative treatment because
it keeps changing, were the better option, why would you
be ashamed in any way or deny that you were
the person that influence Also, it really doesn't contradict in

(01:47:04):
the way that she's said, because like it, it means
that that she's an adult. The polone is an adult.
That she's She's not been forced into this decision, is
what it means. But anyway, on the twenty second of July,
something happened that may indicate that potentially Kate sher already

(01:47:30):
might have been correct. There is somebody, a very influential figure,
influential in American politics, that indicated that Kate was correct.
I think we could all guess who this this person
might be. Okay, hell yeah, now bears smuggler the best,

(01:47:54):
yes him, he of the sketchy voice. The Independent released
an article and this was all over the news for
a couple of days, like this is a big deal
RFK Junior or just changes for organ donation network as
report finds dozens were not dead when organs were harvested. Okay,

(01:48:20):
this is from the Independent. Amid reports that organ donors
maybe at risk for having of their body parts harvested
while still alive and kicking. The Trump administration has launched
a sweeping reformation of the US organ transplant system. The move,
announced by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Comes on the hills of an investigation by the department's

(01:48:41):
Health Resources and Services Administration that revealed disturbing practices by
major organ procurement organizations. Our findings showed that hospitals allowed
the organ procurement process to begin where patients showed signs
of life, and this is horrifying, Kennedy said in a statement.

(01:49:02):
The organ procurement organizations that coordinate access to transplants will
be held accountable. The entire system must be fixed to
ensure that every potential donor's life is treated with the
sanctity that it deserves. The New York Times recently reported
that the federal inquiry had been on last fall after
thirty six year old Kentuckian Anthony Thomas Hoover the seconds

(01:49:24):
organs were pursued even as he shook his head and
drew his knees up to his chest. Hoover's sister, JOHNA. Rohair,
had previously told NPR that she felt betrayed by the
fact that the people were telling us he was brain
dead and then he wakes up. After examining more than
three hundred and fifty cases where organ donation was authorized

(01:49:47):
but ultimately not completed, it found that one hundred and
three showed concerning features including seventy three patients with neurological
signs incompatible with organ donating. The Kentucky Organ Donator Donor Affiliates,
a group tied to the case, is a new part
of the Network for Hope, a member of the United

(01:50:08):
Network for Organ Sharing and a newly formed organ procurement organization.
Network for Hope has criticized The New York Times for
reporting in a page on its website, saying that it
was missing factual clarifications and critical context about organ and
tissue donation. We are fully committed to transparency and accountability

(01:50:28):
to their regulations regarding donation after circulatory death donation, the
group said. Our goal has always been and will remain
to meet the highest ethical and medical standards in donation
and transplantation. Patient safety is our top priority. Network Hope
looks forward to co working collaborative with HHS and HRSSAY

(01:50:51):
and encourages the development of policies that support the betterment
of the organ transplant system as the whole. The CEO,
Barry Massa said in a statement to The Independent, Now,
what is this story about this person who had his
organs pursued whilst he was actively shaking his head and
pulling his knees up to his chest. MPR. A man

(01:51:14):
declared dead almost had surgery to donate his organs, but
he was still alive. Natasha Miller says that she was
getting ready to do her job preserving donated organs for
transplantation when nurses wheeled the donor into the operating room.
She very quickly realized something wasn't right. Though the donor
had been declared dead, he seemed to her to be

(01:51:36):
very much alive. He was moving around, kind of thrashing,
like moving thrashing around on the bed, Miller told MPR
and an intercity and then we went over there. You
could see he had tears coming down. He was crying visibly.
The donor's condition alarmed everyone in the operating room at
Baptist Health Hospital in Richmond, Kentucky, including the two dough

(01:51:57):
including the two doctors sorry, who refused to participate in
the organ retrieval. Donnad Rohair of Richmond, Kentucky told MPR
that her thirty six year old brother, Anthony Thomas Sorry
Antony Thomas TJ whover thecond was the patient involved in
the case. He was rushed to the hospital because of
a drug overdose. Raw Her was at the hospital that day.

(01:52:20):
She says she became concerned that something wasn't right when
TJ appeared to open his eyes and look around as
was being wheeled from intensive care to the operating room.
It was like this was his way of letting us know,
you know, hey, I'm still here. Rara told MPR. Thankfully
TJ remains alive and in the care of his sister,
though according to Eddie MPR report, he has ongoing problems

(01:52:43):
with his speech, memory and movement. So this is this
seems to support what she's saying. Like r fk Jr.
Has said that people were alive when organs were harvested
from them, that they showed signs of being alive, and

(01:53:04):
that this means that that the practice must change. And
this seems to support what Kate Tremaradi, Michael yedon various
other people were saying, but did do you spot how
it doesn't Let's look at the incident, the one incident
they actually sort of talk about Anthony Thomas, who for
the second right, the man that basically started moving around.

Speaker 4 (01:53:29):
It's given me those vibes of like the stories of
like a person who gets buried alive or something like
that because they're you know, it's just those things happen sometimes.
But it's not exactly like protocol.

Speaker 3 (01:53:43):
Well it's it's actually even less troubling than it's made
out to be because what happened to Anthony Thomas who
for the second well, they didn't take his organs out.
The doctors didn't remove his organs because when he was
brought into the room, that says, yeah, this patient is
clearly not in a state to transplant his organs. So

(01:54:06):
nobody had their organs taken out whilst they were still alive. Now,
what happened was this guy had incredible brain damage. His
brain didn't get enough oxygen. But that happened before he
was declared dead. When the doctors preparing to harvest his

(01:54:27):
organs noticed signs of life, he was taken to the ICU.
So this isn't a case of somebody I mean, it
depends what you The way he's been presented by RFK JR.
Is that this guy was they didn't care that he
was still alive. But what he's actually saying is that
the PROTOCO is to ensure that somebody is a suitable

(01:54:49):
donor for organ transplantation were upheld and ensured that that
person went home. It's worse than that. Even because seventy
three patients had neurological signs incompatible with organ donations, at
least twenty eight may not have been dead when organ
removal began. So I checked it. In all seventy three cases,

(01:55:14):
none of them had their organs removed. In all cases
it was stopped by the doctors and nurses. No one
was killed for their organs. So what this is actually
saying is that the system worked. In this report, there
isn't a single case of anyone being killed for their organs. Also,

(01:55:37):
in seventy two of the seventy three cases presented, the
patient who didn't have their organs removed died of natural
causes within hours of the decision not to remove organs. Hence,
they were all extremely ill. So the story tries to

(01:55:58):
frame this as if healthy people were being killed, and
that's not what is happening. Incredibly poorly people were taken
to the position where they were assessed to see if
there were suitable for organ donation and it was said no.
Now there is a slight problem because the decision to

(01:56:19):
put them into that stage isn't in America, made by doctors.
It's made by somebody else who is connected to that
organization that that said this has been misrepresented. That's their job.
Their job is to say, I think this person might
be suitable for organ transplantation. Now do the checks to

(01:56:40):
make sure that I'm right. So they're again trying to
frame it that this person is walking around the ward
like death, not even offering chess games, just saying basically,
this is it your timesp. I've designated you hack into
that person, hack into that person and take their organs.

(01:57:01):
And only due to the due diligence of this doctor
who didn't feel right, they didn't murder that person. That's
that's framed. But that's not what's happened. What's happened is
they've said, we think this person might be suitable for
organ transplantation, take them to the position where they have
and in every single case they've said, no, this person
is not suitable for organ transplantation. The twenty eight people

(01:57:24):
mentioned were not operated on either. In all of these cases,
the patient was simply put forward as a potential organ donor,
but the protocols in place said that they won't be
harvested from these people, so it's nonsense. Robert Kennedy tweaks out,

(01:57:45):
they've been massive ethical breaches in many organ transplant cases
in the Biden administration. It's been found that at least
seventy three brain dead donors could still neurologically feel pain
when their organs were being taken out. The organs weren't
taken out. Robert Kennedy is lying. So Neil Stone, who

(01:58:06):
is a brilliant doctor, responds to this whole plava by saying,
next on RFK Junior's radar, organ donation transplant of organs
is a magnificent scientific achievement which saves tens of thousands
of lives per year, and he is going to try
and stop it. Jonathan Laxon, MD, FRCPC says, do you

(01:58:29):
not understand the concept of brain death? Our machines can
keep the heart and lungs going even if the brain
is dead, and Alistair McAlpine responds by saying, MAHA doesn't
understand basic concepts like brain death. This is just embarrassing.
David Gorsky responds, I've worked in transplant services during training
for a time. I wanted to be a transplant surgeon.

(01:58:49):
The entire processing is ruled by strict protocols designed to
eliminate conflicts of interest, protect donor and families, and to
ensure the equitable distribution of organs. Charles Ballet said, there's
not enough organ donors. Bobby is a dunce for crying
such bullshit. Organ donors and doctors and crews save lives.
So yet again we're presented with something which on the

(01:59:12):
surface looks horrific, but with the most basic of scrutiny
you find out that actually it's just a really sensatial,
sensational statement by Robert Kennedy Jr. Saying that the organs
were taken out of these people, whous they were still alive,
when the actual report shows that none of these people

(01:59:35):
were operated on, not a single one of them. So
yet again, we've said this before, we'll say it again.
If you need to lie to bolster your argument, you
simply don't have an argument. Descation list

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}4/5 Natural Nurse or Toxic Influence? The Paloma Shemirani Story

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist

All Episodes

4/5 Natural Nurse or Toxic Influence? The Paloma Shemirani Story

Stuff You Should Know