search icon
Live chat

Dr. James Thorp: What Pfizer’s Internal Data Reveals About Vaccines and Pregnancy

“Of the 270 pregnant women, 238 were not followed up. And of the data that they did present with a miscarriage … it was 80 percent miscarriage rate,” says Dr. James Thorp. The calculation that Pfizer documents revealed an 80 percent miscarriage rate was first reported by Daily Clout/War Room researchers in the spring of 2022.

“The federal government, the CDC, and the FDA—they’re corrupt. They sat on that data,” Thorp says.

Thorp is an OBGYN and fetal medicine specialist who sees upwards of 8,000 patients a year. He says his extensive reading of available data convinced him that pressuring pregnant women to get the COVID-19 genetic vaccines is “unconscionable.”

“They fraudulently deleted horrible outcomes of the vaccine in the reproductive toxicology studies,” claims Thorp. “The official UK government … specifically recommends that the vaccines not be used in pregnancy … and not to be used in breastfeeding.”

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Jan Jekielek:

Dr. James Thorp, such a pleasure to have you on American Thought Leaders.

Dr. James Thorp:

Jan, thank you so much for your time, and thank you so much for all you do on this amazing platform.

Mr. Jekielek:

You are an OBGYN doctor, and you’re a maternal fetal medicine specialist. I want to make sure I get that right. You just recently published a paper, “COVID-19 Vaccines.” This is in preprint, “The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function.” You’re also on track to see 9,000 patients this year, which I find almost unfathomable. Why don’t you tell me a little bit about your background?

Dr. Thorp:

Sure. I’m 69 years old, and I’ve been doing high-risk obstetrics, which is my passion. I’ve been doing it for over 43 years. Went to medical school at Wayne State University School of Medicine and did an OBGYN residency for four years at University of Colorado in Denver. Served with the Air Force, active duty for three years, and went back to University of Texas Houston to do a fellowship in maternal fetal medicine. And so, spent the first half of my career in Kansas City, second half of my career down in Florida where I currently reside with my beautiful bride, Maggie. I do full-time telemedicine, and I work through a company in the Midwest. It primarily has about eight offices in both suburban and urban and rural areas, about eight different locations in Missouri and Illinois. And I love what I do.

Mr. Jekielek:

You don’t typically connect obstetrics with telemedicine, or at least I don’t. How does that work exactly?

Dr. Thorp:

You mean delivering a baby through a computer screen?

Mr. Jekielek:

Yes.

Dr. Thorp:

Right.

Mr. Jekielek:

That’s what I’m asking.

Dr. Thorp:

All right. That’s a brilliant question, Jan, and technology has developed—No, I’m just kidding. I’ve gone to fellowship training and done maternal fetal medicine. What we do is many of us now oversee the OBGYN docs or the nurse midwives, and then we focus on the very high-risk obstetrical patients. The important things, of course, like catching a baby is very important, but really, it’s pretty routine.

We use our expertise for the more important things in obstetrics, like for example, how to keep a baby in the womb safely until it’s safe to deliver, how to prevent premature labor, when do you induce somebody, and at what time do you induce somebody? How do you manage diabetes, hypertension, preeclampsia, and all the other obstetrical complications that we have in the United States of America right now?

Many of us don’t actually catch the babies, but telemedicine renders our specialty very well, because we do high-definition ultrasound, 2D and 3D ultrasound, and so a lot of the way we examine our patients is through the ultrasound. We have the ability to do that. And then, of course, I can examine the patient or talk to a patient if there’s a need to do that. My hands and eyes and brains on the ground can do the physical examination in front of me. There’s a lot that I can see on the telemedicine computer screen as well. 

It’s very, very effective for me. I’m actually seeing about three times as many patients as I did before I retired, and that’s because I’m able to devote all of my time to all of my patients and not drive all the way around the geography of two or three states. My mother was a labor and delivery nurse. I went to a Catholic high school in Lakewood, Ohio. And during that time, we had books that we had to read for summer vacation. One of the books that I read was on Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis, and it was by Morton Thompson, The Cry and the Covenant. It had a really huge impact on me as a high schooler. And I knew what I wanted to do after I read that book.

There are several parts of that story that are really historically intriguing to me. Number one, in the mid-19th century and mid-1850s or so, Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis was an attending obstetrician at Vienna Lying-in Hospital. Unfortunately, at that time, obviously that was a pre-antibiotic era, but Jan, if you can fathom this, almost one in two beautiful, young, healthy pregnant women that went into Vienna Lying-in Hospital to have a baby died.

Mom died, went out of the hospital into the morgue, never to see her baby again that she delivered. It so happened that Vienna Lying-in Hospital, all the attending physicians and all the physicians in training were going down to the morgue to do their vivisections, their autopsies. There was nothing known of bacteria or viruses or infection or health. The safety of washing hands wasn’t known.

But Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis figured it out. They had all of these contorted theories of how the women were dying. It’s so analogous to what’s going on today on so many different levels, Jan. The American Board of OBGYN authorities of his day did the exact same thing as the American OBGYN, the Board of OBGYN, our American College of OBGYN, and the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine are doing today. There’s nothing new under the sun as it says in the good book of Ecclesiastes, “What has been done will be done again.”

Mr. Jekielek:

We have to mention a little bit about the story. Semmelweis had this brilliant idea that people should wash their hands. And then what happened?

Dr. Thorp:

It turned out that he did an internal study. And what he did was one floor would wash their hands and another floor did not. So he performed really, the first randomized prospective trial in medicine. He performed it, and he figured it out in what he called contagion. They had all these other goofy theories of miasma and things floating around in the air. It made no sense.

Why did it not make any sense? Because he was an observant physician. I love that about him. And number two, and I’ve tried to model myself after him. I do not follow the crowds. Never have, never will. I don’t do well when authority is calling illegal and unethical, immoral orders, and when I’m put in a position where I’m expected to dishonor and disrespect my physician-patient relationship.

Mr. Jekielek:

How was the situation then and what happened to Semmelweis analogous to what’s happening now exactly?

Dr. Thorp:

They isolated him. Sound familiar? They mocked him. They scourged him. They punished him. They gaslit him, exactly what they’re doing to us right now. Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis knew that he was right. He knew that he was right. He performed the study. He showed incredible results, prevented the disease, and they ignored him. They persecuted him. And literally, he was driven crazy.

I can relate to that, Jan, because I have so much ethical and moral trauma from what I’ve seen in the last two years. Some nights I can’t sleep, and I cry. It’s very painful for me to see my beautiful young moms and my beautiful pre-born babies and my beautiful newborn babies die or be permanently damaged from something, when I know what caused it. I’ve seen it with my own eyes, Jan. And I think that Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis felt the same way. I had no idea when I was reading this book in 1973 that I would be in such an analogous position in a time such as this.

Mr. Jekielek:

What is it that you started to see as these vaccines started to get rolled out? As we knew, they were recommended for pregnant women.

Dr. Thorp:

Of course, the vaccines really didn’t roll out full force until 2021, but I became very concerned. Actually in 2018, 2019, there was all this talk about a looming pandemic that was definitely coming. There was talk about SARS-CoV-1. And so, I’m always inquisitive. I like to make sure I’m catching all bases and not going to miss anything.

So, I went back and read a lot about SARS-CoV-1. I read on hydroxychloroquine and how successful it was. Dr. Tony Fauci’s article that he actually published, I don’t think his name is on it, but he funded it, I think that was published in 2004, and at that time it said that it was highly effective, highly effective against SARS-CoV-1. 

There were a lot of other therapies. I used ozone a lot, not in my obstetrical practice, although I have, but with myself personally and with some family and friends. Ozone was extraordinarily effective as was Vitamin D3 and many others. So, in 2020, “Oh, the pandemic is coming.” They even had this mock meeting, if you will, of authorities. They were actors planning out how they would manage a pandemic that was going to come, we were told.

So, it came, and then I noticed that the doctors weren’t really doctors, they were fake doctors. And the authorities and the powers were saying, “Well, you can’t treat this early.” “What do you mean you can’t treat it early?” “There’s no treatment. You just stay at home until your lips turn blue and then come in the emergency room.”

I was dumbfounded by that response because I’m a historian, and I know the history of medicine. There’s never been a disease in the history of medicine where we’ve said, “No, there’s no treatment.” It’s always been agreed by experts and historians that the earlier you treat a disease, the better the outcome is going to be. What’s this business about staying home? How do you know there’s no therapy for it that’s effective? That’s not my understanding.

So, with my research background, and with my medical background, and never having taken funding for any of my hundreds of projects that I publish, I haven’t taken any funding from any of the pharmaceutical companies. I never wanted to take the money, because we all know that with 90 per cent of grantors that give money for research, 90 per cent of the investigators will always follow the fiduciary leanings of their funder. That’s a fact of life, and I didn’t want to be tied to that. So, I designed a randomized, double-blinded clinical trial in the summer of 2020 saying, “This is how it has to be done.” I wrote it up, I published it on social media, and I sent it to everybody I knew.

Mr. Jekielek:

Basically, you said, “If you’re going to roll out this warp speed vaccine, this is what you need to do in order to test it properly to be able to assess it.”

Dr. Thorp:

Yes.

Mr. Jekielek:

But no one seemed to be interested in your methodology.

Dr. Thorp:

I got laughed at.

Mr. Jekielek:

Okay.

Dr. Thorp:

I got laughed at. Of course, it’s going to work. The rest is history, it was rolled out. Now, six months into the rollout, and this is really important, when I looked at the various data, Jan, I was dead wrong. I was dead wrong. I hypothesized a fivefold increase in death in 10 years. Are you kidding me? There was a 20 or 25-fold increase of death in six months out compared to the other vaccines.

I was then really upset and rather depressed, because had we done that randomized controlled prospective trial and started it by the summer or by September 2021, we could have had a committee around the world to look at that data and say, “This vaccine is killing people, take it off the market.” That’s what would’ve happened if they did the randomized, double-blinded placebo control trial. 

They didn’t do it, and I think they purposely didn’t do it. So, that’s my story leading up to the rollout of the vaccine, which was December 1st, 2020. That’s when they shipped it out worldwide. And by mid-December 2020, then the injections were starting around the world.

Mr. Jekielek:

Okay. Then, you started seeing some impact among your patients. Is that what happened?

Dr. Thorp:

Yes. I saw horrible outcomes. I will say this, and I personally didn’t see death and destruction from COVID-19 disease itself, really nothing more than what I’ve seen over the last 20 years with flu. I really didn’t. I didn’t see a lot of pregnant women dying. I didn’t see a lot of sick pregnant women. There were some, but it was on par with my prior experience with the influenza. And what I also noticed was that part of the lure to push this vaccine in pregnancy was based upon some really flawed assumptions, in my opinion.

Mr. Jekielek:

For example?

Dr. Thorp:

For example, I think that the powers that be would always say, “Well, pregnant women, you have to use a vaccine in them. They’re at more risk for dying from viral pneumonia.” I would ask, “Why is that?” “Well, because pregnant women’s immune systems are compromised, and that’s the only way they can carry a baby.” Because of course, a baby is a totally different human being than the mother carrying it. 

In essence they’re right, a pregnancy is a natural, the most successful transplant case that we could ever have, because that fetus inside the womb is not of the mother’s origin, it’s a completely unique human being by mixture and exchange of genetic material between the father and the mother. So yes, they’re right in a way, but their conclusion is dead wrong, in my opinion.

In my experience, pregnant women are less vulnerable to an infection or a viral pneumonia than a non-pregnant woman. I think that, truth be told, the current literature would bear my opinion out. There’s an article that was published by Beth Pineles, actually from my alma mater, from a fellowship at University of Texas Houston. Beth Pineles published an article that was published last year. She did a very large study showing pretty dramatically that, interestingly, pregnant women had much lower mortality from viral pneumonia than their non-pregnant colleagues. Isn’t that interesting?

And now there was just another study published in Journal Nature, I believe the lead author is John MacArthur, et al, showing very similar results. In fact, the immunity of the immune system of a mother and fetus are integrally related to each other and dependent upon each other, and that the baby does fine, and mother does fine during pregnancy with cellular immunity, cellular immunity being much more important than humeral immunity. Let’s look at the cell-mediated immunity as a right hand of the immune system, humeral or the antibody creation by the B cell.

The lymphocyte B cells are the left hand, they’re not as important. And it’s my opinion that they’re not a good marker of immunity, whatsoever. And that’s everything that the pharmaceutical industry bases their tests on. In my opinion, it’s a false surrogate. If an antibody is absent, it doesn’t tell you anything. If it’s present, it really doesn’t tell you anything. And the literature has borne that out. So, I don’t believe that the antibody testing that the pharmaceutical companies do are anything better than a charade, using a false surrogate to make themselves look good and make large amounts of profit.

Mr. Jekielek:

At what point did you start seeing some impact in your patients?

Dr. Thorp:

In 2021 as the vaccines were rolled out, about March of that year, I started seeing problems. It was my observation. Now I want to be really transparent. I want to make it real clear to our audience that I’m not allowed to do clinical research on this topic. In fact, doctors have been fired for doing that. It’s a pretty covert closed mouth operation. You can’t do something that your employers don’t allow you to do, or your colleagues won’t allow you to do, but I can keep track.

Seeing 7,000, 8,000, 9,000 patients a year, I’ve got my fingertips on the pulse of obstetrical outcomes. I saw many more miscarriage, I saw more malformations, I saw more cardiac defects. There was much more preeclampsia and preterm labor. I saw many more second trimester abnormalities, abnormal testing results, abnormal appearing placentas, and dead fetuses. I saw stillbirths, too many.

Mr. Jekielek:

You’re saying this was quite different in the year that the vaccine rollout happened, versus the first year of COVID. So, you could see that it wasn’t just COVID that was happening.

Dr. Thorp:

That’s correct.

Mr. Jekielek:

Okay. I want to ask this. You were already expecting the vaccine to have some negative outcomes. Did you ever worry that that might have influenced what you were seeing somehow?

Dr. Thorp:

It’s a great question. That’s a very legitimate question. I don’t think that it did, because I was hoping and praying that I wouldn’t see that. And of course, there was the VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] data. I was keeping my fingertips on the pulse of the VAERS data, and fetal deaths were up. And then, of course, when I saw Pfizer’s own internal documents, those got me even more upset. 

And now keep in mind, specifically for your audience, I’m speaking of the Pfizer 5.3.6 post-marketing survey data. That’s the official data of Pfizer. That was 90 days, the first 90 days of the rollout. Like I said, they shipped it out December 1st, 2020. They carried out this study for about 90 days, February 28th, 2021. And then nothing was said. 

Now, about a month later, I got a copy of internal whistleblower documents. I saw this data. Jan, that was horrible, but there’s nothing that I could do about it, because what am I to do with this? I said, “Okay, this is consistent with what I’m seeing, but I can’t show this to anybody.” I didn’t get it legally. It’s not given to me by formally by the company, but I studied it and I looked at it very carefully. And Jan, it wasn’t until 14 months later that the federal judge made a FOIA request for that.

Pfizer wanted to hold it up for 75 years, which I would have been long gone to heaven dancing with Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis or something. But I think that it was very, very disturbing, because why would they want to block something for 75 years? Doesn’t every world’s citizen deserved to know what that was? Because by that time, there were billions of injections given all over the world.

What is this? Why is this not on CNN? Why is it not on Fox News? Why is it that we’re just talking about this now, and nobody else is talking about it? It really upset me, because when that came out on April 1st, the first thing I did was I compared every single page, even the copy artifacts were the same on my PDF copy. Every dot, title, coma, from page zero, page one was identical to the copy that I had. And then it was, “Boom.” Then, I continued to follow that, and I would keep following avalanches of data after data, after data drop, actually showing worse outcomes then VAERS.

Mr. Jekielek:

Maybe summarize for me what you saw in that data that was the most concerning, for those of us not familiar with it.

Dr. Thorp:

Just for our viewers, if you go to a search engine, now you can’t use Google, but use DuckDuckGo. Google will block you. It will never get you. And just type in Pfizer, P-F-I-Z-E-R 5.3.6, hit search, and you’ll come up with a website. There’s many different sites that it’s published on, they’re all the same. But the one that’s easiest that I find going to is phmpt.org.

That’s public health and medical practitioners for transparency, P-H-M-P-T.org. Pull that document up, click on it, go to page seven. On page seven, there’s table one. In table one, fatal outcomes, 1,223 fatal outcomes. That’s in less than 90 days, Jan. I told you my experience as a medical student when I was 24 and Wayne State University had just 26 deaths, [the vaccine] was ripped off the market. 

What was the difference in those 47 years? It’s hard to extrapolate and figure out, because it was so unprofessionally done. If you go down to page 12 on that same document, it’s got the obstetrical outcome, which we talked about. And if you look at that carefully, it’s very poorly done, very poorly written on Pfizer’s part, horrible, bad language. It’s not professional language, not the appropriate language, but their miscarriage rate was north of 75 per cent, 80 per cent.

Mr. Jekielek:

Their miscarriage rate was 80 per cent?

Dr. Thorp:

Yes.

Mr. Jekielek:

Okay, explain that in another way.

Dr. Thorp:

In the data that they presented on page 12, and I’ve read it and I’ve studied it for a year, it’s very disjointed, and it’s not well written. But as of the 270 pregnant women, 238 were not followed up. And of the data that they did present with a miscarriage of those that they did follow up, it was an 80 per cent miscarriage rate, 80 per cent. And I want to bring it to your attention, Jan, that the federal government, the CDC and the FDA, they’re corrupt. 

They’re corrupt. They sat on that data. I’m not an anti-vaxxer. In fact, I didn’t really believe what they were saying at Children’s Health Defense. It wasn’t until 2020 when I really took RFK Jr and Dr. Andy Wakefield seriously, and I looked at the data that they accumulated in Africa. Jan, it is bloody disturbing. Basically, what they did was they covalently bonded the pregnancy hormone HCG to the vaccine antigen.

They purposefully distributed it throughout the entire continent of Africa to sterilize young, beautiful daughters of our most high God. That’s not an allegation, that’s proven. And they proved it with patents. They proved it with publications, and they got caught with their pants down, as much as they wanted to deny it. Now I found it really interesting. I’ve gone back and I’ve studied all the African doctors. I spent some time over there in Africa, not enough. But I really realized that what they did was a purposeful heinous crime to take the fertility away from one of my patients. 

I don’t care what country they live in. That is not okay with me. And God bless Dr. Andy Wakefield. He’s been so persecuted for pointing that out, as has RFK. And I apologized to them because it took me till 2010 to wake myself up. I was dead wrong. I made a mistake. I did an academic metanoia if you will, and I apologized to the people that I might have insulted or might have made feel bad, because I thought the vaccines were indicated. I was brainwashed. But I think that it’s crucial to understand that what they’ve done with this vaccine, is much of the same with what they did there.

I know there are different vaccines. It’s an mRNA vaccine, and it’s different. But some of the proteins that are coded for by this manmade mRNA code for a molecule that’s very similar to the molecule that holds the baby in the womb syncytin. So, just like the HCG covalently bonded, they spent millions doing that in the lab for that sole purpose. When the young girls in Africa, 10, 11, 12 years old, when they got those vaccines, their body developed an immune reaction, an autoimmune reaction to the pregnancy hormone HCG. So, when they get pregnant and the HCG levels go up, their antibodies made by the T cells would drive up dramatically, bind to the HCG, neutralize it, leading to failed pregnancy, dead baby, or no baby.

I have no idea exactly what is causing the miscarriage or what’s causing the rampant bleeding in women of reproductive age who are not pregnant. We don’t know that. There’s so many things we don’t know because nobody will fund it. But that syncytin-like protein that is coded for by the mRNA does the same thing. The body makes it into a protein, what happens? The body’s immune system develops an antibody, and then that antibody goes to the womb and makes a hostile environment. So, if there is fertilization that occurs, it’s miscarried. Or if the pregnancy does continue and there’s not enough antibody, the pregnancy will go on for a time such that it’s lost.

Mr. Jekielek:

I want to jump to your paper because I think you did some really, really valuable work there.

Dr. Thorp:

Thank you, Jan.

Mr. Jekielek:

Again, “COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function.” And you summarized this to me. Of course, you’re one of a number of researchers that worked on this.

Dr. Thorp:

And I was going to point that out to you. It wasn’t me, there’s seven of us and the least of whom is me. We have Ms. Claire Rogers. I’m her wing man, I like to say. And then we have, let’s see, Michael Deskevich PhD, who’s a brilliant PhD mathematical modeling expert. We have Stewart Tankersley, who’s an incredible colleague and whistleblower, military whistleblower. He’s a physician and a friend. 

And then we also have Megan Redshaw, who is an attorney. She’s lead counsel with RFK’s Group, Children’s Health Defense, and also with TrialSiteNews. Brilliant attorney, brilliant writer. We also have Dr. Peter McCullough, who I know that everybody knows. I also have Albert Benavides. Albert Benavides is the expert in the world on VAERS, and he travels all over the world. He’s developed dashboards. He’s not a physician. He has been in the medical billing profession. He’s sharp.

Mr. Jekielek:

Maybe you can summarize for me what you found.

Dr. Thorp:

To set the stage, I wanted to compare the vaccine influenza since we started using that in 1998 in pregnancy, and then compare it to the outcomes of the COVID-19 vaccines that have been used. So, understand, we’re looking at about 288 months of usage for the influenza vaccine in pregnancy. We’ve got about 18 months or so of the data from the COVID-19 vaccine and pregnancy.

What I did was I simply interrogated the various databases, and I looked for pregnancy complications that I’ve seen in my experience. Mostly I looked for things that were highly related to inflammatory nature. It’s been known in my field for 50 years that anything that causes inflammation in pregnancy is deathly and dangerous and injuring to the developing embryo fetus. I looked at all of those causes. I picked out first, before pregnancy, the miscarriage, and the explosion of abnormal menstruation in women of reproductive age, to the tune of 1200-fold.

I’m not talking about 1200 per cent, I’m talking about a 120000 per cent increase in abnormal menstruation. Something’s going on there. And then we also noted a substantial increase in miscarriage. Now this is comparing the COVID-19 vaccine to the influenza vaccine, the same database. I saw a substantial increase in cystic hygroma, which is an abnormality in the developing fetus embryo along about 10, 12, 14 weeks where there’s an abnormal development of the lymphatic system, the lymphatic channels that drain into the venous system. Saw a dramatic increase in cardiac arrhythmia, irregular heartbeat in the fetal heart. Saw a dramatic increase in fetal cardiac abnormalities and malformations, saw a substantial increase in fetal cardiac arrest.

Absent fetal heart, saw a substantial increase in abnormal placentas where the placenta doesn’t serve the baby well. Dramatic reduction in birth weights, what we call intrauterine growth restriction. A dramatic increase in preterm labor. Saw a dramatic increase in abnormal blood flow to certain various organs in the fetus.

We looked at sophisticated doppler velocimetry measuring the blood flow velocity and certain blood vessels in the umbilical artery, in the ductus venosus, in the umbilical vein sometimes, and in the ductus arteriosus in the middle cerebral artery, all doing surveillance. We did the non-stress test where we would monitor the fetus for 30 minutes with a continuous heart rate monitor. Those testings were dramatically abnormal. And then of course, stillbirth.

Mr. Jekielek:

It’s hard to fathom what studies need to be done to confirm all of this, that this is actually caused by the vaccines.

Dr. Thorp:

It’s hard to undo it, because I believe probably purposefully they’ve lost a follow-up and they’ve crossed over, they did a crossover. So, some of the patients in their phase one, phase two and phase three that got the placebo were crossed over. So we’ll never have that data. It was permanently, permanently deleted.

Mr. Jekielek:

Explain what that means.

Dr. Thorp:

The part of doing a randomized controlled prospective trial, you have pristine, you don’t have bias. So you’re randomizing a patient to either getting the real treatment, the vaccines, or getting a placebo which is fake. And when you do that, you eliminate bias, if it’s done appropriately and if you include a large enough number. 

So, what they never did was they never—and I believe purposefully, they’re not dumb—they wanted this to be concealed, so they never kept a pristine placebo group. They ended up crossing it over and treating those patients that got the placebo group with the real vaccine.

Mr. Jekielek:

They said that they did it because for humanitarian reasons, right?

Dr. Thorp:

Yes. For humanitarian reasons to get their 80 billion profit margin. People will want to discredit VAERS data, which is a governmental database saying, “Oh, it’s passed. And no, it doesn’t prove causation.” No pharmacovigilance tools ever proven. It wasn’t proven back in 1976. That’s not the function of a pharmacovigilance tool. The function is to pick up safety signals.

The safety signals that the CDC recommended that needed to be acted on is an odds ratio of two. Listen, our odds ratios are so far off the graph that I had to make the X axis log rhythmic. Instead of going 1, 2, 3, 4, I had to go 1 10, 100, 10,000, a 100,000. Otherwise, if it were on a linear X line, a linear graph, the data point would be a mile out to the right hand of my screen. It wouldn’t be visible. And if you look at the yellow card, the UK Yellow Card, it’s same thing.

It’s worse than VAERS. The European Union, the European Medicines Agency database, EudraVigilance, is worse than VAERS. At the World Health Organization, VigiAccess is what they call it. It’s worse than VAERS. Here’s what I found just six weeks ago, which just floored me. The official UK government for two years put language at the bottom, very concealed. It’s very hard to find. I can’t believe I missed it. They specifically recommend that the vaccines not be used in pregnancy. 

COVID-19 vaccines are not to be used in pregnancy and not to be used in breastfeeding, specifically on their website right now, as we speak. As a very intelligent move for the UK government, because the governments all over the world now are waking up. And many of them, who do you think they’re blaming, Jan? They’re pointing their fingers at the physicians. And rightfully so, because it’s not the bureaucrats or the politicians or the board that have a physician patient relationship that they have to honor.

Where does the rubber meet the road? The rubber meets the road when a physician does his or her own due diligence and they counsel their patients. The UK data has always been there. They’ve always put it in there, but they have plausible deniability, you see? The government in the United States, they don’t have that hidden anywhere that I can find it. 

The U.S. government doesn’t have that excuse, but the UK government does. They have plausible deniability. I have assembled large numbers north of 30 independent verifiable sources showing that the various data that we have in our study is absolutely accurate, except it may be underestimated the adverse effect, because it’s being throttled.

Mr. Jekielek:

And what does throttle mean again?

Dr. Thorp:

Throttling is like a governor on an engine. If you have a Corvette and you’re sitting there and you try to take the RPMs up, it’ll keep it suppressed so it won’t hurt the engine. Same thing as what the FDA and CDC has done. And Albert Benavides has convinced me, I’ve spent hours with him going through just unbelievable data clearly showing that they’ve hidden, they’ve taken deaths out. They will take data out from, for example, the age. If the age is taken out and there’s a death from the vaccine, it doesn’t get counted.

Mr. Jekielek:

Oh, that’s right.

Dr. Thorp:

Yes.

Mr. Jekielek:

Because you need all the data points.

Dr. Thorp:

What Albert Benavides has done was he’s gone back, and the age was in there in other areas of the report. So he just put it in there, and that’s going to be our next paper.

Mr. Jekielek:

I see. You’re basically de-throttling.

Dr. Thorp:

Well, we didn’t do it for this study, because I wanted virgin data. This is straight data from VAERS. Our next study after this we’re going to start working on is we’re going to use de-throttled data. Now we can’t de-throttle at all, because they’ve done a lot of sneaky things, but he can de-throttle a lot of it.

Mr. Jekielek:

Just from pulling from different parts of the database, right?

Dr. Thorp:

That’s right. That’s absolutely right.

Mr. Jekielek:

And you mentioned breast milk. I think this was in the UK information. So, there have been reports of this mRNA appearing in breast milk from what I recall.

Dr. Thorp:

There’s two reports that I’m aware of. Two reports, one published this year and one published last year. And what they’re finding is that there is intact, I call it PU mRNA. That PU is pseudo urinated mRNA intact in the breast milk. And I have to tell a little story of why that’s so deeply disturbing to me. First understand, the first lie that we were told was that the vaccine stays in the arm. That was nonsense, they knew that. The vaccine doesn’t stand the arm. It’s in the bloodstream within hours and it breaks every God made barrier to protect the human being from dangerous substances.

Now, in order for it to go from here, it’s in a lipid nanoparticle, then it goes into a cell, pick any cell in the body. But here’s the bizarre thing, and what’s really scary to me about this study is that the mRNA is reprocessed within the cytoplasm of the cell, and it’s made into another lipid package. 

It’s by pinocytosis, a fat layer, kind of like the lipid nanoparticle, except it’s not that, it’s really a natural fatty layer like a lysosomal membrane or exosome. It covers the mRNA, it protects it, and then by pinocytosis it’s transported out the cell, then it goes to the memory gland and then the reverse process occurs. It gets intact into the acequin cell of the milk duct gland that’s making it and it’s excreted intact. 

So, think about that. This mRNA, PU mRNA is being sent to possibly every acequin gland in the body; your sweat glands, your salivary glands, nasal secretions, eye drops, vaginal secretions, cervical secretions, semen, it could be in all of those. Normal mRNA only lasts about 20 minutes, a half-life of 20 minutes in our blood, because it’s immediately taken out by the metabolic enzyme machinery. Not so with DNA. 

DNA is very stable. It stays in the blood for a long time. In fact, we use fetal DNA that is excreted in mom’s blood to do genetics on a fetus. We’ve been doing that for 15, 20 years now. DNA is very easy. It’s very stable. RNA is not, but pseudo-manmade RNA lasts a long time and that’s scary. So is it coming out in our sweat, in our spit, in our breath, in our saliva, in our semen, in our cervical secretions, we don’t know. This is all stuff that was incumbent upon the government and the pharmaceutical companies to study before it was rolled out. This is an event that could potentially severely adversely affect generations to come. 

I’m not saying that’s what’s happening. What I’m saying is that it’s possible. We now have two studies, two very clear studies, the study by Aiden and colleagues earlier this year, and the study from Zang and colleagues last year that clearly show that the mRNA, the pseudouridine mRNA is reverse-transcribed. That means it’s an enzyme. Reverse transcriptase takes it from mRNA to DNA, and it gets incorporated into the DNA genome, possibly permanently.

Mr. Jekielek:

Now I think those were in vitro, right?

Dr. Thorp:

Those were in vitro.

Mr. Jekielek:

Right.

Dr. Thorp:

Very good, Jan.

Mr. Jekielek:

Again, it’s something else that needs to be studied in vitro in the body.

Dr. Thorp:

You’re spot on. That’s correct.

Mr. Jekielek:

What kinds of studies would typically be done to understand the impact on pregnant women, both short term and long term?

Dr. Thorp:

That’s a brilliant question. Thank you for asking that. As we speak, I’m working with Dr. Ryan Cole and we have a team. We’ve assembled a team of folks, one from Europe, Aga Wilson, Tiffany Parrotto, she’s from Florida, Brook Jackson and myself. And we’ve designed some studies to move forward and to gain more understanding of what’s in the placenta and also what’s in the endometrium of these women. They’re causing severe adverse menstrual irregularities. Understand that your question is so good and nobody’s funding it.

So we have to fund ourselves and we’re moving forward with ourselves as best we can study this for our patients to give some hope. How do we treat these things? We don’t know how to treat them until we know what the exact cause. I do believe that the vaccine damage and injury and death is mediated by multiple different mechanisms, including inflammation, at least in the fetus. The study by Palmer and Bhakdi pretty much showed that that spike protein vasculopathy or endotheliitis is what’s killing the people that get the vaccine and die. They’ve shown that pretty conclusively. I think the same thing.

Mr. Jekielek:

Can you say that in layman’s terms?

Dr. Thorp:

Dr. Palmer and Dr. Bhakdi are brilliant investigators. So the spike protein, which is made by the pseudouridine mRNA is stealing all the energy from the usual household energy requirements of the molecules and the cells. It’s stealing that energy and diverting it to creation of spike protein. The spike protein is severely damaging to the lining of cells, causes severe inflammation, necrosis and damage. You just probably saw that recent article this past week where there’s vaccine injury due to severe damaging of the brain tissue.

Mr. Jekielek:

What does it typically look like for a product or a drug or a vaccine to be tested for use in pregnant women? What does that typically look like?

Dr. Thorp:

You’re a great questioner because that’s a topic we should visit. Before you ever introduce any drug in pregnancy, you have to do a couple of things. Everybody knows you don’t have to be a doctor or a nurse or a mechanical engineer or have any education, realize that you don’t ever use a foreign substance in pregnancy. You don’t ever do that. We’ve been burned very badly; Thalidomide, Diethylstilbestrol, the Dalkon Shield. In obstetrics, my area of specialty, we have a very dark history of catastrophic iatrogenic problems that we’ve caused.

What they’re supposed to do is reproductive toxicology studies phase one, phase two, and phase three before anything is ever given to a pregnant woman. There’s a brilliant researcher, a whistleblower, her name is Alexandra Latypova. She goes by Sasha. She and I have talked at great length. I’ve interviewed her. She worked for the pharmaceutical industry. She has internal documents that broke on your outlet. I think Mr. Enrico Trigoso broke that, or one of your colleagues, maybe it wasn’t Enrico. Basically, they fraudulently deleted horrible outcomes of the vaccine in the reproductive toxicology studies. 

In fact, Sasha Latypova has it. And it was buried and never published. Now you talk about censoring us physicians and being responsible for having blood on your hands and killing 500,000 Americans, because they didn’t get appropriate therapy that we knew we could have saved their lives with and were not allowed to do that by our government, and by the bureaucracy of the American boards. Okay, this is just as bad or worse, because they’re still pushing the vaccine in pregnancy to this very day. That is unconscionable.

There’s been so much academic fraud from The New England Journal of Medicine and the editor in chief with the fraudulent articles where they’ve put out pushing this disastrous drug and pregnancy—fraudulent articles, demonizing hydroxychloroquine when it could have saved 500,000 people. Same thing with Ivermectin. This is a concerted effort to taint and compromise and monetize every sector of our society to push the vaccine.

They knew what they call the low hanging fruit. You know the COVID Coalition Core [CCC], Department of Health and Human Services, put out not tens of millions, not hundreds of millions, not billions, but tens of billions of dollars to manipulate every single sector of our society. All the medical boards, all of the media, the legacy media, the mainstream media, all of the IT companies were in on this.

There’s internal communications that are leaking, Twitter, Facebook, all of them ganged up and pushed the vaccine. They used rock stars, they used athletes. They gave money to churches. They bribed physicians. They’re collecting their paychecks as a passive bribe to continue to collect their money. And they continue injuring patients if they’re pushing the vaccines, and they should know better. Being told to do that or being threatened to get fired, that’s not an excuse to not disgrace your Hippocratic Oath. You don’t ever break that, that’s sacrosanct. You don’t do that. You die before you do that.

Mr. Jekielek:

You have some very strong thoughts on COVID treatment, on the costs, on the harms, and on studies that weren’t done. Have you encountered any reprisals for your efforts?

Dr. Thorp:

Yes, a lot. I’m threatened by the American Board of OBGYN. I love my employer. My employer has been best employer I’ve ever worked with. I don’t want to mention their name, but I think they know that I’m right.

Mr. Jekielek:

You’re describing this study that you’re organizing with the number of other doctors and there isn’t any funding available. The question is, how often does this thing happen?

Dr. Thorp:

I’ve never seen it happen before. Now, I’ve funded myself from private donors in my 40 year career, but there’s never been a situation like this where there’s been an emergency and a problem where there’s literally no funding available. It’s unprecedented. I go back to Edward Dowd’s data, the BlackRock numbers guy, the former wall Street analyst for BlackRock futures.

There was a 40 per cent increase in all cause mortality. A 10 per cent increase would be a one in a 200-year black swan event, a three-sigma event. We call that a three-sigma event, sigma equating to a standard deviation in statistics. Three standard deviations is very, very high. It’s one in 200-years, this is 40 per cent. That’s a 12-sigma event. That’s a one in an 800 or a thousand-year event.

Mr. Jekielek:

You’re here at the FLCCC [Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance] conference. I know you’ve encountered all people who are working on related issues that you haven’t come across before. How important to this whole effort is this new community that’s developed around both funding and treating and assessing all these vaccine harm related issues?

Dr. Thorp:

You have no idea how much it means to me. And even all my co-authors, I’ve never met them before. Dr. Claire Rogers, she’s a physician’s assistant, so I call her doctor because she’s an independent practitioner. I never knew her. I never knew anybody in Tiffany Parrotto’s group, the My Cycle Story. But I’ve been so deep in this battle with them that I feel like they’re my brothers and sisters. It’s not just people in the United States.

It’s people that I’ve networked with down in New Zealand, down in Australia where I’ve done cases, in Scandinavia, in Vienna, and in the Philippines. With these people, we have a bonded relationship in truth. And I don’t think a true relationship can be flourish if it’s not founded on truth.

That’s the silver lining. It’s brought so many friends that I’ve never met before that I love, because they’re part of my family.

This is what the FLCCC is for me. I love Dr. Kory. I respect him so much for what he has done, along with Dr. Marik, and all of these doctors. Zev Zelenko, I never had the opportunity to meet him. Peter McCullough, Richard Urso, Ryan Cole—these are heroes. These are people that are standing up and losing a lot, and getting persecuted to save their patients and to stand for truth. And I stand with them.

Mr. Jekielek:

Dr. James Thorp, it’s such a pleasure to have you on the show.

Dr. Thorp:

It’s such a pleasure to meet you, Jan.

Mr. Jekielek:

Thank you all for joining Dr. James Thorp and me on this episode of American Thought Leaders. I’m your host, Jan Jekielek.

Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode.

BUY Jan 6 DVD: https://www.epochtv.shop/product-page/dvd-the-real-story-of-january-6, Promo Code “Jan” for 20% off.

* Click the “Save” button below the video to access it later on “My List.”

Follow EpochTV on social media:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/EpochTVus
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/EpochTV
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@EpochTV

Gettr: https://gettr.com/user/epochtv
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/EpochTVus
Gab: https://gab.com/EpochTV
Telegram: https://t.me/EpochTV

Read More
Popular
Related Videos