-
Hello friends, today is Thursday the 20th
August 2020 and tonight I have the privilege
-
to be with Jean-Dominique Michel
Hi Jean-Dominique!
-
Good evening Sylvano!
Now you have become famous and
-
famous throughout the French-speaking world
with the covid crisis,
-
but tell us before this
crisis, Jean-Dominique Michel
-
what was he doing?
-
I am a health anthropologist.
Anthropology is the study of
-
the human species through space and
time. An astonishing species:
-
she is creative to the point of arriving
to build universes of meaning and
-
modes of social organization all more
different from each other.
-
The anthropology of health is
study of how
-
different cultures describe what
is to be in good health, define
-
disease and since people fall
sick throughout history and time
-
what to do when someone
became ill to allow him to
-
regain health. So
traditionally we have traveled through
-
the world to see how it was going
in distant tribes. Nowadays
-
the anthropology of health is very much
more focused on our own practices
-
knowing that in our societies exist
of course biomedicine, which is the
-
main method of care to which the
most people speak up when they
-
are going badly but that there are plenty of others
proposals as well. Whether they are
-
ancestral or traditional medicines
such as Chinese medicine, Ayurvedic
-
or very recent proposals such as
quantum medicine or epigenetics
-
and then to observe
how according to his convictions
-
of its culture of its origin the people
use a particular discipline
-
depending on the difficulty.
It's extraordinary. Anyway I will put
-
jean dominique michel's blog in
in the program description
-
and I frankly advise you to do so
go and read because it is
-
fascinating everything he writes.
So when there was this covid crisis
-
What did you think at first?
Did you think about anything?
-
You've seen a little bit of
normal way or how you lived it?
-
So if you want for the specialists
the issue of epidemics and health
-
of a possible pandemic is a risk
recurring
-
so if you're over fifteen years old, you'll be able to
all have examples in mind when it comes to the flu
-
avian influenza, swine flu from
the flu this the flu that and to
-
every time we dread the big one, you're
know it's the word we use for
-
describe the earthquake in
California has a very important flaw
-
and we know that if one day there is a very
large earthquake
-
there could be a shift of
land a whole part of the
-
california in the ocean obviously we
hopes that this will not happen, though.
-
seismologists know it will happen
sooner or later. Is it in a
-
year or ten thousand years from now we don't know.
So we are vigilant with regard to
-
seismic activity in california, and the
people who work in the
-
the health sector, especially the
infectious diseases are seeing departures
-
epidemic regularly because the
virus mutate and then each time we get a new one.
-
said is it going to be the big one or
not? Then obviously that of my
-
point of view, but I don't want to have
look a little cynical or
-
indifferent is always interesting
and a new trick in China and to try
-
quickly enough to capture the size order
of the epidemic and the actual risk
-
that it makes the population of
find out which disease is different
-
each time and then I feel like saying with
this observation of monitoring systems that
-
tend to overreact depending on the
precautionary principle.
-
Today we all know the predictions
Professor Ferguson's delirious in
-
England which is wrong every time
but in orders of magnitude
-
monstrous and yet we continue to be
turn to him as soon as there is a new one.
-
fire starting by saying:
"How bad is it, doctor? »
-
The WHO of course, but all the
politicians in general do not want to get involved in the
-
be blamed for not having done enough
also tends to ring the bell very quickly.
-
and then in a process of
classical scientific discovery on
-
find out what's going on as you go along.
measures the passing weeks and then
-
there we can have a more complete view of the
reasonable.
-
And what is special but I
you don't learn anything in the case that we
-
occupies is that even though the
first signals arrived very quickly
-
which allowed to be reassured about
the order of magnitude, and say:
-
it is an epidemic event like those
to which one is accustomed.
-
We see since the month of March a species
of collective delirium settling in and which
-
treats in a totally
exceptional and unreasonable some
-
which is of the order of usual
and this obviously poses
-
a lot of questions about what
organize our companies but also on
-
the collective mentality that has as much
lost sight of what an epidemic is.
-
And you thought you could have a
day live what we are currently experiencing
-
with this covid crisis?
Depends on what you're talking about.
-
if ever it is the epidemic itself
yes, because that's what we're going through
-
regularly. It should be remembered that according to
that we include in the name the dead in the
-
ehpad and according to the count we are between
the 9th and 14th epidemic episodes
-
the most serious since the post-war period.
So there have been between 8 and 13 plus
-
serious before. And I've had
e-mails from a retired doctor who has
-
said but you don't surrender
counts the famous Hong Kong flu
-
in '68 69, the dead were laid out in the
hospital corridors it was absolutely
-
"as worse" as Quebecers would say
that today and therefore there is nothing
-
exceptional in this epidemic so
I tell them very quickly the epidemic it
-
even is normal. On the other hand, what I
I didn't expect to see and who continues to
-
the time to be interested and to be afraid is
this collective over-reaction but which has
-
still look like they're being piloted by
very special interests.
-
to put it another way and I go to
the essential but then I'm sure we'll be able to
-
will develop this or that element. The covid
it's a 100 billion dollar business
-
of dollars
and if he had been treated like 30 years ago...
-
or 40 years old and thinking, "There's a peak.
epidemic has people dying
-
it's mostly people at the end of life
after it goes down there's more death.
-
everything is fine, we are starting to live again. »
is 100 billion
-
Dollars of failure for people and
companies an industry that only requires
-
that to capture this manna but which have
need to be able to capture it,
-
maintain a collective psychosis
unfortunately, this is what we see
-
for months and months of a
in a way that is totally out of sync
-
in relation to the epidemiological reality
and then in a way then that is
-
also totally damaging to the
population. We are many to have it
-
says very quickly month from the month of March
but that there was a risk that the
-
measures included the following
fter none of them had any basis
-
serious scientists would risk
cause consequences
-
much worse than what we have been doing.
sought to avoid
-
and this is something that we can see
today and the research is coming out
-
that allow to document this
intuition that many of us have had.
-
so to do this you still need to
the complicity of two things
-
of each country's politics and the media.
How is this possible?
-
So if you want me to study these
questions for a long time because
-
that they are central and perhaps
that one of the easiest ways to do so is to
-
to speak is to make comparisons
why hasn't it been 40 years
-
that we've switched to energies
renewable and that we have not been
-
weaned from energy dependency
fossils and well because the interests
-
at stake are such that even though
this transition was possible
-
that it would have been beneficial
there are lobbies that have locked the
-
things and subsidized energies
fossils by refusing to subsidize
-
renewable energies: "when are we going to
not even subsidize energy".
-
but in the meantime they were subsidizing
oil extraction and therefore there has been
-
status quo until today, when we are
realizes that it's very late for
-
consider changes
so if you want this configuration of
-
supposedly democratic country but which
in fact do not have the freedom of the
-
decisions they make and whose
decision-making bodies are totally independent.
-
infiltrated by the industries concerned
it's something that is generic
-
today. It's about pesticides
it's about energy it's about
-
armament concerns all fields
of life. And in the medical field this
-
which is interesting is that the
specialists have been making this diagnosis since
-
about fifteen years. And the specialists
it's a university ethics center
-
is the medical journals themselves
editors and former editors
-
chief editor of all major journals
medical ten since years ago
-
something deeply rotten
in the system that spoils research.
-
Research is already being tinkered with at
departure to achieve the desired results
-
after magazines and reviews
-
scientists are only the cases of
marketing resonance that do not make
-
their work to sort the quality of the
research. We saw it recently with
-
the Lancet and the NEJM which published,
Excuse my French, shit!
-
But it's passed through the filter,
why, because deep down they are only
-
the more scientific journals are
marketing sounding boards of
-
certain interests.
And then there are the instances
-
country by country governments that are
completely infiltrated by
-
industry representatives.
Obviously you are being sued as much as I am.
-
It sounds very conspiratorial except that
this is the house of commons
-
the British senate, which says so.
French that says it, it's the university
-
of Oxford who says so. We have a problem
why because people who are
-
at the helm in these different circles
are all in serious conflict of interest with
-
the industry and therefore necessarily that
It skews everything. So the term which is
-
retained technically it is that of
systemic corruption. So it makes you angry
-
a lot of people when you use it
because they feel they are being made to feel like
-
accuses of being corrupt, and that's not all.
has done this systemic corruption.
-
Systematic corruption means that
if I hadn't paid you wouldn't have me
-
received on your antenna so I am obliged to
to lubricate the leg to be able to
-
get the desired result.
Systemic corruption
-
is when the rules of the game are
sufficiently distorted to a large extent
-
by legal facts, i.e.
that it is not illegal.
-
You see in France we have a lot
noted that the expert committees were
-
all with a conflict of interest is
not illegal.
-
They publish it on the site any citizen can
go and see : Karine Lacombe touches so much,
-
thing touches so much, so it's
not forbidden but in the meantime we
-
say the ethics centers of the
universities is problematic because
-
that it comes as a final result to
what the mercantile interest of
-
industry takes precedence over the needs of the
population in decisions that are
-
taken. And that again
it's a lot of fun because today
-
it's a scandal, but you can find
the articles of Le Figaro, Le Monde, de
-
Libération, reports from TF1,
2 3 4 5 10 years ago where
-
they say so! Because it is a truth.
And what strikes me a lot in
-
the times we live in, it's that all of a sudden
it's as if by saying: "there are some
-
narco-traffickers in Mexico "what everything
the world knows, people say:
-
"But how can you say such a thing!
-
You are plotting! You also believe
to the aliens! How is it
-
possible to say something as
scandalous" when everyone knows it!
-
It is known, it is not hidden. And there we
is in an extraordinary fiction
-
actually played by the authorities, the
media that consists despite common sense
-
of what has been proven that the entire
world knows, to make people believe, to create a
-
fiction that is false and that would leave
to believe that decisions are made
-
for the good of the population then
that they are not. And here we are
-
actually in a hiatus so I
thinks it's partly orchestrated
-
because we're in a logic
criminological. I make a little aside
-
but one of the world's leading epidemiologists
to the world, Professor Gøtzsche,
-
wrote in 2014
a book called "Organized Crime,
-
pharmaceutical industry" where he shows
that industry strategies are
-
the same as those of the mafia.
This book in 2014 receives the award of
-
the British Medical Association
doctors they know what they are made of
-
speak. And what does the professor describe
Gøtzsche ? It's that there are tricks at the
-
level of drugs to impose them
that industries even put
-
on the drug market
that they know they don't have the effect of
-
beneficial and toxic effects.
There are deaths. It is discovered at a
-
given time.
The pharmaceutical industries are
-
criminally convicted. But if you ever
makes 15 billion in sales
-
with a cure, that you have 500 million
1 billion in fines and
-
interest you leave with a net profit of
13.5 billion and therefore what the
-
Professor Gøtzsche, it is not me who says so,
I read what the specialists say and
-
I allow myself to make it known to my
risks and perils
-
what Gøtzsche says is that deep down inside
the industry today has incorporated
-
this penal dimension and the
sanctions as part of the
-
business model. Like when you pay your
rent to do your shows,
-
the pharmaceutical industry, it puts a
billion set aside for fines
-
that she's going to harvest, but that doesn't stop her
not to go and Gøtzsche gives 15
-
different examples of this strategy it
there was the Mediator in France there was the
-
Levothyrox, finally it is repeatedly and in the
flu cases we are interested in
-
h1n1
rock has made tens of billions
-
of benefits with a drug
inefficient that was useless Tamiflu
-
which he has managed to sell to the entire states
by reselling vaccines I believe that
-
Roselyne Bachelot had purchased 93,000 doses of vaccine at the time, which were used for the following
-
useless but you see that everything is not
not lost for everyone. And so it
-
there's really a criminological dynamic.
I know that what I'm saying is again
-
appallingly shocking but I invite
any person of good faith and common sense
-
and a little bit capable of being
document by itself to go
-
check the sources. There are many in the
blog posts I read. And from
-
new it is known as the white wolf.
So what's amazing about the
-
figure and which I am in any case astonished by.
it's commented is it
-
strings that big, how does
such enormous manipulations...
-
you've seen the fraudulent studies
published in the biggest ducks
-
how do these guys dare to do
things like this and how
-
explain that despite the all-too-favorable side
obvious fact of dirty handling
-
that they implement
they still manage to get by
-
and impose their agenda? There are
questions that are strong but also
-
quite worrying as to what organizes
our company and who makes the decisions
-
about what. So how do you
explain that there are people like you
-
like me like all my subscribers who
are fully awake to it,
-
that become even you know very in
anger at this huge masquerade
-
this manipulation which is there under
their eyes they see it and how you
-
explains that such a dichotomy with
people completely asleep
-
who see nothing.
How is this possible?
-
There's a lot of thinking about this.
in social psychology.
-
I believe that a first element of
answer is to recognize that
-
in any case the evolution of our societies
is dictated by an agenda that has not been
-
democratically chosen.
If you take 1980, politicians
-
Chirac, Mitterrand, Giscard... who would have said :
"The world of 2022 is the one I want,
-
for my country and for my children. »
No one. No one would have dared.
-
However, this is what is needed, year
after year. So, here we are rather
-
in political science
but it is essential and urgent
-
to detect that there is a checkmate
of the popular will through
-
representative democracy that makes
that we get to the point of adopting the measures
-
that the population does not want, does not want, does not want
wishes not to, see that it does not support
-
but which are imposed on him towards and
against everything. So what are
-
the mechanisms the processes it's a story
complex, it's not my area of expertise.
-
All I can do is
to note. On countless occasions,
-
we force the population that is supposed
have the power and be able to decide through
-
her elected officials to things she doesn't want.
So that's the first element.
-
The second is that the efficiency of
this impregnation and this taking of
-
power by the lobbies the industry is such,
that no one can oppose it
-
except to get shot. I know
it's not quite your edge.
-
but Danielle Mitterrand at one point recalled
that when her husband was elected, she told him:
-
"So it's okay, you're going to apply the program.
that you say you want to implement. »
-
and that he replied: "No no, you're
Don't understand, I have a government,
-
I don't have the power. I can't go
against the World Bank, against the IMF
-
against Europe, so there you go, I'm not going to do anything.
do what I said I would do
-
I can't, I can't afford it. »
So you see anyway.
-
So that's one element.
And then it's efficiency in fact.
-
of this stranglehold
on public decisions
-
and then afterwards there is unfortunately
all in one elite conditioning
-
and the population, not to be noticed,
not to react, not to measure.
-
So the elites are relatively
easy because in the end it's people
-
which are a bit like in religion.
You see when you're a scientist today...
-
in a scientific committee
it's a bit like being a cardinal.
-
at the church
so all you have to do is repeat
-
the same as the others
there is an esprit de corps and we have
-
much seen in the controversy around
hydroxychloroquine. You will remember
-
one of the great reproaches
of these scientists was to say:
-
"But Raoult who does not study
randomized in double blind so that
-
is worth nothing. "And Raoult said it right away,
I have been checked throughout the
-
scientific literature he is right:
a randomized double-blind study
-
is not better for evaluating a cure
in infectiology that a study
-
observational like the one he did.
But then you had this whole chorus
-
cardinals who said: "No, it is the
dogma and if we don't respect the dogma,
-
we know nothing. "So there you really have an effect
of conformism to the extreme
-
benefits, which makes the elites of the world's
have become... it has become difficult for them
-
to think intelligently.
Then afterwards at the population level
-
Well, it's all about the benefit of the doubt,
on the fact that they can't imagine
-
that the dice can be piped
and then for some time now
-
years the fact that we are depriving more and more
the more people that are formed
-
ways to think. When for example
Rhetoric has been removed from the school curriculum.
-
Rhetoric is what makes it possible to
to understand how is organized
-
the discourse of the other who seeks to persuade us.
And if you stop teaching rhetoric
-
you give more to people
the means to identify manipulations.
-
Currently we are in the process of
to remove all humanities
-
and the humanities
from everywhere: it's the only thing
-
that opens the mind. So what allows
scientist not to become a cardinal
-
and to remain a scientist is to have
had access to the humanities and art,
-
to sociology, to have travelled in
other countries to have had access
-
to other things than his field
and today we hyper-specialize
-
so many people in some kind of tunnel
that they become hyper-sharp in
-
their small areas of knowledge
but completely dumb about everything else
-
and therefore can no longer contrast the
know that they have
-
with a global apprehension of reality.
And when you mix it all together, well, it's
-
ideal conditions so that in fact
the population the citizens
-
and women citizens are deprived of all power
not only to act but even to react.
-
That is to say that at school they make these things.
from the school. That is to say that at school
-
until the baccalaureate the programs become
more and more stupid. It is not enough to
-
take a look at the 1923 bin
and try to do so
-
you will see the difference.
And then we actually specialize it
-
in a domain, and then there it remains
a specialist in his field, he can no longer see anything
-
of what's going on around it.
Yes and you see what I was passionate about
-
in the covid is that experts in the covid
have said, but the enormity
-
nonsense like me I wouldn't even have
Dare to think of saying such things.
-
So we can see that this expertise
by dint of shrinkage it loses even
-
its validity in the field in which it operates.
See? That is to say that basically
-
what makes expertise is to have an
solid knowledge and then a base that
-
allows to have counterpoints of
and guardrails and that
-
it allows you to think intelligently.
But when you isolate people in
-
hypers rutting and we make them do that.
all their life, that is to say that even
-
in their field of expertise
they lose the skill so I had some
-
17 examples. Doctors who we
explained here that everyone was going to
-
getting sick because no one had
never encountered the coronavirus.
-
Yes, but there are four others.
Today, we realize that there are
-
a cross-immunity that half of the people
a priori are already immune.
-
So, you see the super virologist from
the unity of Geneva that the President
-
macron has just hired to evaluate the
French policy
-
he said such a stupid thing
in the month of March.
-
And because he is an expert everyone
listened to this as the gospel word
-
and in the aftermath we said: "yes but the
science is complicated we can't
-
always know everything in advance".
But no one asks the question:
-
how is it that experts
supposed to be experts,
-
can say such nonsense?
And that for me is still the
-
question of substance. And then how
the world's number one expert
-
in infectious diseases, Didier Raoult,
is not listened to at all. Is treated
-
a charlatan? I don't get it.
What I have observed a lot
-
by frequenting scientists,
is that the best in their field
-
are extraordinary people
open-minded
-
humble, competent, they recognize their ignorance
they are relatively free
-
in relation to power games, well, Raoult
it is solid, it is very clever, compared to power.
-
We don't do it to him. But still it is that he
has preserved its integrity, in particular by
-
report to the pharmaceutical industry.
So the "all good" in their field
-
they are of this nature. And then after
you have the cohorts of followers
-
who are much less gifted who are
much less awesome that are
-
much less competent, but who they are at the
contrary boast
-
of their powers, knowledge and authority
and that gives the fanatics.
-
See? So how are we going to get out of this
of all this? Well, listen as well as you can
-
or not at all. How do you see yourself
the next three months?
-
Look, I don't know.
I used to say that I am a
-
joyful pessimist. So I'm not optimistic
because I have the impression that the critical mass
-
is not reached
that the locking of power systems
-
is such that no counter-power
cannot be opposed at this time,
-
already the media I teach you nothing
no longer play their role at all
-
of counter-power
and then you saw even when
-
guys like Raoult, like Peronne
or like me at my modest level
-
did everything we could
to alert... pure loss, you see.
-
At least in appearance.
So I have the impression that for the moment
-
it's irresistible.
That said, I have a question that I ask myself
-
it's deep down in themselves
in their inner conviction
-
what people really think when you know
they are less than 27 or 22%.
-
to trust the French government
on health issues today
-
there are more than 70% of people who know
that they can't be trusted.
-
So on the obligation of the mask
they seem to agree more than 60%.
-
but we don't really know
what it is about the conviction of each one.
-
Things are today divided by a
in such a way that there can be no
-
of gathering energies for
challenge the policy in place
-
but it is not excluded that at some point in time
given there are movements of revolt.
-
Either because people are tired of
Wear a mask that at first serves no purpose.
-
but it is also totally
suffocating and is like
-
a violation of bodily integrity.
And then I think that in the scenarios
-
possible futurologics is
likely the imposition of the vaccine
-
that may generate a reaction.
That's what they have in mind.
-
they will do everything they can
to get there. But I have the impression
-
as much as people can accept
being locked in their homes and wearing a mask
-
when it comes to making
inject something dangerous
-
because you don't make a vaccine in six months.
that's not true, with a technology
-
that we don't know and that can be
dangerous with consequences
-
from which the vaccine companies have already exempted themselves.
by an impunity that is assured to them
-
regardless of the consequences...
-
there we see that you still have a bomb.
And then I wouldn't be
-
perhaps moreover that the vaccine
will be completely harmless and that
-
and that it will work just fine. We don't know.
But I think that people at that time
-
when this taxation will be advanced
will have a defensive reaction.
-
Will it be enough
to thwart the plan? To be continued...
-
Often when talking about WHO
of GAVI's vaccines we think of Switzerland.
-
You are in Switzerland, how are things at home?
What is it? Where are you at?
-
to give news from Switzerland.
Wearing masks, vaccinations, politics?
-
If you want there was something
really interesting to observe
-
because God knows if I have been critical
French health responses
-
which in my opinion
so I totally agree with Peronne's analysis.
-
everything that could be done
of false and bad was done
-
and Switzerland has a peculiarity is that basically
it systematically copies France
-
but not as bad
so we confined it to a time when it was
-
probably not necessary but we have
semi-confined. Here, the mask is imposed
-
in some cantons not in others
but only in enclosed spaces
-
outdoors not. The latest developments
they talk about the objective is to achieve
-
80% of volunteers in the population
who agree to be vaccinated.
-
So you see its soft measures,
i.e.
-
that we are not in a logic
authoritarian as in France
-
or pyramidal or centralized but it is
not very different, but it is a little bit
-
less serious. And finally already as
that citizen is nice, because
-
I prefer this diet to the one you have
have suffered. And then on the other hand it has
-
the dreaded side effect
that it cuts the grass under the feet
-
of any reaction.
Since it's not that bad.
-
And then you know it
Switzerland is still the plate
-
the turntable of all the mafias
international: sports federations,
-
international organizations,
money laundering, all corruptions
-
finally converge here and therefore
people like Bill Gates are
-
"ass and shirt" with the government but as in all countries
-
but that's the rule of the game today.
and me what amazes me
-
is that it is not a problem.
Yeah that's what's crazy!
-
And wait, do you really think that Mr. Gates
has bad intentions?
-
But that's not the point.
The point is that a guy as rich as he is
-
does not have to dictate health policy
states wherever it comes from.
-
And now I think we're very entangled.
i.e. it is as if
-
we were told: "But you
suspect people of being dishonest? »
-
They may or may not be, I don't know.
But that's not the question.
-
The question is that of probity and of
transparency of governance systems.
-
And here we have an obviously major problem.
But nevertheless
-
80% of the volunteer population
that's a huge thing!
-
But there is no vaccination obligation in Switzerland.
for the moment.
-
And then how would I say once
you've scared people enough
-
you claim to have a safe vaccine
even if it is not, you see most of them
-
people are not going to ask questions
and we will say: "Phew, that was a close call.
-
we didn't die from that terrifying thing."
even if they are 40 years old and are not sick.
-
"and then I'm offered something
-
who is guaranteed to save my life
or to protect me
-
so I'm going. That's the kind of...
Yes I see. Which makes sense.
-
As long as they are afraid.
-
Today Didier Raoult has switched to
the French antennas on a media,
-
a long interview and he said:
"You traditional media,
-
you are overwhelmed by the media
alternatives including youtube "
-
and the reporter said "yes".
Is that a first sign?
-
Look, it's interesting but I think
that it also illustrates the reason
-
for which said alternative media
are being monitored
-
like never before and that we actually see
the massive return of measures
-
infringements of the freedom of opinion and expression
you know something about it
-
so it's true but after
it's a bit like a cybernetic loop
-
i.e. the more the media
betray their fundamental mission
-
and today it's just and terrible...
the more they lose people's trust
-
so the more people lose interest
look elsewhere
-
and then here it is at first
it came with a lot
-
criticism of the fact that what
circulating on the internet is not mediated
-
so the journalists are there to do
this work to discriminate to balance
-
points of view, but they don't make the points at all.
in any case. So it became
-
only tool species
of propaganda that no longer respect
-
the values the missions and the charter
ethics of the profession.
-
And then on the internet you can find everything
and anything of the things well done
-
intelligent things of things
excessive things. But finally
-
It's obvious that it's overwhelmed.
Look at the number of spectators you have.
-
My blogs have had nine million
readers, you know? "Le Monde" can go get dressed.
-
And I'm all the more proud of it because
from the beginning I told myself
-
I'm going to make papers that are complex
that addresses difficult aspects
-
which are extremely well documented I have given up
simplify anything
-
by taking the bet people are smart.
Then there are people who may disagree.
-
with my analyses or not appreciate
my way of writing but you
-
see what I mean,
provide quality content and in fact
-
that's what made it big and I think that
it's really... it reflects the fact that people
-
have a need a thirst a thirst to have
information that is solid and reliable
-
that is supported and then not supported.
in those silly journalistic shortcuts
-
that we see all the time.
If you have any doubts
-
on wearing the mask outdoors you are an "anti-mask".
This is absolute nonsense,
-
is the zero degree of reflection.
-
Yes that's right. And the media are there
in it unfortunately. They are in
-
this extreme caricature and I find
that people are turning away from it.
-
I even heard a great
professor say that the one who is
-
against the fact that there will be
a second wave
-
that one who is against the fact that
the mask protects are negationists.
-
How can we explain, how can we get there?
You did a great show
-
what to say to someone
who calls you a schemer, but me...
-
there's always a question
that I didn't understand: what does it mean to be a conspirator?
-
If they call you a schemer,
What are you plotting?
-
For me there is a little
two levels to your answer.
-
First of all, there are conspiracies.
There are plots all the time.
-
You know the adage: there are two positions to avoid: believing that everything is a conspiracy.
-
and to believe that nothing is conspiracy. So there are always plots.
-
There are bribes for the attribution
from the olympic games there are wars
-
that are triggered on bases
false only to be able to
-
to go and steal the oil at last there is
shenanigans in a lot of places and therefore
-
For me, the first answer is to be "aware".
of this reality and then it does not hide it.
-
and therefore ask questions.
And then there's another conspiracy
-
so always be careful
not to over-psychologize or psychiatrize
-
but the fact remains that
the human mind is inhabited by
-
a natural curiosity and that
the most difficult thing for him is to be
-
in inconsistencies that are not
understandable on the basis of what we are told.
-
And one of the ways to be comforted
or to find comfort is
-
to imagine things that do not exist
but which allow to give meaning
-
to these elements of reality. And this is
the real conspiracy drift. You see what
-
I mean? It's a way to
to put back consistency is wrong.
-
Because coherence is a
basic neurological needs.
-
And then, of course, we get into things
who become delusional at some point.
-
But what is complicated in this case
is that in fact negationism
-
he is on the side of those who
deny the possibility of any problems
-
of any scheming or any
intentionality. Because it is not true
-
it's like that nowhere in life.
So they turn the thing around
-
but these reversals
it is at the same time very Orwelian
-
and it's very perverse. See? When
the government explains to you that we lock up
-
the elderly and in the EHPAD
to protect them and then in fact
-
it's a hecatomb, it's perverse.
If you want to protect
-
old people, you don't do that.
You do otherwise.
-
So we are permanently in these
reversals and then after "conspiracy"...
-
well, it's just like any other
label if I call you a "leftist".
-
or "Trumpeter", all this means that
by the label that I stick on you
-
I no longer need to be interested in this
you say, I disqualified you right away.
-
And that's where, you know, I did
a small "tag" on social networks
-
"neither sheep nor schemers,
yes to debate, no to insult".
-
Someone who is convinced that the port
of the outdoor mask can be useful,
-
I am open to discuss with her.
-
I don't share this conviction
but maybe she knows things
-
that I don't know and that with his contact I will
be able to think things differently
-
maybe the other way around I'll be able to say:
"But listen, look at Holland
-
and in Scandinavia do not do it, they do not have
no more problems than us so
-
for me it is rather the proof that
it is a measure that is not necessary
-
but at least there is a dialogue that is possible
and the real dialogue is when
-
you listen to what the other has to say.
Processes like what you describe
-
but that we see systematized today
in the media and politics
-
it's really a way to
close the debate before it is even open
-
and it scares me because
historically it is on this basis
-
that all the worst excesses have
always been built. Absolutely.
-
It is the first step towards
dictatorships this. Yes, that's the fact
-
not to be able to stand the difference
not to tolerate divergent points of view
-
to immediately dirty the person you have in your home.
in front of you. And I think you've been there.
-
I too have 55 brooms, not born of the last rain,
I've never had such violent attacks.
-
as malevolent and as twisted
that this time. And we felt that there was
-
a kind of rage, it was necessary at all costs
demolish the man because
-
his message was unbearable.
And now we are no longer in civility.
-
We are no longer in respect
we are no longer in humanity.
-
Yes, and many people tell me that
that is to say that many doctors
-
many lawyers
have not been used to
-
to this violence.
And this violence they have been
-
all very shocked.
Personally I am used to it because
-
the de-bunkers I have on my back
for years and the funny thing is
-
is that when they called me they started
always with this sentence: "I am not a
-
conspirator" to apologize you already see
what they were going to tell me
-
because they found that things
did not go into all this management
-
of the crisis and the epidemic.
But some have let go because
-
precisely it is of an unheard-of violence.
But really as you say it is
-
something the people who listen to us
can't understand because they
-
have never experienced this.
Yes, it's a first alarm.
-
I had already met some perverts
narcissistic on my personal journey
-
so I knew from experience
-
this extreme malevolence from someone
who seeks to destroy you at all costs
-
without any consideration for his humanity.
So I had some personal landmarks
-
if you want. But what I found most
already struck then already some of these
-
attacks as far as I'm concerned
I'm sure they come from the industry.
-
they have been sponsored we know
that there are boxes that do that.
-
who will search your past on the internet
and then inquire
-
to be able to get dirty so
I've had things done very well
-
it was very well documented but
always turned in the direction
-
to prove what a bad guy I am
and someone who doesn't know his field.
-
while I am a very good expert,
-
sorry to have to call him back,
but really with this intention. That being said
-
that struck me the most in the experience,
is the number of relays of this malevolence
-
I know people who have told me...
but I stopped reading
-
at the end of two paragraphs, it's
was nauseated. It was so mean.
-
See?
And then after me I saw a lot of people.
-
including people I know in
the health systems of people who have
-
positions of power, people with
who I thought was in a good relationship
-
mutual esteem, people with whom
I worked on projects and suddenly, all of a sudden
-
relayed "posts" but from a
extreme malevolence, saying that I was
-
an impostor, a crook, but you see some
hyper serious stuff. And all of a sudden
-
you have a small notable of institutions "hop"
which sends it to its network. And then
-
I know enough about human psychology
to think
-
that they must be convinced of the usefulness
to do it you see. They didn't say:
-
We're going to hurt Jean-Dominique, we'll be happy.
There is something in them
-
who must have adhered to this manipulation.
But afterwards I find it breathtaking
-
that the editor of a medical journal
a former hospital director
-
a person in charge of a health system
monstrosities post about me
-
when they know me and they know who I am
And there, the collective process
-
of stoning where finally everyone throws
his stone. It's like mobbing
-
in schoolyards :
you get the creep who spots a guy
-
that does not belong to him it goes against, then afterwards
he's rounding everybody up so that everyone's gonna fuck up
-
his punch. And that's what
worries me a little bit, so fine,
-
again I am happily
quite philosophical at this stage of my life
-
and sufficiently aware when to
what motivates the values that are mine
-
but I find that there is something
this is what happens to young people who
-
commit suicide in order to be taken to task
on social networks, you know?
-
It is this kind of mechanism. And what strikes me
is that there is still no
-
seems to be an immunity in the collective
compared to that. That is to say
-
that the responsibility of each
a human being worthy of the name
-
in the face of attacks of this nature
is to say stop, I'm not participating in this.
-
We can agree or disagree with Mr. Trotta.
we can agree or disagree
-
with Mr. Michel, but I don't participate
to something of this nature. And what I saw
-
on the contrary, it's a bit as if
a lot of Mr. and Mrs. everyone
-
were completely embarking on
this proposal for a mimetic revival.
-
But then we know
when there are times of great
-
collective tension of great stress
there are often outlets for violence
-
where we take a poor guy who's passing by for a ride.
or who had the misfortune to dare to open his mouth
-
then all the others keep quiet
and that there is a rampage
-
it's lynching, you know. Here I am
often read about it on social networks.
-
This is the first time I've seen it live.
It feels funny. And at the same time...
-
Many doctors have told me:
"I thought I had friends
-
thought they had even
very close friends
-
I thought I was working with confidence
and because I had a different attitude
-
a different reasoning from them
they lynched me. Overnight.
-
It was so violent
that I had been shocked. Psychologically shocked. »
-
I call it a little bit the virus of truth.
It's where you discover your real friends.
-
And this is incredible.
-
Have you been able to see in foreign countries,
and you've been around the world a little bit.
-
models that still have you
a little bit given back a little hope?
-
Already here it gave me hope, I don't know.
what it is for you, but me
-
I received, but literally,
thousands of messages of support
-
but of a generosity! People but
who write 4, 5, 6, 7 paragraphs where they talk about themselves.
-
Which are painted in such goodness
to say, "Thank you so much for doing what you do! »
-
You know me at the beginning my intention
-
it was very sanito-genetic.
I said to myself: but it's so anxiety-provoking,
-
it's so traumatic,
that it is absolutely necessary to give
-
response elements
reassuring to people for
-
that they can say, "Yes, I have to be careful,
but no reason to panic. »
-
And I've had, but literally, thousands
of messages from people who said to me:
-
"But when I read you,
It was a breath of fresh air,
-
it has been a lifeline in the
ambient delirium. How good it made me feel! »
-
And many of them said to me:
"You put words to what I knew to be right
-
but I didn't have
of vocabulary to say. »
-
And that is perversity.
It's when you make an entire population believe
-
that she is wrong.
So what a great sense of what's going on.
-
So this intention, me it is also
what did I agree to?
-
to take hits and put me
forward and suffer consequences.
-
But the generosity of the people,
You see, she's so touching,
-
she is so beautiful.
And then afterwards, the...
-
It also means that if you hadn't been there
if I hadn't been there so full
-
thousands of others like us,
had not been there, these people would be today
-
in a rather strong psychological distress.
Yes. And you probably know
-
that the outlook is very bleak in this area.
That is to say that there is already a wave
-
in psychiatry, which in fact,
is the real second wave.
-
And then of people who do not suffer
of classic psychiatric illnesses.
-
It's not bipolar people
or psychotics who all of a sudden
-
have an outbreak because of the epidemic.
These are people who were not suffering from anything.
-
beforehand and which are going into a spin,
so much the treatment, especially media treatment,
-
was violent. And you see a friend
professor of neuromarketing
-
which studies the effects on the brain of
advertising messages, was telling me
-
that they could not believe they were imagining
the effect on who this part is
-
of the brain which is in permanent vigilance
to see if there is any danger or not.
-
Have you ever been at home, has there been a presence
even from a relative, but you didn't know
-
that he was there. Then all of a sudden
you make a monster jump.
-
"You scared me! " It's the amygdala.
And this amygdala is bludgeoned.
-
for months and months and months,
and in a way but totally delirious!
-
And I said very early on, if we were doing
the same hype, with for example
-
heart attacks :
"Today, 220 heart attacks in France!
-
Today 10% more heart attacks! »
After three weeks everyone
-
is afraid of having a heart attack and then everything
the world becomes hypochondriac.
-
Everything knows what I mean. You've really got a bludgeon
panic. Again a second time
-
I tried to oppose it,
obviously in pure loss...
-
And that of course it's going to have
sustainable impacts. We can see that suicide rates
-
explode, the precariousness, because there again, the precariousness
the effect on the economy will be devastating.
-
And so we are in the process of
to create a disaster.
-
I used as a metaphor at the very beginning:
it's like bombing the cities
-
to fight against malaria.
Now we go on except that there is
-
even more mosquitoes.
We continue to bomb! And I say to myself:
-
but what conscience do the rulers have
to make decisions that are
-
so traumatic without even asking the question?!
When you see kids wearing masks
-
at school what's it going to do
on their psyche, on their security needs,
-
of trust?
We are creating monstrous damage
-
for something that's between the 9th
and the 14th most serious epidemic
-
and which has been extinct since May.
There is no more epidemic. Yes, there is. It is terrible.
-
In Switzerland kids will have to carry the mask back?
Yes, above 12 years old.
-
This is so absurd.
You know, I've published a text by a psychiatrist who specializes
-
in the delirious puffs.
There are examples in the story
-
notably in Orleans in 1968. And tells him we are
in a collective delirium.
-
That is to say that school principals
are so panicked at the thought
-
that a child can get sick and infect
an elderly person and then dies
-
and then let it be his fault as a school principal
we block, everything is locked,
-
we secure everything, but in a deadly way
really in a collective delirium,
-
but I'm really thinking about the meaning
psychiatric term. It is in any case
-
what this psychiatrist says.
In addition, we in France, we had for two months,
-
almost three months, one non-access
to the hospital for everything that is
-
heart attack, stroke,
treatment of cancers...
-
Here again it is a second wave quite
important.
-
In addition to psychiatry.
I wondered about containment,
-
Because when you watch
epidemiology "textbooks",
-
None of them recommend containment.
like what we've been through. None.
-
It's not in the recommendations.
They say that it may be useful
-
at the very beginning of the epidemic for
nip the epidemic in the bud,
-
but once the virus has spread a little bit,
it's worse than anything
-
because it brings together contagious people
with not contagious people etc...
-
So I really tried to see what
research said and the latest studies
-
that went out in England show that
two thirds of the deaths during
-
containment did not die from the covid.
They died from the causes you say.
-
And that the consequences will be long
term.
-
So it's absolutely true and here it is
it's this drama we've fallen into.
-
To take precautions
we caused the damage is infinitely worse.
-
And with governors
that have so much toppled over
-
in denial and their belief systems,
that even today they are
-
totally incapable of questioning themselves,
to consider that maybe it was
-
not the right thing to do and therefore against all odds,
continue to assert the things we know
-
today that they are false.
You think they're so dumb that they're not
-
being aware of it, that they were wrong?
Then no,
-
I think that... already there was a headline in the newspaper,
at a given time :
-
"Those who don't want to wear
masks are often
-
narcissistic or psychopathic". You remember the trick.
I replied on social networks:
-
"Wait, guys, wait, narcissists...
and psychopaths,
-
in general they are found in
positions of power, to frighten others
-
and to enjoy the power they have.
taken to terrorize the population. »
-
Not to be confused. So I think a part
people in power who are sociopaths.
-
And that unfortunately we have
channels of accession to power
-
that favour problematic profiles.
-
This is a pretty clear statement.
Then the other thing, I see it here because
-
our politicians in Geneva
they're not bad guys.
-
They are people of good will, but what I observe is,
it's when you made a mistake
-
for a long time, the psychological cost
to realize that you made a mistake
-
is such, that there is this process of denial which
is well known to psychologists,
-
that is being put in place and that make
against all odds, they continue to assert
-
that this is the way it is, but almost in good faith.
They convinced themselves.
-
That's crazy.
The Minister of Health in Geneva,
-
he held an extraordinary reasoning
on social networks by saying :
-
"You don't realize, it's because we have
taken the steps we have taken
-
in March/April that today there are no more
of sick people. And those who criticized us
-
already in March/April to take
measures taken continue to us
-
criticize to maintain the measures then
that if we got them up, it'd be like, you know, it'd be like...
-
as in March and April.
You see, this is completely wrong as a result.
-
In Sweden they have not confined the epidemic.
is extinguished.
-
So nowhere does it go back to the
conviction in which is this type:
-
"if we have arrived at the result in which we have
is today it's because of what we've done "
-
it's totally fallacious. It is not true.
That's not the reason. But he is
-
so convinced and I think that
would be so costly on a personal level
-
to open our eyes to the fact that
no, everything he imposed from a to z
-
was essentially unnecessary,
that there really is a process
-
basic psychological issues that concern us
all, which is denial.
-
Yes, that's right, they are in denial.
And how do you see it,
-
you wanted to talk about international politics,
how you see a little bit,
-
international politics by
to this covid. Do you see
-
countries that you feel have done well
choices and others that are really
-
vectors of corruption
Listen to the corruption it is everywhere and then
-
systemic corruption in particular.
It is the former Minister of Health of Ecuador
-
who did a paper in the
Lancet to talk about corruption
-
who is who intrinsically.
The abuse of language that we all commit
-
is to talk about health policy.
We don't have a health policy.
-
We have a disease industry. It's not at all the same.
In the West today 80% of diseases
-
are chronic. They are diseases of
civilization that would be avoidable.
-
It is the product of our food,
-
pollution, stress, lack
of movement, lack of sleep.
-
So we could reduce by 80% the
diseases from which the population suffers
-
if it was protected against the factors
of risk and in fact we do nothing,
-
or next to nothing. It causes this damage
and then we have a medicine
-
very specialized, very expensive that comes
repair people who are damaged but for whom
-
nothing was done at the collective level
to avoid damage.
-
So that's not a health policy.
it is an economy of disease.
-
From this point of view, the logic is the same,
worldwide, because they have the same interests
-
that configures it. After what has been observed
fun and interesting in this epidemic.
-
is that poor countries have
much better, because they reacted much better, because they have
-
the habit of dealing with not much,
because in many countries
-
chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine
they know it very well,
-
they eat it like smarties, in any case.
in some regions they know
-
that it is not dangerous,
and above all, they are not interesting markets.
-
for pharmas. So to panic
the United States France and
-
Switzerland is a guaranteed jackpot.
Panic in Senegal, or... you know...
-
There, there was this reversal and Raoult
said it early on. But I find
-
that they gave us lessons
pragmatism and intelligence
-
but with a slightly disturbing perspective,
which is the decay of the West.
-
If today we are so incapacitated
to evaluate the seriousness of a phenomenon
-
to take answers
pragmatic and efficient
-
and to recognize when, along the way
we made some bad decisions.
-
It's just that we're ripe for the EHPAD.
Public policies
-
in the West are just
but completely senile.
-
It is clear. And you as a scientist
still recognized,
-
were you still invited
on TV sets
-
on mainstream radio stations in Switzerland?
In France a lot. The French have been very nice.
-
Just one or two who have been around me
who are science journalists
-
so very close to the...
but the French was very nice
-
notably André Bercoff, but in Switzerland
even though I had to be invited
-
about 50 times on national television
between 2000 and 2017,
-
to talk about anything and everything
but that's what an anthropologist does:
-
I was not made to talk about the death of the pope.
John Paul II, and of the staging
-
of the Catholic Church...
it's great... Sancto subito,
-
Sancto subito... fuck, guys, they're
had been paid, prepared signs...
-
An anthropologist, he decodes that.
On the other hand, when it's my field of expertise,
-
I have been, but boycotted, not according to the
boycotting but radio and television
-
began to say: "Yeah, we don't know
where this Mr. Michel comes from,
-
it is dubious,
we're going to check his CV, we feel like
-
he doesn't know what he's talking about,
finally you see a demolition company...
-
But who was up to the fact
to tell lies about me
-
at prime time.
In this case in my exchanges
-
with an editor in chief I had done
screenshots of the mails we got
-
which allowed me on my blog to say
but here's what the guy said
-
on air
and this is the reality of our exchange.
-
It doesn't shock you that the editor-in-chief
of a so-called prestigious daily newspaper
-
allows himself to lie only
to smear someone's reputation?
-
So no, I was confronted with something
very particular and which has been systematic.
-
Ah, it's incredible!
Has he made a reaction to your blog?
-
No, but I filed a complaint with the
Swiss press council so in my opinion
-
it is badly crossed out. I really could
document the fact that he said
-
on the air something wrong
with the obvious intention of harming me
-
and to make listeners believe
that I was someone who needed above all
-
not listen. But that's crazy. It's just
unbelievable. It's really unbelievable.
-
Yes, but that's the world today you're in.
see. Me, that's where I hallucinate.
-
You know, I was 18 years old
I've been to the United States,
-
I saw a lot of stuff I didn't know about
films that were
-
cut four times for advertising, or the
same pub that was hammered all along.
-
of a sporting event or program.
I was thinking, thank God that's never going to happen.
-
at home, you see. And then
Twenty-five years later, we were there.
-
So unfortunately this is today's world.
it's a world that looks like
-
to the advertising clip of the
American presidential campaign
-
or no matter what you say the important thing is
you're trying to smear your opponent
-
and then journalists then who
in any case in Switzerland have totally
-
lost sight of the balance of points
of sight and the duty of truth in which they are
-
to reflect things in a way
approximately in line with reality.
-
So that's the world today.
-
And it is the same in the German-speaking part of Switzerland and in
Italian-speaking Switzerland ? Yes, if you want, it's
-
a little bit different because Switzerland
has a tradition of conformity, extreme.
-
In France you love to bite your nose off
on the TV sets, everyone's screaming,
-
it gesticulates, nobody listens to anybody
-
and then that's a good debate.
In Switzerland, it is above all nothing to say
-
that could offend anyone,
and that could disturb anyone.
-
And anyone who creates a breach of the rule
makes himself badly seen by everyone.
-
So obviously I went quite hard
you see, but by telling me the subject
-
is so important, the stakes
are so great and above all the risks
-
that we make the population run with
such bad management are such
-
that I have a duty to open my mouth.
So then I hit myself head-on
-
to the fact that criticizing the authorities :
"But Mr. Trotta, you don't think about it! »
-
In the end it is infantilism,
but which takes another form.
-
The first interview you did,
I had to pinch myself twice: he is
-
Switzerland! Not possible.
You must have shocked there in the country.
-
That's funny of course it was shocking.
And then I have the pleasure
-
a little bit of pride, I apologize,
but to see that four months
-
later all I said was
right. So what I found
-
interesting, so of course I went quite frankly.
and that, my faith, is a risk I took.
-
but that it is mainly the fact
-
for saying true things that shocked.
As for Raoult
-
as for Peronne,
and in the hundreds of emails I have received
-
of doctors, a significant number of
said to me: "we don't dare to say
-
what we think for fear of the consequences. »
And I ask the question:
-
what is a democracy
in which doctors dare not say
-
what they are convinced of
in their soul and conscience.
-
In the freedom of opinion,
someone may have a different opinion.
-
But what is a system
where people are terrorized?
-
That's it. And what is a system
or doctors are censored?
-
Or punished for treating people or persecuted, etc...
And then I did
-
published on my blog a lot of letters
which I have called "resistant doctors".
-
A woman doctor in Paris who fought
but like a lioness
-
so that one of those 85-year-old patients
be cared for when they had decided
-
not to treat her, to let her die,
she struggled for four hours with the head doctor,
-
she has managed to get her way, and now,
she brings joy to her children and grandchildren.
-
I had to fight against my government
to find hydroxydoroquine
-
because I was sick of the covid.
And I was able to arrange a clandestine deal
-
on a parking lot to get
a drug that could save my life.
-
I had to trick my government.
-
What kind of world do we live in? Medicines
that were on sale over the counter a short time ago.
-
Exactly. And what keeps me
knocking you see is what it looks like
-
to be an evidence for you,
it's obvious to me, but when I talk about it
-
for example, to health officials here,
they don't see why it's a problem for me.
-
They're surprised that it makes me angry
or that it shocks me
-
or that I find it questionable.
That's crazy. It's crazy but I think
-
that we've tipped over
in a collective madness.
-
People are in awe.
There's a psychic rift that makes you think more...
-
So sometimes it goes into hysteria.
-
I've had medical teachers
who insulted me by telling me
-
that I was dangerous.
Hysterical. I wanted to throw them out.
-
a bucket of water in the face
to bring them back to their senses.
-
University professors of medicine.
It shows that the emotional brain
-
it is even in everyone's home since
-
just because you're a university professor
that you can't be in the same state
-
of inner panic. And he gave you one of the arguments?
Yes. What did he give you?
-
as an argument? Why were they hysterical?
What were they mad at you about? Listen in part.
-
I understood because he said
that he disputed my statement
-
that we were in a natural order of magnitude
for an epidemic in terms of
-
contagiousness, dangerousness and lethality.
And he said to me, but you don't account for it!
-
We had dozens and dozens of beds
with people in intensive care,
-
it never happened, so...
and from this point of view he was not wrong.
-
That is to say, the clinical reality,
as it can be observed
-
at the peak of an epidemic it's different
the epidemiological reality that says that
-
it didn't kill more than usual.
It is two realities that are adjacent,
-
if you want. But him because he was
so anxious, and then it was a man
-
more than 70 years old, so I think that deep down
he was freaking out about himself. He felt like
-
that death was lurking and then me,
instead of fighting with him against death,
-
I was saying that
but no, but no, death was not dangerous.
-
And then somehow he couldn't stand it.
So these are arguments
-
that he was trying to get, but I had a good time.
repeat it five or six times until the moment when the
-
where I was forced to block it
social networks so much it became harassing.
-
To explain to him:
I don't dispute what you're saying.
-
but from an epidemiological point of view
that's what it is. But he had lost
-
the ability to think about these issues.
I hope that he will read and listen to you and then
-
he will realize that, since the internet has some
memory,
-
you were right. Oh, I didn't so much
confidence in it. You know what
-
Max Planck said about scientists?
He said, quite rightly, and so he who has
-
revolutionized physics with physics
quantum, he was saying a new theory
-
is not necessary because the proponents of the
ancient theories adhere to it,
-
it is necessary because the proponents
of the old theories end up dying
-
and there's a new generation coming
who has no prejudices
-
compared to the theory. And you see, I didn't
so much hope on that side.
-
I think that people who are so robbed do not
will never be right. In any case
-
we're going to keep fighting,
We've been talking for an hour.
-
It passes quickly the time
that we discuss together.
-
In any case, Jean-Dominique, you continue.
Subscribe to his blog. Read,
-
share his articles, because
Frankly, they are extremely well done,
-
and very documented very sourced, it is really
the work of a very great professional
-
and do not hesitate to share them frankly.
Jean-Dominique, thank you
-
you can go on my channel whenever you want.
Thanks to you, frankly, one moment
-
of quality. That's why time flies.
And then indeed
-
Fortunately, free electrons
as you and I dare to take
-
their responsibilities. I've been criticized a lot
not to be an academic. And at some point,
-
my wife told me, made me observe:
"But if you were a university professor
-
with a 20-year career,
you would never have dared to say what you said. »
-
And that's where the difference lies,
on the contrary it must be valued,
-
listen to everyone and so that
people can make up their own minds
-
according to what makes sense.
Thanks to you in any case.
-
Thank you Jean-Dominique thank you bye-bye.
See you soon! Ciao!