Bret Weinstein: I will be vindicated over Covid

These vaccines couldn't possibly have been known to be harmless when they hadn't been around for even a year. There was no way to know what they would do to people 5 years out and 10 years out.

We are being asked to get a fourth booster shot. This is obviously not a highly effective vaccine. This is, at best, a very weakly effective vaccine. It doesn't prevent the acquisition of the disease or the transmission of the disease, and we all know that they cause myocarditis in some people.

Even if these vaccines had been excellent with no known hazard associated with them, there were lots of people who simply didn't need them—people who were safe from COVID by virtue of the fact that they were young and healthy.

In my opinion, I don't think we should have vaccinated anyone because the risks and unknowns were too great, and we had alternatives.

The picture of how to address COVID should have emerged naturally from clinicians. Instead, it was handed down; it was preordained—and that is completely unnatural. It was extremely dangerous. It resulted in a serious violation of the Nuremberg Code. And I suspect... we're going to see that not only was there large-scale harm, but that there was a completely unnecessary reduction in human longevity.

What we got during COVID was not an inept response; it was the inverse of a good response ... Had they simply failed, that would be one thing, but what they gave us was a recipe for disaster. And to the extent that they were willing to do that, for whatever reason, and allow the harm to flow from it that did... These people must be removed from power lest this happen again.

I think we have now all come to an understanding that lab leak was plausible all along ... As I have said from very early on, all of the evidence that points in one direction points toward the lab. And we have now gotten to a place where it is impossible to deny that.

What Pharma is is a business that needs to have a medical need that can plausibly be associated with some compound over which it has intellectual property rights. And so, how can you increase your profit in such a world? Well, you might manufacture a disease, you might broaden the definition of a disease so more people appear to have it ... There are lots of ways to increase your profit.

The vaccine mandates required people to accept a product about which little was known and a product that was entirely novel in terms of... its mechanism of action. That is a violation of Nuremberg. Informed consent was impossible because people don't know what was in these vaccinations, and they don't have enough information to understand what risks they may be facing.

The vaccines appeared to be the one-size-fits-all solution, which is preposterous at a number of levels. For one thing, epidemiologically, it was not wise to mass vaccinate in the face of an ongoing pandemic. That's very different than vaccinating in advance of a disease outbreak.

I'm concerned about the meaning of the monkeypox outbreak. And the reason I'm concerned is because we really shouldn't be having an outbreak. This is a disease that's actually traditionally relatively difficult to transmit.

I'm not sure I like the term anti-vax because it's now been pointed at me so many times despite the fact that I regard myself as a vaccine enthusiast.