1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:03,600 Last night, 60 minutes revealed the weapon. 2 00:00:03,600 --> 00:00:07,800 Tonight, the scientist who investigated the original attack. 3 00:00:07,800 --> 00:00:11,000 I woke up with a full body compulsion. 4 00:00:11,000 --> 00:00:14,000 The worst pain I have ever felt, 5 00:00:14,000 --> 00:00:18,400 it felt like a vice gripping my brainstem. 6 00:00:18,400 --> 00:00:23,000 A portable silent weapon that can penetrate the walls of your home. 7 00:00:23,000 --> 00:00:25,600 We are told it doesn't look anything like a gun. 8 00:00:25,600 --> 00:00:30,200 It's designed to be concealed and small enough to be carried by a person. 9 00:00:30,200 --> 00:00:38,000 It is silent, the device is programmable for different scenarios and can be operated by remote control. 10 00:00:38,000 --> 00:00:43,000 And for almost a decade, the government said it wasn't real. 11 00:00:43,000 --> 00:00:45,600 Are you saying this is a cover-up? 12 00:00:45,600 --> 00:00:47,600 This is a massive CIA cover-up. 13 00:00:47,600 --> 00:00:50,600 And not only downplayed, but dismissed. 14 00:00:50,600 --> 00:00:52,600 These are not buckshot devices. 15 00:00:52,600 --> 00:00:54,600 These are shock shot devices. 16 00:00:54,600 --> 00:00:56,200 And that's what renders them. 17 00:00:56,200 --> 00:01:02,000 Perhaps every more elegant in their exquisite-ness of nefarious use. 18 00:01:02,000 --> 00:01:03,000 Let's find out. 19 00:01:03,000 --> 00:01:12,600 Everyone, welcome to the good trouble show I'm Matt Ford. 20 00:01:12,600 --> 00:01:20,000 Last night, 60 minutes broke the story that the United States government secretly purchased a directed energy weapon. 21 00:01:20,000 --> 00:01:30,600 A portable, conceivable device that may explain nearly a decade of brain injuries suffered by American diplomats, spies and military officers. 22 00:01:30,600 --> 00:01:32,400 Tonight, we go deeper. 23 00:01:32,400 --> 00:01:37,400 Our guest is the scientist who was brought in to investigate the original cases. 24 00:01:37,400 --> 00:01:43,000 He examined the patients, he analyzed the brain scans, and in 2018. 25 00:01:43,000 --> 00:01:47,600 Six years, six years before the government bought that device, 26 00:01:47,600 --> 00:01:52,400 he briefed US Special Operations Command and said this was, quote, 27 00:01:52,400 --> 00:01:55,800 "A beta test of a viable neuro-weapon." 28 00:01:55,800 --> 00:01:57,600 It's just insane. 29 00:01:57,600 --> 00:02:02,000 Tonight, he's here to explain what these weapons do to the human brain, 30 00:02:02,000 --> 00:02:04,800 what else is out there that the public doesn't know about, 31 00:02:04,800 --> 00:02:09,400 and why the people who knew the truth were ignored for years. 32 00:02:09,400 --> 00:02:15,200 Dr. James Giordano is Professor Emeritus of Neurology, Biochemistry and Ethics 33 00:02:15,200 --> 00:02:18,000 at Georgetown University Medical Center. 34 00:02:18,000 --> 00:02:22,000 He has served as a senior scientific advisor to the Pentagon, DARPA, 35 00:02:22,000 --> 00:02:27,200 the Department of Health and Human Services, NATO and the World Health Organization. 36 00:02:27,200 --> 00:02:31,400 He currently serves as head of the Center for Strategic Deterrence 37 00:02:31,400 --> 00:02:37,000 and study of weapons of mass destruction at the Institute for National Strategic Studies 38 00:02:37,000 --> 00:02:39,800 at the National Defense University in Washington. 39 00:02:39,800 --> 00:02:44,000 He was the forensic neuroscientist brought in to investigate the original 40 00:02:44,000 --> 00:02:50,400 Havana Syndrome cases in Cuba, the author of over 375 publications, 41 00:02:50,400 --> 00:02:53,600 10 books and 50 government reports. 42 00:02:53,600 --> 00:02:58,600 His new book is called Bioethics and Brains, out now from MIT Press. 43 00:02:58,600 --> 00:03:03,800 We should note that Dr. Girardano is appearing tonight in his personal capacity. 44 00:03:03,800 --> 00:03:08,800 His views are his own and do not represent the National Defense University, 45 00:03:08,800 --> 00:03:12,000 the Department of Defense or the federal government. 46 00:03:12,000 --> 00:03:14,600 Please welcome Dr. James Girardano. 47 00:03:14,600 --> 00:03:17,000 Dr. G, welcome to the Good of Troubleshow. 48 00:03:17,000 --> 00:03:22,200 Before we get into the substance, you advise the Pentagon, DARPA, 49 00:03:22,200 --> 00:03:26,800 you had a weapons of mass destruction center at the National Defense University, 50 00:03:26,800 --> 00:03:31,000 what security clearances and tickets do you hold? 51 00:03:31,000 --> 00:03:34,400 I will the top secret clearance with sensitive compartmentalized information 52 00:03:34,400 --> 00:03:36,200 with multiple compartments. 53 00:03:36,200 --> 00:03:36,800 Okay. 54 00:03:36,800 --> 00:03:42,400 And you were the consulting forensic neuroscientist on the original Havana Syndrome cases. 55 00:03:42,400 --> 00:03:49,800 In plain English, what is Havana Syndrome, which I understand now is referred to as anomalous health injuries, 56 00:03:49,800 --> 00:03:54,800 and what did these individuals present with when you examined them? 57 00:03:54,800 --> 00:04:00,000 I think it's notable to say that at first we discussed this as the immaculate concussion. 58 00:04:00,000 --> 00:04:05,000 These individuals presented objective signs and subjective symptoms 59 00:04:05,000 --> 00:04:09,200 that were representative of some kind of a head injury as if they'd been concussed. 60 00:04:09,200 --> 00:04:10,800 None of them had been concussed. 61 00:04:10,800 --> 00:04:13,600 None of them had history of concussion or prior head injury. 62 00:04:13,600 --> 00:04:18,600 They were presenting with vertigo, disorientation, inability to concentrate, 63 00:04:18,600 --> 00:04:24,000 profound fatigue, loss of motor control, loss of balance, inability to eye track, 64 00:04:24,000 --> 00:04:27,400 and just profound, profound disorientation. 65 00:04:27,400 --> 00:04:29,600 All of this occurred rather rapidly for them. 66 00:04:29,600 --> 00:04:30,800 It occurred independently. 67 00:04:30,800 --> 00:04:34,000 It occurred in their domicile as when they first noticed it. 68 00:04:34,000 --> 00:04:38,200 And each one of them then referred to the medical facilities on the island 69 00:04:38,200 --> 00:04:43,800 and then were taken off the island where they were independently examined by Dr. Michael Hofer in Florida. 70 00:04:43,800 --> 00:04:47,800 I came on to the case subsequently to Dr. Hofer's examinations. 71 00:04:47,800 --> 00:04:51,800 And I was approached by the Department of State at that time pretty much with the idea, 72 00:04:51,800 --> 00:04:57,000 "Hey, something's going on here. What is this? Can you help us to figure out what this is?" 73 00:04:57,000 --> 00:05:00,800 So the process that I use is one called abductive forensics, 74 00:05:00,800 --> 00:05:06,000 which basically is one of the possibilities given all of the data, all of these individuals' health records, 75 00:05:06,000 --> 00:05:12,800 metadata about their geographies, their environments, the architecture, prior histories, operational histories, 76 00:05:12,800 --> 00:05:16,800 and then of those possibilities, what might be most probable? 77 00:05:16,800 --> 00:05:21,600 So the idea is to rule certain things out and rule certain things in. 78 00:05:21,600 --> 00:05:25,000 Now everyone at home has a microwave in their kitchen. 79 00:05:25,000 --> 00:05:29,800 How do you turn that same energy into something that damages a human brain 80 00:05:29,800 --> 00:05:32,200 without the person knowing? 81 00:05:32,200 --> 00:05:36,400 Well, I think it's important to understand that there's probably two types of directable energies 82 00:05:36,400 --> 00:05:42,200 that these individuals were exposed to, perhaps independently, perhaps in tandem or in some combination. 83 00:05:42,200 --> 00:05:47,200 The first patient seemed to also exhibit signs of being exposed to some form of long range, 84 00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:51,400 acoustic, or ultrasonic device. There's a number of reasons for that, 85 00:05:51,400 --> 00:05:56,200 because of the signs and symptoms that they presented with and the nature of those findings. 86 00:05:56,200 --> 00:06:02,000 Then there were also some very curious findings, even in that first cohort that would have suggested that's probably not the case. 87 00:06:02,000 --> 00:06:06,000 Early on, we didn't think that it could have been exposure to microwaves, 88 00:06:06,000 --> 00:06:13,200 because at that time it was not well known whether or not scalable, fieldable, and rapidly pulsable microwaves 89 00:06:13,200 --> 00:06:18,800 would have been available for that type of perhaps operational use, even in a setting that may have been, 90 00:06:18,800 --> 00:06:21,000 for example, occupational safety and health. 91 00:06:21,000 --> 00:06:24,600 In other words, were they exposed to some kind of a microwave at work? 92 00:06:24,600 --> 00:06:27,400 Well, that was certainly not the situation. 93 00:06:27,400 --> 00:06:37,000 So the issue with these microwaves is that to provide that kind of microwave energy at a distance of 25, 30, 35 meters, 94 00:06:37,000 --> 00:06:43,400 would require an incredible amount of power, which obviously would necessitate a very large power source, 95 00:06:43,400 --> 00:06:47,600 which someone would notice. I mean, now we're talking about something the size of a pickup truck. 96 00:06:47,600 --> 00:06:57,000 But a major revolution in the field happened around 2012, 2011, and that was the use of very rapidly pulsed lasers 97 00:06:57,000 --> 00:07:03,200 to create a very rapidly pulsed microwave that decreased the energy requirement significantly. 98 00:07:03,200 --> 00:07:09,600 And by decreasing the energy requirement, decreased the size requirement, and therefore allowed these to be scalable, 99 00:07:09,600 --> 00:07:18,000 fieldable, and usable in a variety of operations. And so that addition, the understanding of that technological readiness level, 100 00:07:18,000 --> 00:07:22,600 was an epithelial point that then allowed us to look at these data in a slightly different way, 101 00:07:22,600 --> 00:07:29,800 recognizing that some of the patients had signs and symptoms of exposure to what was apparently some form of ultrasonic energy, 102 00:07:29,800 --> 00:07:36,000 and some of these patients had signs and symptoms of what appeared to be exposure to electromagnetic frequency energy, 103 00:07:36,000 --> 00:07:44,200 most likely some kind of rapidly pulsed microwave, and some patients had signs and symptoms representative of both. 104 00:07:44,200 --> 00:07:51,800 In 2018, you briefed Special Operations Command and said, quote, "This is intentional, this is directed, 105 00:07:51,800 --> 00:08:00,700 this seems to be a beta test of a viable neuro-weapon. What made you that certain that early?" 106 00:08:00,700 --> 00:08:09,100 Well, it actually was not that early, it was over 15, 16 calendar months of deep dive research into what had happened to these people. 107 00:08:09,100 --> 00:08:14,900 And also some anecdotal reports followed up by actual objective reports coming from elsewhere. 108 00:08:14,900 --> 00:08:21,700 So although we were looking primarily at the Havana cohort, there were secondary inter-share reports of, they're not alone. 109 00:08:21,700 --> 00:08:31,700 So the idea again is ruling certain things in and ruling certain things out and the way we go about this is a process called presumptive risk evaluation, 110 00:08:31,700 --> 00:08:39,900 and there are defined methods, protocols, and criteria that are used. And these are widely used, for example, throughout the Veterans Affairs Administration, 111 00:08:39,900 --> 00:08:43,300 the Department of Defense, Public Health, Associations, etc. 112 00:08:43,300 --> 00:08:48,100 To try to determine perhaps what an individual may have been exposed to, the likelihood of that exposure, 113 00:08:48,100 --> 00:08:54,900 and then what that then means for that individual's care. So when we approached these individuals, again, 114 00:08:54,900 --> 00:09:00,300 ruling things out, ruling out environmental toxins, ruling out environmental exposures, 115 00:09:00,300 --> 00:09:05,900 inadvertent drugs, foods, food drug interactions, exposure to certain things at work, 116 00:09:05,900 --> 00:09:11,700 and there were obvious protocols, criteria, and data that were necessary to rule those things out. 117 00:09:11,700 --> 00:09:19,500 And so at that point, we had then come to the conclusion that the most probable issue, the most probable cause, 118 00:09:19,500 --> 00:09:26,900 was exposure to some form of directable energy. Then the question became, well, what kind of directed energy? 119 00:09:26,900 --> 00:09:35,500 Well, the deep dive included examination of the workplace. Were they doing anything at work with any kind of special surveillance or disruptive equipment that perhaps, 120 00:09:35,500 --> 00:09:39,500 as an artifact, a side-effect, may have rendered them vulnerable? 121 00:09:39,500 --> 00:09:48,300 No. Were they exposed at home to some form of perhaps radiative or electromagnetic frequency device that may have been installed in the home, 122 00:09:48,300 --> 00:09:52,300 that they may have been using in and around the workplace? No. 123 00:09:52,300 --> 00:09:58,700 So at that point, it became very apparent doing the analyses of the data at a very granular level, 124 00:09:58,700 --> 00:10:04,700 that these individuals were, quote, "downrange" of something. Now, what could that have been? 125 00:10:04,700 --> 00:10:14,700 And I think what's important to recognize that since 2018, and even today, my feeling is, you know, we can't necessarily say what intent is. 126 00:10:14,700 --> 00:10:21,900 You can't get into someone's head, an adversary, an aggressor, someone who's looking to actually do this intentionally. 127 00:10:21,900 --> 00:10:32,700 So what is the intent? So there could have been three things. First, the intent could have been some form of surveillance or disruption of equipment that these individuals may have been using in their home. 128 00:10:32,700 --> 00:10:39,900 In other words, let's just surveil these individuals utilizing either some form of ultrasonic or electromagnetic frequency radiation. 129 00:10:39,900 --> 00:10:48,900 Let's see if we can disrupt their communications between their home and their work at work, disrupt their communication equipment. 130 00:10:48,900 --> 00:10:57,700 And then, of course, the other issue is, well, if it then incurs some physical issue that disrupts the person and not just the equipment, 131 00:10:57,700 --> 00:11:10,900 then there's a go or no go decision. Do we continue doing this? Or was the original intent? Let's see if we can not only perhaps disrupt equipment, surveillance, communications, but the individuals who is using this. 132 00:11:10,900 --> 00:11:18,900 I can't speak to what that intent is because obviously I'm not getting into the head, whatever that peer competitor adversary may have been thinking. 133 00:11:18,900 --> 00:11:25,700 But certainly, you have to consider the range of possible intentionalities and how these things are being used and put that into that framework. 134 00:11:25,700 --> 00:11:43,700 The physiological damage to people, these symptoms that they're experiencing, can any of this be reversed or are these people living with the rest of their lives, the effects of having experienced this particular weapon? 135 00:11:43,700 --> 00:11:54,700 The most encompassing answer to that question is, it depends. And I hate to give that answer because it seems so ambiguous and vague. But it really depends on three factors. 136 00:11:54,700 --> 00:12:06,700 First, the health of the individual to begin with. Second, the nature of the actual exposure. How many times do they expose at what intensity and potency? How long? 137 00:12:06,700 --> 00:12:23,700 And number three, what type of care did they receive as a consequence of that first exposure? And of course, what we understand is that ultrasonic forms of directed energy produce a somewhat different effect than microwave forms of radiation and engagement. 138 00:12:23,700 --> 00:12:32,700 And as a consequence, we may be seeing multiple forms of brain injury that exist on a variety of levels from the subcellular all the way to the systemic. 139 00:12:32,700 --> 00:12:50,700 And of course, you also have to remember that the brain and nervous system is a controlling system in the body. So with perhaps continued degeneration or dysfunction of the nervous system as a consequence of that first hit or in some cases multiple hits, you then begin to see secondary tertiary, 140 00:12:50,700 --> 00:13:08,700 secondary signs and symptoms, autonomic dysfunction, problem with heart rate variability and regulation problems with digestion, endocrine function, immune function, bodily inflammation, and of course all of the cognitive, mental and motoric signs and symptoms that would go along with the neurological injury. 141 00:13:08,700 --> 00:13:28,700 Which leads me to the question, how many people could have been hit by this and never known? For instance, if a neurologist isn't looking for directed energy exposure, would they even recognize it? And is there any way to shield against it? For instance, can a building be hardened against this type of energy? 142 00:13:28,700 --> 00:13:44,700 There are really three very important and excellent questions there. The first is, how do you know? And that's become something of a moot point. And I have to tell you, you know, there are those early on, we said this is nothing more than a psychogenic associate, genetic effect. In other words, this is mass hysteria. 143 00:13:44,700 --> 00:14:04,700 Well, I can tell you of at least the 24 or 25 individuals who were hit in Havana, that was not crickets, that was not mass hysteria, that was not a psychogenic effect. And I can tell you of the subsequent cases of which there were well over 100 validated and verified cases of events that occurred worldwide. 144 00:14:04,700 --> 00:14:20,700 Those are not representative of psychogenic associate, genetic effects, but this is important. The nature of this event and much of the media that has been surrounding it, and again, this is not in any way miscommunicative media, it's just media. 145 00:14:20,700 --> 00:14:34,700 And some of the ambiguity and confusion, misconception and misperception of what may have happened, what may have not happened, then did in fact lead to a bit of a sociogenic or a psychosycogenic effect more globally. 146 00:14:34,700 --> 00:14:54,700 So here you have individuals who may be employed in government jobs and they're worried, this is what we call the worried well, there may be individuals who have other things wrong with them, inner ear infections, immunological conditions, inflammatory states, neurological conditions that may have gone undiagnosed or partly diagnosed. 147 00:14:54,700 --> 00:15:06,700 And they may have an acute flare up and think, well, was I hit? And then you have other individuals who are just concerned, worried and may in fact be sort of over vigilant, well, could this be happening to me? 148 00:15:06,700 --> 00:15:19,700 And then this also could give rise, you know, downstream to various conspiracy theories, et cetera. And so I think what becomes important to understand is that there has been a rather profound social effect. 149 00:15:19,700 --> 00:15:39,700 And then you have to ask, if I were going to design some type of engagement of mass disruption, where I'm having maximum disruption to a set of targeted individuals, but also creating a veil of confusion, wouldn't that be useful? 150 00:15:39,700 --> 00:15:56,700 Sure. And the short answer is, you bet. And so one of the issues for us continues to be being able to have definable and very discreet criteria that can be used to be able to assess these individuals, assess them. 151 00:15:56,700 --> 00:16:05,700 And therefore, increase the suspicion towards the probable likelihood that something may have happened to these individuals, to then refer them to appropriate care. 152 00:16:05,700 --> 00:16:26,700 And again, as you say, one of the issues here is that your grassroots, so to speak, clinician, your family practitioner, nurse practitioner, PA, who suddenly has a patient in front of them who's presenting with these signs and symptoms, well, the first thing they're not going to think of is, well, this individual was exposed to some form of directable energy. 153 00:16:26,700 --> 00:16:51,700 You're going to think, head injury, possibility of a transient ischemic attack, perhaps some form of hypoglycemia, perhaps some undiagnosed neurological condition, if they're presenting with vertigo or some form of dizziness, inner ear infection, and perhaps even some form of psychiatric or psychological condition, is a some form of functional neurological disorder, a psychogenic effect. 154 00:16:51,700 --> 00:17:13,700 But I think what becomes very important is the history, in other words, taking a very good history of these individuals, where they find, and there was an onset, and into things worsen, was there some discreet, prototypic incident that they can recall, I was sitting at home watching TV, suddenly bang, I felt strange, or I went to bed feeling one way, woke up feeling another way. 155 00:17:13,700 --> 00:17:27,700 Whether some other events that were involved, did they hear funny noises, did they electricity in the house, do a funny thing, well, they driving in the car, and suddenly felt tremendous pressure in their head, and then it went away, and then after that things were not quite right. 156 00:17:27,700 --> 00:17:41,700 Something like that, where they're then beginning to present with very defined neurological symptoms and signs, very defined physiological signs and symptoms, as well as feeling disoriented, anxious, etc. 157 00:17:41,700 --> 00:17:57,700 Well, I think that's sentinel, and so in those cases, what we're really looking for is coupling the history with the presentation and the findings, and at that point, if there are clinicians who think, "You know, I have a patient here in front of me," and this just doesn't seem quite right. 158 00:17:57,700 --> 00:18:02,700 Yeah, it could be A, B, or C, but might it be this? 159 00:18:02,700 --> 00:18:16,700 And the other thing to ask, "Who is this patient? Who is this person?" I mean, what I must tell you, at this point, we're not suspicious of the fact that this is happening at random to individuals on the street. 160 00:18:16,700 --> 00:18:28,700 These are individuals whose role, whose professional life, whose professional activities in career, seem in some way to be involved with issues of state, government, military, intelligence. 161 00:18:28,700 --> 00:18:41,700 So in those cohorts and those individuals, who then suddenly begin to present with these objective signs and these subjective symptoms, you know, putting all these things together, what you're doing is actually creating a bit of a puzzle. 162 00:18:41,700 --> 00:18:48,700 And as you get that puzzle more, particularly put together, you may not have all the pieces, but it certainly is grounds for referral. 163 00:18:48,700 --> 00:19:03,700 Hey folks, over half of our viewers, half of you watching right now are not subscribers. So please help us grow our show by becoming a subscriber to our channel and hit the notification bell so you will always be up to date on our latest shows. 164 00:19:03,700 --> 00:19:11,700 We are also on all the major social media platforms on X, we're at Good Troubleshow and everywhere else at the Good Troubleshow. 165 00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:22,700 And if you prefer to listen to us on your favorite podcasting platforms, just search for the Good Troubleshow with Matt Ford and please leave a review, all that kind of stuff helps us. 166 00:19:22,700 --> 00:19:32,700 Finally, if you would like to become a financial supporter of the Good Troubleshow, we don't have any sponsors or anything like that and your donations help us keep the lights on and pay the rent. 167 00:19:32,700 --> 00:19:49,700 You can donate at Patreon, at www.patrion.com/thegoodtroubleshow. Your donations are what helps us bring you important guests like we have today with Dr. G. Ardano. Dr. G, I like to call them. 168 00:19:49,700 --> 00:19:51,700 Anyway, we'll get back to the show. 169 00:19:51,700 --> 00:20:06,700 He spoke earlier about the technological jump that allowed the miniaturization of this thing. I have to ask, if you can't comment, I totally understand. Have you seen one of these devices? 170 00:20:06,700 --> 00:20:09,700 I can't comment on that, that's her. 171 00:20:09,700 --> 00:20:19,700 Okay. A Norwegian scientist built one of these devices and apparently tested it on himself. He got sick. What does independent replication tell you? 172 00:20:19,700 --> 00:20:35,700 Well, I think independent replication certainly reinforces something that we've been saying for a long time, which is that these devices exist. These devices are scalable. They are fieldable and they are ready for operational use. 173 00:20:35,700 --> 00:20:54,700 Number one, number two, that there is existing technology that is reasonably readily available that would allow even a non-state actor to reverse engineers such a device if they had the skill set and the tools and the necessary equipment and or substrates the parts. 174 00:20:54,700 --> 00:21:10,700 And that the use of these devices certainly can incur physical harm. Can this kind of device, can it be detected if someone aimed one of these things at your house right now? Would you even know whether than just the sensations? 175 00:21:10,700 --> 00:21:20,700 Well, it's certainly possible to detect both ultrasonic as well as microwave, directable energies. The question is, where are you looking to detect them? 176 00:21:20,700 --> 00:21:32,700 So part of the issue, part of the challenge is trying to determine what's called next strike capabilities. In other words, well, where might these things be used? 177 00:21:32,700 --> 00:21:42,700 How are these being used against watch, against government facilities, against individuals in their home, in their automobile, etc. 178 00:21:42,700 --> 00:21:57,700 So the idea is first very, very important to any form of defense and deterrence is defining what are the parameters of use, like anything else. In other words, where is this strike going to occur? Where could such a strike occur? 179 00:21:57,700 --> 00:22:17,700 Then the question is, well, at that point, can we detect it? The short answer to that question is, yes, particularly if you then know what it is you're looking for. And so much of the work since 2017 and 18 has helped to clarify those variables to the point where there's much greater awareness of what we're dealing with and how we're dealing with it. 180 00:22:17,700 --> 00:22:31,700 Then the next question becomes, what does that detection involve and that detection is multilatered? As you mentioned, you can't get something called geographic detection. You can put up a perimeter. You can put up architectural or structural detection. 181 00:22:31,700 --> 00:22:57,700 You can have individuals wearing personal detection. And if in fact you're then thinking, well, there's some way that each one of those parameters has been breached, are there also early phase assessments if someone thinks, well, perhaps I have been hit, these parameters, these defenses have been breached. And that answer is yes. There are certain things that can be done acutely to be able to assess if in fact an individual may have been down range of exposure to this form of energy. 182 00:22:57,700 --> 00:23:17,700 The next question is, well, given that, and we realize that this is now a viable form of weaponized technology, what can be done about that? And that's a larger question. I mean, certainly I'm not keen to work in the area of policy that's way above my pay grade. 183 00:23:17,700 --> 00:23:39,700 But I think what does become important is something that we've been dealing with for a number of years, which is that the international signatory treaties and conventions, such as the biological toxins and weapons conventions and chemical weapons conventions, have been very effective against those types of techniques and technologies that could be weaponized to date. 184 00:23:39,700 --> 00:24:08,700 But you know, it's very, very important that we pay close attention to the science and technology and the pace of that science and technology on the global stage, such that those treaties and those international controlling guiding and governing documents are equally attentive to how each and all of those potential developments could be weaponized so that the language of those treaties allows greater surveillance, oversight and governance. 185 00:24:08,700 --> 00:24:12,700 And I must tell you, there has been progress on that front, which has been encouraging. 186 00:24:12,700 --> 00:24:31,700 We all have devices in our homes that emit radio frequencies, Wi-Fi, phones, Bluetooth, could a weapon like this actually hijack existing electronics, or does it still require a purpose built device aimed at a home or person or whatnot? 187 00:24:31,700 --> 00:24:37,700 Sure the answer is yes. Both of those questions. 188 00:24:37,700 --> 00:24:40,700 Okay, and you can elaborate on that. 189 00:24:40,700 --> 00:25:00,700 Well, I mean, I think that the issue there is there would need to be some form of device that could then engage either an existing system to corrupt that system, purline or as you say, hijack that system, or to completely bypass that system or use that system as a noise back. 190 00:25:00,700 --> 00:25:10,700 And there's a noise background to be able to then provide additional forms of either sonic and or electromagnetic frequency energy that would then corrupt the environment. 191 00:25:10,700 --> 00:25:17,700 Dr. G, Havana syndrome is one weapon and you've spent your career studying how brain science can be weaponized. 192 00:25:17,700 --> 00:25:27,700 Your new book, Bioethics and Brains is about exactly this. Are you aware of other technologies that can affect the human brain from a distance? 193 00:25:27,700 --> 00:25:31,700 Give us an example. Someone at home could understand. 194 00:25:31,700 --> 00:25:36,700 Sure, so let's reframe what we mean by a distance. 195 00:25:36,700 --> 00:25:48,700 A standoff type of engagement, I think what becomes very important for people to understand is that the new environment is not necessarily one of weapons of mass destruction. 196 00:25:48,700 --> 00:25:58,700 Oh yes, let's face it, we're still certainly worried about the nuclear threat without a doubt, the radiological threat without a doubt, the explosive threat without a doubt. 197 00:25:58,700 --> 00:26:09,700 However, the new science and new technology is also allowing for weapons of maximum disruption and that disruption can occur on a variety of levels. 198 00:26:09,700 --> 00:26:20,700 It can occur in an individual in a group of targeted individuals or more broadly within a collective or with random individuals. Now what are we really talking about here? 199 00:26:20,700 --> 00:26:28,700 Some of the things that actually keep me up at night, for example, are the use of synthetic biology and gene editing. 200 00:26:28,700 --> 00:26:34,700 Perhaps everyone is familiar with some of the new gene scissor or gene editing techniques, most notably something like CRISPR. 201 00:26:34,700 --> 00:26:51,700 And that's gotten a lot of publicity over the past few years. Well, the ability to modify the genetic code of a variety of different organisms, bacteria, viruses, fungi, living organisms, small mammals, insects, 202 00:26:51,700 --> 00:27:07,700 creates a tremendous amount of power to then change what that physical organism is, the way it acts, what it does, and its relative risks, threats, and harms that could be posed to humans, to animals, to crops. 203 00:27:07,700 --> 00:27:18,700 Now if we go one step further and then we also look at other types of manifestations of same, we know that you add artificial intelligence to the mix. 204 00:27:18,700 --> 00:27:38,700 And now what you have is, if you will, a computational partner that might be able to literally spit out, spool up, develop a whole host of potential algorithms for how a bad actor might be able to use gene editing techniques, synthetic biology techniques. 205 00:27:38,700 --> 00:28:00,700 To make what our group has been referring to as precision pathologies and precision pathogens, taking existing microbes, for example, that may here to for have been benign and changing them in some way, to make them far more harmful, far more morbidly inducing, may make them far more inducing of sickness, or perhaps even lethal. 206 00:28:00,700 --> 00:28:12,700 To make brand new microbes, viruses, fungi, that we've not encountered before, or to take existing substances, for example, something like toxins, organic toxins. 207 00:28:12,700 --> 00:28:27,700 And we know that there are plant toxins, we know that there are fungal toxins, and of course most recently, as divulged by our European allies, the use of various animal toxins, amphibian reptile, fish, toxins. 208 00:28:27,700 --> 00:28:50,700 In this particular case, the poison dart frog toxin that was used to assassinate a position leader Navaulny, clearly was not something that the individuals had to go into some jungle remote to be able to extract the skin oozing of this frog, but rather could be synthetically created, and when there is that synthetic then bridge. 209 00:28:50,700 --> 00:29:00,700 What that then allows is for these substances to be more stable, to be more potent, to be more deliverable, and in some cases to be far more covert. 210 00:29:00,700 --> 00:29:18,700 In other words, when we talk about things at a distance, one of the distance factors we now need to worry about is not how far away the individual is who's doing the attacking, but how far away the attacker can get before those who are attacked recognize they've been attacked. 211 00:29:18,700 --> 00:29:42,700 So these new techniques, not only in molecular biology and genetics, but also in computation, in big data that allows accessibility to medical records, to artificial intelligence that allows permutations and combinations of chemical and physical structures that can allow bad actors to make new weaponized forms of biological agents. 212 00:29:42,700 --> 00:29:58,700 And even the use of drones as delivery systems for small amounts of these biological agents to very specified targets, all increase what is referred to as the risk and threat space and their potential clear and present harm. 213 00:29:58,700 --> 00:30:03,700 Your work isn't just about damaging the brain, it's also about influencing it. 214 00:30:03,700 --> 00:30:15,700 Can this technology alter someone's judgment without them knowing? And you called this a beta test earlier, were those people targets or test subjects in your opinion? 215 00:30:15,700 --> 00:30:26,700 I think those two concepts are inextricable. I think they are one and the same. An initial target is always viewed as what can we do with this? Did it work? 216 00:30:26,700 --> 00:30:39,700 I mean in any scenario firing anything off, whether it's something ballistic, whether it's an arrow, whether it's a sword, how good is this? Does it do what is intended to do and what are the manifest effects of that? 217 00:30:39,700 --> 00:30:54,700 Not only necessarily on the battlefield, but the longer term effects in terms of what types of resources, services, economics of care, then be rendered to these individuals that then put a burden on whatever those individuals forces are with. 218 00:30:54,700 --> 00:31:02,700 Those societies there with the cultures, the armies, whatever. So I think you have to take a look at manifest effects as we say way downrange as well. 219 00:31:02,700 --> 00:31:14,700 But to your question specifically, I think that the issue then becomes well, what things can be done and what things should be done or should not be done. 220 00:31:14,700 --> 00:31:33,700 So in a situation such as as the ones we have here where you're looking at a variety of other ways to influence individuals, one of the new, if you will buzz words that's become increasingly popular and I think realistically so, is the idea of very sophisticated cognitive engagement. 221 00:31:33,700 --> 00:31:50,700 What some would refer to as cognitive warfare, which isn't just psychological operations, it's actually more than that. It takes a three dimensional view of the human person as certainly having a biology, certainly existing in a social environment. 222 00:31:50,700 --> 00:32:04,700 And that the bridge between that biology and that social environment is their psychology. We respond to our environments and to other psychologically. We take that information and perceive and react to our environments psychologically. 223 00:32:04,700 --> 00:32:21,700 So the ability to now target aspects of environments, the ability to now selectively seek to affect psychologist of individuals groups and collectives, the ability to perhaps change vulnerabilities, biases, 224 00:32:21,700 --> 00:32:35,700 vulnerabilities of individuals and collectives biology either directly or indirectly or become part of that potential palette of what cognitive engagement or what some would refer to as cognitive warfare constitutes. 225 00:32:35,700 --> 00:33:00,700 So one question comes to mind with with this technology. Is there a concern that this could be scaled up such that it could be deployed as a weapon of mass destruction that you could lack of a better way of putting it, detonate one of these things over a city and have mass effect on the entire population? 226 00:33:00,700 --> 00:33:21,700 So if we're talking about forms of directable energies, yes, we've already seen that. In fact, the issue was sort of a reverse consideration generating, for example, long range acoustic devices or ultrasonic end or perhaps infrasonic devices of large scale. Well, we've done that. 227 00:33:21,700 --> 00:33:37,700 And the issue there is they're very large and they're certainly conspicuous. I mean, you're not going to hide one of these things per se. The same could be true of, let's say, large scale microwave devices, a large scale microwave dish is not something that is going to be used clandestinely. 228 00:33:37,700 --> 00:33:57,700 I mean, clearly just the size of this thing necessary to be able to generate that mass effect would mean that it would be very conspicuous. So the challenge was not, well, could we use these types of things or could one use these types of things in a broad way against certain collectives and aggregation of troops or aggregation of people? 229 00:33:57,700 --> 00:34:13,700 We know that's possible. The issue there is that once you're aware that the opponent has these, well, then you're getting into the domain of electronic warfare. We're now you're getting technology against technology and we've been doing that for a long, long time. 230 00:34:13,700 --> 00:34:31,700 But the scalability is not scalability to great size. I think the more incumbent risk threat and perhaps harm will be scalability to ever smaller sizes that allow far more precision targeting rather than mass casualty effect. 231 00:34:31,700 --> 00:34:49,700 And of course, the issue there is also one of a tremendous cognitive rippling effect because one then asks a question who's next. And so I think our peer competitors and adversaries recognize that. We recognize that of our peer competitors and adversaries. 232 00:34:49,700 --> 00:35:05,700 And that's the nature of that current competition in that weaponology space, not necessarily to make something that's going to be weapons of mass destruction. There are plenty of things in the current armament area of nations and even non state actors that we can use for those means. 233 00:35:05,700 --> 00:35:16,700 These are not buck shot devices. These are shot shot devices. And that's what renders them perhaps ever more elegant in their exquisiteness of nefarious use. 234 00:35:16,700 --> 00:35:33,700 Stanford immunologist Dr. Gary Nolan has published research on brain abnormalities in people with close encounters with UAP or unidentified anomalous phenomenon. Is there any overlap with what you saw in Havana syndrome patients? 235 00:35:33,700 --> 00:35:51,700 First of all, I have to really applaud Dr. Nolan's work. He does incredibly good work and he is a very, very sharp and very meticulous and rigorous researcher. And so there's very little that would come out of Dr. Nolan's laboratory that would leave any room for doubt. 236 00:35:51,700 --> 00:35:54,700 I mean, the rigor of his science is paramount. 237 00:35:54,700 --> 00:36:10,700 What's interesting is in the conversations I've had with Dr. Nolan and I know Dr. Nolan is that you're dealing with energy. And the question then becomes, well, are there multiple exposure types of energy? 238 00:36:10,700 --> 00:36:24,700 Even some that might be benign, for example, individuals who are working around energetic technologies that are utilizing microwaves that are utilizing things across the electromagnetic spectrum that might be using various forms of sonic energy. 239 00:36:24,700 --> 00:36:34,700 What is the risk of exposure to those individuals? Now this is taking on an occupational safety and health set of parameters, risks, considerations and concerns. 240 00:36:34,700 --> 00:37:01,700 But what's interesting about the UAP phenomenon is exactly that, not knowing what these things are. And then also noting that in some individuals, such as those who were examined by Dr. Nolan, there seem to be discrete objective findings that would suggest that there are both functional changes, utilizing some of the functional magnetic resonance imaging and tracked tracing. 241 00:37:01,700 --> 00:37:12,700 As well as perhaps structural changes that would suggest that these individuals too may have been exposed to some form of energy that had a physiological effect. 242 00:37:12,700 --> 00:37:23,700 There's a location in Utah called Skinwalker Ranch where government personnel and researchers have reported nausea, disorientations, skin burns, neurological symptoms. 243 00:37:23,700 --> 00:37:28,700 Does that sound like directed energy exposure to you? 244 00:37:28,700 --> 00:37:42,700 I don't know the details of Skinwalker Ranch. So I can't speak to that specifically since I say yes or no. I mean only what I have read, what I have heard, and what I've encountered in what I'll call passing professional circles. 245 00:37:42,700 --> 00:37:46,700 My work has not directly engaged anything with the Skinwalker Ranch. 246 00:37:46,700 --> 00:38:05,700 But I mean if you're considering similarity of report, if you're considering similarity of anecdote in terms of circumstance, situations, timing, what the actual subjective objective features of those individuals who've made these reports are, they seem similar enough. 247 00:38:05,700 --> 00:38:09,700 I mean clearly I think they would seem similar enough to at least warrant further investigation. 248 00:38:09,700 --> 00:38:18,700 If you have treaties for nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, there's nothing that covers these sort of neuro weapons, correct? 249 00:38:18,700 --> 00:38:25,700 Not exactly. We do sort of, let me explain. 250 00:38:25,700 --> 00:38:36,700 The current signatory treaties, the biological toxins and weapons convention, the chemical weapons convention, certainly those nuclear prescriptions and prohibitions are broadly worded. 251 00:38:36,700 --> 00:38:46,700 And in some cases the broadness of that wording is intentional to be able to cast a wide blanket to capture any and all possible developments that might be included. 252 00:38:46,700 --> 00:38:58,700 And therefore could be weaponized. There are also things such as the European export system that controls what types of precursors might be moved around so as to be able to prevent synthesis of certain things. 253 00:38:58,700 --> 00:39:04,700 However, I think an important consideration is how fast is the science and the technology moving? 254 00:39:04,700 --> 00:39:15,700 So one of the areas that had been somewhat overlooked, particularly in the biological toxins weapons convention, is the development of neurological technologies, neuro devices, neuro tech. 255 00:39:15,700 --> 00:39:26,700 And since 2016, primarily through the work of the Australia group, that has actually brought that to the attention of the review committee of the biological toxins and weapons convention. 256 00:39:26,700 --> 00:39:39,700 And some of the very, very notable work of one of my colleagues, Dr. Diane D'Eulis, and some of the work that we've done together, coupled with some of the work that has been done with NATO and a colleague of ours in the UK, Dr. Malcolm Dando, 257 00:39:39,700 --> 00:39:50,700 there has been increased attention to what these signatory treaties focus upon. And one of the problems has been that many of these treaties are what we call nominal. In other words, they'll name certain things. 258 00:39:50,700 --> 00:40:00,700 Substance X, drug X, biological peptide, X, Y, or Z, that's a problematic issue and should be prohibited, prescribed, overseen or governed. 259 00:40:00,700 --> 00:40:12,700 Where it begins to get problematic is the technologies, technologies such as directable energy technologies, many of them that can be used and developed for therapeutic purposes. 260 00:40:12,700 --> 00:40:23,700 Many of these toxins can be used as research probes or even therapeutically, for example, one that's probably most common and familiar to your listening audience, would be botulinum toxin, both toxin. 261 00:40:23,700 --> 00:40:44,700 So part of the dilemma, part of the challenge, but I think also the real opportunity, is to be able to combine what's referred to as dual use research of concern considerations, and those are specific considerations that were developed at the Azzillamar conference, for example, 20, 30 years ago, 262 00:40:44,700 --> 00:41:01,700 that specifically looked at types of research that could be moving in directions that might be concerning, that might produce some deliverable, some result, some method, that could be uptaken into various other agendas and therefore could be used for harm. 263 00:41:01,700 --> 00:41:18,700 So combining dual use research of concern considerations issues, protocols and governances with the biological toxins and weapons convention, and as my colleague Dan Gerstind, formerly of Rand and I reported reviewing that convention. 264 00:41:18,700 --> 00:41:35,700 I mean, there are what we call review conferences and review committees every so often to the biological toxins and chemicals weapons convention, but specifically reviewing towards revising the language, not necessarily just to name a thing, but to also begin to focus up range a bit. 265 00:41:35,700 --> 00:41:45,700 In other words, upstream, what are some bio-manufacturing processes, what are some trade processes, what about tacit use of international talent skills? 266 00:41:45,700 --> 00:41:55,700 How are groups of laboratories, perhaps working together, and how might those collaborations yield products that could be utilized for capricious or nefarious means? 267 00:41:55,700 --> 00:42:12,700 So I think what it takes is both that broad lens of the current treaties and conventions, coupled with some very granular and specific facets of those lens, that allow a much more detailed examination of the current science and technology, 268 00:42:12,700 --> 00:42:19,700 and how that science and technology could be duly used for purposes that could render risk threatened harm. 269 00:42:19,700 --> 00:42:36,700 Michael Beck, the first person to ever report Havana Syndrome that we publicly know about died in January, Parkinson's at 45, incredibly young, workers comp denied, and we hear this figure that, say, around 1500 people have reported symptoms. 270 00:42:36,700 --> 00:42:44,700 Do you think the real number of people that have been affected by AHI is significantly higher? 271 00:42:44,700 --> 00:42:53,700 Well, I think that the 1500 number figure is certainly at this point appropriate with regard to those, as I said, who are in a validation pipeline. 272 00:42:53,700 --> 00:43:06,700 I mean, I can speak directly to at least 100 additional who are not only in that pipeline have been validated, but at this point are in what we call sort of a care pipeline, a care algorithm. 273 00:43:06,700 --> 00:43:11,700 But I think what's important to understand is that this was not a one-off. 274 00:43:11,700 --> 00:43:14,700 I mean, this was not just something that happened in Havana. 275 00:43:14,700 --> 00:43:22,700 And although we tend to look at the Havana Syndrome as a sentinel event, and it may have been in terms of public awareness, 276 00:43:22,700 --> 00:43:30,700 the use of directed energy to be able to disrupt technology, equipment, and perhaps personnel is not something that just happened in Havana. 277 00:43:30,700 --> 00:43:38,700 It's been going on literally for decades prior to that at a much more constrained and a much more limited scale and level. 278 00:43:38,700 --> 00:43:51,700 But what Havana really did was helped to really pull back the shade, open the aperture publicly, as well as professionally within the Department of Defense, the intelligence community, law enforcement communities, 279 00:43:51,700 --> 00:43:54,700 interpol worldwide, NATO. 280 00:43:54,700 --> 00:44:05,700 To be able to recognize, as I mentioned earlier, that these techniques and technologies are to the point now where they're scalable and fieldable that allows a much broader operational use. 281 00:44:05,700 --> 00:44:14,700 And what we're now seeing is that not only are those technologies, such as the ones that were used, for example, in Havana, viable. 282 00:44:14,700 --> 00:44:25,700 But this may actually represent an iteration, a developmental pathway, if you will, whereby these technologies are now being improved, are being embellished, are being combined. 283 00:44:25,700 --> 00:44:29,700 So the science and technology does not stand still. 284 00:44:29,700 --> 00:44:43,700 And a pace with that should be that our insight, our investigation, and our diligence should not stand still as well, but should remain in step if not ahead of these scientific and technological developments to recognize those ways that they can be weaponized. 285 00:44:43,700 --> 00:44:51,700 And what we need to do to define that, detect that, defend against that and deter it. 286 00:44:51,700 --> 00:44:55,700 A source told me something that I just can't let go of. 287 00:44:55,700 --> 00:45:08,700 When I asked why elements of the government would bury this, they said it's because Havana Syndrome is essentially a gateway that it opens the door to an entire ecosystem of weapons that both sides have. 288 00:45:08,700 --> 00:45:11,700 Does that resonate with you? 289 00:45:11,700 --> 00:45:19,700 I really can't comment to that one way or the other. I mean, for a number of reasons, not least of which is because it's way above my pay grade, so to speak. 290 00:45:19,700 --> 00:45:32,700 I mean, the machinations of higher government within, not only various government agencies, but even politically, have insights and intentionalities and reasons, rationales for what is done. 291 00:45:32,700 --> 00:45:34,700 And I certainly can't speak to that. 292 00:45:34,700 --> 00:46:01,700 What I've said for years, since literally my first public presentations about this early in 2018, is that what's important to understand is that these types of technologies, excuse me, let me say it, that these types of technologies and these types of techniques are in fact part of the working compliment of what I called the big three, the United States and many of its international economic, technological and military allies have these devices. 293 00:46:01,700 --> 00:46:18,700 I mean, certainly these devices are utilized in various occupational settings, as well. We know that China has these devices, and we know that the former Soviet Union was engaged in significant research in directable energies, and of course much of that portfolio has transferred to contemporary Russia. 294 00:46:18,700 --> 00:46:26,700 So to say that, well, do these weapons exist and does that open a larger door? Well, that was a door that was already wide open, and that was part of the recognition. 295 00:46:26,700 --> 00:46:41,700 Yeah, these things exist. Again, the key question at the time is, do they exist in a form of technological readiness that allows them to be scaled to be used in ways that are clandestined, if not covert? And I think we've already answered that question. 296 00:46:41,700 --> 00:46:52,700 But I think the larger issue is one that speaks to the changing character, not nature, but the changing character of the implements of warfare. 297 00:46:52,700 --> 00:47:07,700 What we're seeing is that a variety of new techniques and technologies are coming from the amalgamation, the convergence of different types of sciences, the physical sciences, the natural sciences, the life sciences, and even the social sciences. 298 00:47:07,700 --> 00:47:30,700 And I think understanding that that scientific knowledge gives rise to certain technologies, and that new technologies gives rise to increasing scientific capabilities that can be used in a variety of ways, and that science and technology are not a unified event that occurs here in the United States or with our international scientific and technological allies. 299 00:47:30,700 --> 00:47:41,700 But it occurs across the global stage, and we have to take a look at our international scientific and technological peer competitors, for example. But wait, there's more. 300 00:47:41,700 --> 00:47:59,700 We also have to consider that the science and technology may also be available to proxies, to smaller states and state actors, to non-state actors, in some cases, to individuals who are seeking to work as, quote, "loan wolves," 301 00:47:59,700 --> 00:48:08,700 because some of these technologies are reverse-engineerable. Some of these things are capable eyes by using direct to consumer products. 302 00:48:08,700 --> 00:48:18,700 And of course, we're also very much concerned about the international, do-it-yourself market. Again, sometimes you refer to as the bio-hacking market. 303 00:48:18,700 --> 00:48:31,700 Not that there's anything intrinsically problematic with that nature and that practice of democratized science, not at all. But I think what has to be recognized is that that is a fairly vulnerable community. 304 00:48:31,700 --> 00:48:47,700 It is a community that can be penetrated by nefarious and capricious actors, and then can be manipulated, used, vulnerableized, to be able to create certain things within soverities that could then be used for a variety of potentially malevolent purposes. 305 00:48:47,700 --> 00:49:12,700 And the good news is that here in the United States, our federal Bureau of Investigation has established a very solid working discourse and dialogue and cooperation with not only the United States, but the international, do-it-yourself science and technology, the hacker community, to be able to afford some level of oversight and protection without restricting the democratization or practices of their science. 306 00:49:12,700 --> 00:49:29,700 But I think the take-home message here is to your earlier point about governments and apertures and the question, why? The technology is out there. The science is out there. Certainly it's out there with regard to what we're capable of doing and what they're capable of doing. 307 00:49:29,700 --> 00:49:44,700 And so I think what becomes important to understand is just because there is capability does not in any way directly infer or indicate use, nor does it incur direct intent. 308 00:49:44,700 --> 00:49:51,700 And of course there's always the problem of attributability. And that's particularly difficult with these types of things. 309 00:49:51,700 --> 00:50:13,700 Because as we mentioned earlier, these types of operations can be rendered certainly clandestinely, if not completely covertly. And so the question then becomes, well, what happened? And then even when you define what happened, the question is, who done it? And can you prove who done it? And that's arduous. 310 00:50:13,700 --> 00:50:28,700 So I think what we're seeing is a change in the character of the way warfare can be waged and is being waged based upon new developments in science and technology. And that by itself is not unique. We've always seen that. 311 00:50:28,700 --> 00:50:45,700 If we look back across the centuries, whatever new developments in science and technology, however rudimentary they may have been, have characteristically been incorporated in some way into another in the defense of nations and the waging of wars. This just represents the next iteration of same. 312 00:50:45,700 --> 00:50:59,700 The Biden White House wrote a statement backing the victims. And in the end, they never released it. What would stop a president from saying what his own advisors believed was true? 313 00:50:59,700 --> 00:51:03,700 It's way above my pay grade. 314 00:51:03,700 --> 00:51:22,700 I certainly can't speak to the political and I certainly can't speak to the intent and the actions of any particular political figure. The reason being that political figures deal with a number of different competing contingencies that ultimately are responsible for making their decisions in obligatory way to be able to serve the public. 315 00:51:22,700 --> 00:51:51,700 I think what is notable, however, of that from that administration, what is very notable is that that really represented the first time when then Secretary Austin came forth and made the public declaration that these anomalous health incidences are real or veritable and that those individuals who feel that they may have been subjected to this type of injury or insult should not feel any shame stigma or bias about coming forward and seeking care. 316 00:51:51,700 --> 00:51:54,700 And I think that was an important step. 317 00:51:54,700 --> 00:52:09,700 If you had five minutes to brief the president of the United States on this issue, what would you tell him needs to happen right now? And then second part of that, what would you like the public to know about all of this? 318 00:52:09,700 --> 00:52:28,700 The two part question. So let me get into the oval office of the briefing room first. I mean, I think the issue here is Mr. President. There are science and technologies that are being developed that can be used for very, very beneficial means, but they can also be leveraged for very, very influential if not harmful means. 319 00:52:28,700 --> 00:52:50,700 And it's important that we focus on the way science and technology is being developed and used not just here in the United States, but worldwide so that we can develop a stance of preparedness, knowledge readiness and response in a way that is proportional to the growing risks and threats that these science and technologies may yield if in fact they're weaponizing these ways. 320 00:52:50,700 --> 00:53:06,700 So it would conclude my presidential brief to the public. I think it's important to remain aware of scientific fact. I mean, I think it's far too easy to be misinformed. 321 00:53:06,700 --> 00:53:20,700 I'm not finger pointing in any way at the public or anywhere else. I think these days were confronted with a ubiquity of information. And so realistically, it's a question of the public becomes an information consumer. 322 00:53:20,700 --> 00:53:35,700 Who do we listen to? What is real? What isn't real? What should I pay attention to? And I think the idea of utilizing viable resources, for example, such as this, that present balanced scientific information, presented in ways that are understandable. 323 00:53:35,700 --> 00:53:57,700 Grounded wholly, in fact, become viable resources for the public. And what the public should understand is that knowing the nature of the risk and the threat, quote, that's out there is an important step in defining it in conjoining the public to a whole of nation response of awareness, definition, discernment, detection and defense. 324 00:53:57,700 --> 00:54:09,700 And aware public, a knowledgeable public is a participatory, a collegial public that can work in public defense with those entities within the government that are there to protect them. 325 00:54:09,700 --> 00:54:19,700 Dr. Giordano, thank you so much for joining us. This has really been eye opening. And I have to say a bit, bit frightening. But thank you for your work on this. And thank you for coming on the show. 326 00:54:19,700 --> 00:54:22,700 Thank you so very much. It was a pleasure to be here. 327 00:54:22,700 --> 00:54:31,700 Folks, if you enjoyed our interview with Dr. James Giordano, you will love this episode. Thanks for tuning in and tell your friends about our show.