Interview with Josh Walkos

On Vaccination, Revolving Doors, New World Religion, Protective Stupidity and more.

The fight against The Poisoning has been going on for two centuries.

There is ample literature spanning this timeframe of courageous principled people making the same points and arguments we are making today.

“They are poisoning us, and they are lying about it.”

That’s the basic message.

It gets through to some.

Only certain souls are prepared and capable of doing this work.

Josh is one of them.

He is one of the most effective content creators on X and a wonderful source of videos, commentary and inspiration.

With thanks and gratitude to Josh Walkos (Champagne Joshi).

---

---

Background and Influences

1. Josh, could you please start by telling us a bit about your background and what led you to become interested in researching and writing about topics like vaccines and public health?

When I was around 14-15 years old my grandmother whom I was extremely close with went to the cardiologist for a checkup and was talked into having a stent procedure that was elective, meaning it wasn’t an emergency. At this point she was 66 and had already had open heart surgery but had recovered quite well all things considered. The surgeon made a mistake during the procedure, and this led to her death. It was the first time my eyes were opened to the iatrogenic harm that occurs worldwide by the medical system itself. My family tried to bring a lawsuit against them but the laws as they are written make it virtually impossible for a family who isn’t extremely wealthy to win. So, I was out of a grandmother, and this caused a lot of discord and suffering within the family.

Ever since that happened, I have had a deep distrust of the medical system and have always taken it upon myself to read and research as much as possible about it. I mostly kept this to myself and didn't share it with the world but once I saw what was happening with the “coronavirus pandemic” I made a decision to speak out and help expose the fraud that was occurring on a worldwide scale. In the course of learning about the mRNA injections I also began looking into the history of vaccines in general and was completely shocked. It amazes me that there is such a disconnect from the reality of these products and the mythology that has been carefully constructed around them via coordinated propaganda/messaging campaigns but the government, medical system, academia, and the media.

2. Who were some of your early mentors or influences when you first started learning about issues with vaccination? How did they help shape your understanding and approach to this topic?

Honestly, I haven't really had any mentors on the topic, I consider myself an autodidact and I have just read as much as I can and slowly accumulated a reference library. I first started learning about the dangers of vaccination by reading about the Dr. Sears vaccination schedule which is what I used for my kids. It essentially limits their exposure to just one vaccine at a time, therefore limiting the amount the potential for an overactive immune response which can then cascade into other problems with children's health. This was very early in my journey of learning about vaccines and to be honest if I had to do it over again, I would have just gotten an exemption. I did lobby for this with my wife but at the time she wasn’t aware of the dangers and much like most other people took what she heard about vaccines at face value and didn’t give it a second thought. Children’s Health Defense was also an early influence which led me to other publications about vaccines like the book “Dissolving Illusions” which really blew the lid off the scam for me. That book has single handedly lifted the veil of ignorance from so many people’s eyes. We are told a story about how vaccines are responsible for saving the human race from the scourge of disease but when you understand that disease eradication is overwhelmingly attributed to improved hygiene, clean water, and better environmental living standards, it is a revelation. We tend to view history in a vacuum, and one has to understand the conditions people lived and worked in back then. Conditions that were horrific and bred disease throughout society. When you look at historical records of disease prevalence and see how far it had declined by the time all of these vaccinations were introduced it becomes absolutely clear that we have been lied to on a grand scale.

Impact and Personal Experience

3. Questioning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines can sometimes put a strain on personal and professional relationships. How has your work in this area impacted your relationships with family, friends, and colleagues? Have you faced any challenges or obstacles in your work or business opportunities as a result of your views?

As I mentioned initially my wife, and I clashed on the issue, and I was able to come to a compromise with the Sears alternative schedule. It remained a point of contention for a while, but I was persistent in educating her on the issue and to her credit she listened. She still resists in some ways but for the most part has joined my side of the issue and I think the so-called pandemic really opened her eyes to the manipulation and deception employed by the government and medical industry. As for relationships outside of my immediate circle, I try not to discuss it with colleagues or friends because I am keenly aware of what a third rail it has become and there is just too much political nonsense attached to it. Obviously, I don’t hide my views since I speak publicly about them and write about them on X and my substack but it is not something I willingly bring up in discussions in my personal life. With that said, if it does come up though, I will and have given my stance on the issue. I am sure your readers have experienced the same illogical knee jerk reactions anytime they want to speak out against the sacred cow that is vaccination.

Views and Positioning on Vaccine Safety

4. There is a spectrum of views among those who question vaccine safety, ranging from advocating for greater informed consent and individual choice to calls for the complete abolition of vaccination. Where would you position yourself on this spectrum?

At this point in time, I am in favor of placing a moratorium on the entirety of the vaccination program and funding a truly independent review of every single study that has been used as a basis for approval by our regulatory agencies. I am of the opinion that if this really happened the only conclusion at the end of it would be to eliminate the vaccinations on the market. The collusion between the regulators and pharmaceutical companies is beyond redemption in my opinion. They no longer serve the public interest and have the blood of millions on their hands due to the greed and pseudo-science they have employed. In fact, I wouldn’t stop with vaccines, I would do the same for a litany of classes of drugs on the market.  SSRIs immediately come to mind, when one looks into the deceptive studies used to approve these drugs and how they have been pushed on the population, it truly shocks the conscience.

5. You mention the phrase "safe and effective" being used as a "religious mantra" to bypass critical thinking. Why do you think this phrase has become so ubiquitous in discussions about vaccines?

This is classic propaganda messaging, used throughout history by governments to get desired results. There is a reason for this, it works when it is aimed at populations and repeated ad nauseum.  Most people hear “safe and effective” but don’t stop to ask simple questions like, what is considered safe? or Effective how? It is just a generic term that sounds good on its face but belies a much darker reality. If you look up the definition for “effective” here is what it says.

1. successful in producing a desired or intended result.

2. fulfilling a specified function in fact, though not formally acknowledged as such.

This is a quite peculiar use of the word when using it in the context of medicine isn’t it?

The word “safe” seems self-evident but this is not the case when it is used in “public health”. You must understand that “Public Health” is a collectivist amorphous term that is used based upon whatever the particular goals of public health administrators set. So, something may not be safe but according to public health logic it may be considered safe relative to other outcomes. It's a deliberately convoluted construct that they boil down to a catch phrase because they know it is a means to an end. They can rationalize someone dying from a medicine if based on their modeling it “saves” X amount of people. Of course, they cannot definitively prove their models are correct but they serve their purpose and help justify various drug approvals.

6. Some proponents of vaccination argue that even if vaccines carry some risks, the benefits to public health far outweigh the potential harms. How would you respond to this perspective?

I would ask those proponents to provide me with evidence of benefits and also how they calculate this? The fact of the matter is that the harms of vaccinations are suppressed and denied to such an extent it is virtually impossible to know the overall damage being done. If you are not looking for the harms or just outright deny they occur, how can we get to a point where we are having an honest conversation about the topic. Proponents who are trotted out to gaslight us invariably have conflicts of interest that if shown should automatically disqualify them from speaking on the subject with authority. This is the core of this problem. These injections are a multi-billion a year enterprise, protected by the government, liability free to the manufacturer and a guaranteed source of income to thousands of people each year. We act like these are magically talismans and not products produced by an industry that has a history of outrageous deceit. They don’t deserve our respect or trust and yet the government demands we give it. It is like finding out your child was abused by a daycare worker, and you are expected to believe that worker is now ok to watch your kid. We all just act like greed and human nature doesn’t apply to the government or pharmaceutical companies even though all the evidence we have is in direct conflict with that false reality.

Specific Concerns and Criticisms

7. You raise concerns about the short safety monitoring periods for some vaccines, such as the Hepatitis B vaccine given to newborns. Would you say that this is regulatory incompetence or evidence of an “intent to harm” and ultimately hide the evidence?

I think that these things start as a regulatory failure but then become evidence that there isn’t so much intent to harm but they are willing to live with those harms in order to keep the gravy train rolling and to save their own hides from career destruction or prosecution. You mention the Hep B safety period, which in the package insert is only 5 days. 

Here is the exact wording:

“In three clinical studies, 434 doses of RECOMBIVAX HB, 5 mcg, were administered to 147 healthy infants and children (up to 10 years of age) who were monitored for 5 days after each dose.”

Package Insert - Recombivax HB (fda.gov)

I want everyone to stop and think about that for a minute. This is a vaccine that they want to inject in every single newborn baby to protect them from a disease that can only be transmitted via intravenous drug use, unprotected sex, or from mother to baby. They always use the mother to baby trope as a pretext but what they don’t tell you is that pregnant women are tested for Hep B so they know damn well that the mother does or doesn't have the disease prior to giving birth. So why insist on injecting it into a newborn? Could it be that:

“The hepatitis B vaccine market size was valued at $7.94 billion in 2022 & is projected to grow from $8.38 billion in 2023 to $12.36 billion by 2030”

Hepatitis B Vaccine Market Size, Share, Growth Trends [2030] (fortunebusinessinsights.com)

Again, this is just for ONE vaccine, and it is making these companies $8 Billion a year! It is absurd that we don’t view profit motive as the main culprit for this. These corporations have a mandate to increase profits year over year so not taking this into consideration is a crime in itself.

Furthermore, why would you limit the safety reporting period to only 5 days? It only makes sense if you want to limit the potential for a safety signal to emerge which is exactly why they have it at such a short period of time. One would think that our regulatory agencies would see this and say, “hold on, 5 days doesn't seem to be enough time to assess the safety of a product that we intend on injecting to every newborn baby?” Yes, one would think that, but the disturbing reality is that the FDA is totally fine with that.

8. You describe a "carefully controlled propaganda campaign" that has shaped public perceptions of vaccines. How do you think this campaign has influenced people's ability (or inability) to “think” about vaccine safety and effectiveness?

A virtually impenetrable wall of propaganda has been built around this industry and I don't blame the average person for not being able to see through it. Millions upon millions of dollars are spent each year to convince the public that these entities have their best interest in mind. Front groups, astro turf organizations, non-profits, you name it, have been built to pose as independent but are secretly funded by the industry to convince you that these products are a miracle of science. This isn’t just for vaccines either, almost every industry does this and with the help of the government I might add. Someone with a full-time job, kids and other obligations simply does not have the time or predilection to look at who is secretly funding organizations trying to convince them their products are “safe and effective”, it's just not feasible and they know this or else they wouldn’t do it. The general public has been propagandized into mental submission and it has been going on for decades. The “pandemic” is all the proof we need of that fact.

9. In your research, you have come across examples where the "revolving door" between the pharmaceutical industry and government agencies led to profit motives taking priority over public health concerns in vaccine decision-making? Can you share any specific examples you've come across of how these cozy relationships may have influenced vaccine policy or promotion?

There are numerous examples of the “revolving door” between pharma and government. One notable example of conflict of interest involves Dr. Curtis Wright, who was an FDA official responsible for approving OxyContin in 1995. Following the approval, he left the FDA and joined Purdue Pharma as a paid consultant. This relationship raised questions about the integrity of the approval process, and whether Wright's decision to approve the drug was influenced by the prospect of future employment with Purdue. I think the logical answer is yes of course it did.

In 2009, a media hyped the H1N1 swine flu pandemic swept across the globe, prompting an urgent response from health authorities. One vaccine developed to combat the virus was Pandemrix, produced by pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). European governments, following recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO), swiftly purchased large quantities of the vaccine.

However, in the years that followed, it was revealed that Pandemrix had caused narcolepsy, a rare sleep disorder, in hundreds of children and teenagers. Questions arose about the relationship between GSK and key WHO officials who had encouraged the use of the vaccine. For example, it was discovered that Dr. Albert Osterhaus, a prominent Dutch virologist, and a key influencer in the WHO's pandemic response, held financial ties to GSK. These connections cast doubt on the impartiality of the advice provided by health experts and the vaccine's rapid approval.

A more recent example that we saw play out on TV during the “pandemic” was Dr. Scott Gottlieb who served as the Commissioner of the FDA from May 2017 to April 2019. After leaving the FDA, Gottlieb joined Pfizer Inc.'s board of directors in June 2019. He played an influential role in public perception management during the COVID -19 pandemic, appearing on television almost nightly to recite industry talking points. Not once was his financial ties and role as a Pfizer board member disclosed during these appearances. Prior to his tenure at the FDA, Gottlieb had already held various roles in the pharmaceutical industry, including serving on the boards of several companies. Critics argue that his close ties with the industry raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest, as he had a major role in regulating the industry during his time at the FDA.

The list could go on and on, but I'll spare your readers.

Communication Strategies and Psychological Barriers

10. Communicating about controversial topics like vaccine safety can be challenging. What strategies or approaches have you found most effective in discussing these issues with people who may be skeptical or resistant to questioning the mainstream narrative?

This is a tough one because it is hard to break through the mind control around this issue. I have found that just being persistent and pointing out the contradictions to them as they arise can be effective. Some people are never going to allow themselves to be reached though. We as a society, discount the power of belief and the ways in which people will rationalize away what are otherwise obvious lies we are told.

11. You have written that many people have difficulty accepting the possibility that they may have made a harmful decision for themselves or their loved ones by accepting vaccines. How might this psychological barrier be addressed in discussions about vaccine safety?

I have found that documentaries can be a powerful medium to break through the psychological barrier. I have received many messages from people who came across a documentary I posted on X who have thanked me for shining a light on the issue. If you have read Orwell’s 1984, you will recall a term called “protective stupidity”. I think this describes what we see going on perfectly. It is when someone will not allow even a shred of evidence that contradicts their existing belief structure to enter their consciousness. This is to avoid the inevitable cognitive dissonance that occurs when confronted. People generally just do not want to experience that confusion which can then lead to anger once they have realized what they once believed to be false. It is much simpler to block it out than to not experience it and I think this “protective stupidity” is legion on a variety of topics within our societies. Unfortunately, it will take personal experience to shake them from their slumber. Like having a friend or a loved one harmed before they will truly believe and start to open up their mind to the possibility that they were wrong. No one wants to admit that they fell prey to lies and as a result put their loved one in harm's way. It is a natural revulsion to not want to admit that in my opinion.

Philosophical Comparisons and Implications

12. In an article, you compare the widespread acceptance of vaccines to a "neo-religion." What parallels do you see between religious faith and the public's trust in vaccination?

In many ways, belief in science has replaced traditional religious belief. We see it all around us on a daily basis. The aforementioned catch phrase “safe and effective” is ubiquitous but there are other phrases like “trust the science” that have been popularized and taken up as a defensive shield by “true believers”. Scientism is undoubtedly the religion of the 21st Century. It demands trust regardless of the conflicting evidence, promises salvation, “if you take this vaccine your child will be protected”, and casts out those who are perceived as heretics, “oh you are just one of those anti-vaxxers”, giving them an easy way to dismiss legitimate concerns and rely on their faith alone. The only problem with “scientism” is that it rejects the notion of the soul or mankind’s unique place in the universes and in fact, it openly mocks religious beliefs. Of course, this is extremely ironic considering it makes the same type of psychological demands that a lot of religions foist upon their flock. I believe the religious impulse is ingrained in mankind and will also reveal itself regardless, albeit in more bastardized forms than others.

13. You have quoted Olivier Clerc's comparison of modern medicine to the historical role of the Catholic Church. Could you elaborate on this analogy and its implications for individual autonomy and informed consent?

Clerc’s book “Modern Medicine, the New World Religion '' draws many comparisons with Modern Medicine and Religion. Here are a few I think are spot on. He writes:

Medicine, then, has become the new world religion. The specific myths, beliefs, and rites of Christianity have been unconsciously projected into medicine since Pasteur. As I explain in detail in the next chapters, we can establish very close parallels between Christianity and modern medicine.

In brief:

• physicians have taken the place of priests.

• vaccination plays the same initiatory role as baptism and is accompanied by the same threats and fears.

• the search for health has replaced the quest for salvation.

• the fight against disease has replaced the fight against sin.

• eradication of viruses has taken the place of exorcising demons.

• The hope of physical immortality (cloning, genetic engineering) has been substituted for the hope of eternal life.

• pills have replaced hosts.

• donations to cancer research take precedence over donations to the Church.

• a hypothetical universal vaccine could save humanity from all its illnesses, as the Savior has saved the world from all its sins.

• The medical power has become the government's ally, as was the Catholic Church in the past.

• charlatans are persecuted today as ‘heretics’ were yesterday, and dogmatism rules our promising alternative medical theories.

• the same absence of individual responsibility is now found in medicine, as previously in the Christian religion.

• and finally, patients are alienated from their bodies, as sinners used to be from their souls.

I find these comparisons to be quite compelling and applicable to the medico-pharmaceutical-complex religion today.

Resources and Further Learning

14. Are there any particular books, documentaries, or other resources that you've found especially powerful in helping to "wake people up" to the concerns surrounding vaccines?

I would definitely recommend your readers get the books “Dissolving Illusions” and “Turtles All The Way Down” as a great starting point on Vaccines. Another book I recommend which is a bit older but ahead of its time is “Murder by Injection” by Eustice Mullens. As mentioned earlier, Children’s Health Defense is a fantastic resource as well. If you head over to my X profile at www.x.com/joshwalkos and peruse my page you will find many documentaries and threads I have put together on these issues. I also have a substack called “We The Free” as www.WeTheFreeSubstack.com that you can subscribe to if you’d like.

In particular this article I wrote called “The Childhood Vaccine Placebo Myth” is a great place to start. Did you know that not one single vaccine on the CDC’s childhood schedule was tested for safety using an “inert saline placebo”?

The Childhood Vaccine Placebo Myth - by Josh Walkos (substack.com)

15. For readers interested in learning more about these issues, what resources or next steps would you recommend? How can people stay informed about your ongoing work?

My advice to anyone who wants to learn more about these issues, is to always strive to have an open mind and understand that there are major financial interests spending millions to try and manipulate your perceptions about reality. Do not blindly accept things at face value and always check sources. Once you start to research these issues you will notice that rarely if ever are there primary sources included in MSM articles and when a source is provided it is invariably full of conflicts of interests. Once you realize the extent to which you have been lied to about vaccines, you will move on to other topics naturally and experience a whole new level of education that you weren’t aware of. Finally, do not be afraid to speak out, it is the only way we change the tide of totalitarianism that is forming right before our eyes. The truth is the most powerful weapon against tyranny.

 If you’d like to follow my work the easiest way is on X or substack.

---

---

Thank You for Being Part of Our Community

Your presence here is greatly valued. If you've found the content interesting and useful, please consider supporting it through a paid subscription. While all our resources are freely available, your subscription plays a vital role. It helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. Please make full use of our Free Libraries.

Discover Our Free Libraries:

Unbekoming Interview Library: Dive into a world of thought-provoking interviews across a spectrum of fascinating topics.

Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Explore concise summaries of groundbreaking books, distilled for efficient understanding.

Hear From Our Subscribers: Check out the [Subscriber Testimonials] to see the impact of this Substack on our readers.

Share Your Story or Nominate Someone to Interview:

I'm always in search of compelling narratives and insightful individuals to feature. Whether it's personal experiences with the vaccination or other medical interventions, or if you know someone whose story and expertise could enlighten our community, I'd love to hear from you. If you have a story to share, insights to offer, or wish to suggest an interviewee who can add significant value to our discussions, please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com. Your contributions and suggestions are invaluable in enriching our understanding and conversation.

Resources for the Community:

For those affected by COVID vaccine injury, consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment as a resource.

Discover 'Baseline Human Health': Watch and share this insightful 21-minute video to understand and appreciate the foundations of health without vaccination.

Books as Tools: Consider recommending 'Official Stories' by Liam Scheff to someone seeking understanding. Start with a “safe” chapter such as Electricity and Shakespeare and they might find their way to vaccination.

Your support, whether through subscriptions, sharing stories, or spreading knowledge, is what keeps this community thriving. Thank you for being an integral part of this journey.