[00:00:00] Luke Storey:  I'm Luke Storey. For the past 22 years, I've been relentlessly committed to my deepest passion - designing the ultimate lifestyle based on the most powerful principles of spirituality, health, psychology. The Life Stylist Podcast is a show dedicated to sharing my discoveries and the experts behind them with you.

[00:00:28] So, dude, what a weird time we're living in right now, right?

[00:00:32]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, I don't know if the word is well-chosen. I mean, weird, it's more than weird to me. Very bizarre. I'm here at my father's place with my two-year-old and my wife. We don't have an apartment. We were supposed to be in California around that time, remember? We're supposed to meet at the Upgrade Labs conference. I was supposed to be in California until April 15th, and then go back to Montreal a little bit, and then be in Prague for two months.

[00:01:00] We were looking for apartments. So, when the whole story broke out, well, we were in Japan, first in Osaka, and then in Kyoto, and we had to take an early flight to go back to Montreal. And then, we arrived kind of at my father's place in the countryside because we're like, well, we don't have a place to stay. And the Airbnb apartment now, they're either unavailable or super expensive. So, we just decided to live here in the countryside, which is bizarre turn of event.

[00:01:29] And I'm sure everyone has their own version of that story, but that's mine. And yeah, it's been, I'd say, a very difficult task for me because I like controlling my life. I mean, as entrepreneur, I'm sure you can relate. Relate. So, I had a bit of, I'd say, one or two weeks of freak outs, which I was very angry at the whole situation, kind of not being able to be on stage at the Upgrade Labs conference and whatnot, and then the shock of the crisis and the uncertainty, and geez, what a stressful moment for everyone. Yeah, it's hard to cope with, very difficult.

[00:02:10]Luke Storey:  Yeah. It's a really strange, strange, strange time we live in. One can only hope that this is the beginning of what will be a transformation of many elements in our society from the media on, right? Because now, that we have access to alternative points of view, such as the ones we're going to be talking about today, I feel that there is a real awakening happening right now, but it's like for many of us being sort of shaken out of your slumber, right?

[00:02:40] It's like you have a nice little nap, and someone comes along, and like drops a bucket of ice water on your head. I think that's what's happening kind of collectively now where we're questioning so many things. And I think ultimately, it's going to be a positive outcome. But in the interim, it really has been quite a disruption. And so many people have fallen ill and all sorts of things like that, too. Like imagine all the people out of work and just the craziness that's ensuing around the planet.

[00:03:09] I'm just holding on to the idea that ultimately, this will be a net positive because of the ripple effect of unplugging so many people from The Matrix, because it's such a bold and brazen move by the establishment to—like it's such an insane power grab all at once that a lot of people are going, wait, what? So, we'll get into some of that. But anyway, I'm glad you're safe, and you and your family found some refuge at your pop's place in the countryside and your good fortune, of course, to be able to be there, as I am here in my house in LA.

[00:03:49] I was just out in the backyard sunbathing, taking a nice ice bath. It's like I don't really notice much different personally because I just love to be home. And the work that I do is here in the office, in the studio. And I, of course, feel for the people who are like stranded somewhere on a freaking cruise ship and so many worse things to be going on. But I'm just kind of like using it as an opportunity to go within and also to really focus on creating some great content and sharing information with people.

[00:04:20]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, it's the same thing for me, Luke. And I don't want to start this interview and people like tune out like, hey, he's complaining about his life, he can still work remotely. I mean, in the end, I'm still able to still have a job. But geez, I guess I would just want to share like my side of how difficult it was, but it's a fraction, honestly, of what I've seen even in the immediate like population here, people who are stressed out of their mind.

[00:04:47] Sometimes, it's because of the virus and sometimes, it's because they lost all their revenue, some people lost everything they invested because of the market crash. I mean, my main concern at the moment, we'll all get into the conclusion, but my heart goes to everyone listening to this. And that they feel hat despair because, oh, my God, society is kind of like being blown apart right now or if you don't have revenue. I mean, yeah, I'm in a very good position.

[00:05:21] And for me, I guess the thing I'm grateful for for this crisis at the moment already is that I found myself, after a freak-out period of about a good week in Japan, and coming back to Montreal, and not wanting anything to do with COVID, I had started to read a little bit about COVID and it was so fear-inducing in me that I just started like even being insomniac a little bit, I never did that in my entire life, I'm 32. So, I decided, you know what, I'm done. I'm done with COVID.

[00:05:58] I'll just ignore, it doesn't exist anymore. I was very, very frustrated, to be honest. So, kind of in denial mode, I guess, that morning, it was about three, four weeks ago now. And that very afternoon, I kind of changed my mind. I said, you know what, I probably need to do the opposite. And one reader in particular who's a longtime collaborator of mine sends me a lot of news around EMFs and 5G developments. He's an engineer, an inventor, and whatnot. I have a lot of these contacts that I don't talk about because they don't want to be named.

[00:06:30] But anyway, that guy said, "Well, Nick, I understand and respect your position that you are a bit overwhelmed by the situation and don't want to talk about it", because that's what I had told him, I guess, the day before. And he told me, "Well, you probably need to do the opposite. Like you're a guy who is able to get to the bottom of stories. And if you get to the bottom of that story, you'll get a sense of relief if you really understand what's happening."

[00:06:56] Because anxiety, it's caused by the fear of the unknown, something could happen. So, is it a killer virus that's going to kill millions? Is it not? Is it a power grab? Is it a conspiracy? What is it? Right? Just being in the midst of completely not understanding what the heck is happening, and the countries are closing down, and flights being delayed. And it was really the uncertainty that was making me freak out literally. So, I came back here at my father's place and basically spent every minute of every day canceled, all my other plans are for two, three weeks.

[00:07:35] I just worked on a single article trying to summarize what the heck is happening and trying to have a balanced view because it's important. Some people listening to this will think I'm a little bit too gentle, but that's my style. Even if I know about the conspiracies, I know about the big bad people who sometimes have corporate agendas that are literally evil, I don't use these words. I don't use very strong words. That's, I think, how I can better communicate.

[00:08:05] I'm someone who is trying to always be, I guess, a diplomat trying to find the best intentions out of people. And sometimes, it's a little bit too much, I guess, a little bit too Canadian in some people's tastes. But at the same time, it makes me able, sometimes, to convince people that we're not convinced by the conspiracy stuff, by the two out there are too strong approaches. So, I find myself very, very middle and I tried to leave the politics out of it.

[00:08:35] And my work around coronavirus was really looking at the scientific data and what it says about the danger. And of course, I heard about the other things, and the agendas, and this, and this, and the conflicts of interest, and I studied that as well, and 5G. But you know what, I decided to not even include EMFs in my article about coronavirus, even though there were all these rabbit holes everywhere. And some of my readers asked me like, "Why did you do that? You're the EMF guy, you're not talking about EMFs in your article, although-" and you interviewed him, Dr. Tom Cowan talked about it, the possible link between kind of the increase in electrosmog that happened in Wuhan and different countries, including Italy, including New York City.

[00:09:21] So, there's a lot of links between electrosmog or a lot of, I guess, correlation, not initially causation in the EMF story, but I decided to actually not go there because in the end, my finding is that overall, when you look at the coronavirus issue, it's just not as deadly as everyone was making it to be. So, I don't really have to find a culprit for something that's not that deadly. If millions would have died, I would have had a different discourse.

[00:09:52] But I mean, at the moment, I was looking at the tracker right now as we're recording this, April 16th, yeah, 30,000 deaths in the US is very concerning, and certain countries are more concerning to me, and that's arguable. We'll get into that, if these deaths are really caused by COVID or something else. But around the world, it's still a minute number. I don't want to sound insensitive. I'm just talking science here and stats, right? Every death counts.

[00:10:21] If it's someone I know, I would be extremely sad about it, so I don't want to sound like a jerk, but what I mean is if you compare 140,000, that's worldwide, maybe it's going to get to 250,000, who knows? But still, the fact remains that respiratory infections will kill 2.6 million people worldwide every year. We don't lock down a third of the planet for that, right? So, just to put it in comparison, it's still something that's reasonably small as far as death toll goes. But it's not small in the way the world has reacted to it, and the consequences of our reaction is not small either. It's unprecedented. So, I guess that I'll just catch my breath here for a second.

[00:11:09]Luke Storey:  That's great. And for those listening, at the time of this recording, it's April 16, 2020. And as we were discussing earlier, my podcast release calendar is usually recorded months in advance. So, I don't know where this one is going to fit in and even where we're going to be in terms of statistics or developments or information or lockdown by the time this comes out because I don't know when it's going to come out right at the second.

[00:11:36] I'll probably push it out as soon as I can because it's timely, but I also want to rest assure that we're definitely going to be talking about the EMF issue as a whole. I've been a lot about it. And I'm sort of, at this point, like I think almost, I don't need to do any more shows about EMF. I mean, I just published one. And we've talked about that, too, when we talked about doing the show. I'm like, well, I don't know, man, I've done so many shows.

[00:12:04] But it's also a topic that so many people are confused about, especially when you get into the 5G. And so, I think we can definitely dive into that, but I am curious to get more of your take on this. When I was looking at your blog post, which we'll put in the show notes, but can also be found at theemfguy.com/blog/coronavirus. So, theemfguy.com is your site and people can find this blog. But I didn't read every single bit of it, but I did give it kind of a skim over. And I took down the eight facts that you lay out in there, which I think are really fascinating.

[00:12:44] Again, coming at this from a logical, pragmatic, neutral place, as I heard you say, which is a wise way to approach it, because you want to polarize people on either side, but I'd love if we could just kind of break down some of the actual facts that you've discovered based on those eight. And I don't expect you to memorize every single point, but whatever you can remember, if we could perhaps do kind of a truncated version of your blog post because I think it was really neutral, and comprehensive, and also quite accurate.

[00:13:17]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah. Thank you. Well, we can start about, I think, what is at the moment, my opinion changed a little bit. By the time I finished my article, just reading my article the day before the publication, I was like I would have written something else. And that's when you know that a crisis is evolving so fast, right? But at the moment, there's a few facts that are happening worldwide that to me, don't make sense. I haven't found a single person who's been able to really confront me on this and prove me otherwise.

[00:13:57] And these facts are highly inconvenient and they indicate at the moment. It could change, right? But they indicate strongly that our reaction to COVID was an overreaction. And of course, you can listen to this and say, well, April 16, you're kind of doing the job of a populace right now, saying, "Oh, I was right, these guys were wrong, and they should have known", right? Well, yeah, that's arguable, too, right? What should we have done and what was the data at the time the decisions were taken?

[00:14:36] But my main point is that I've been following some scientists that from the get-go did not think that the mortality rates or how COVID was being tested or any of that stuff was precise enough to really take good decisions. Some of these scientists are extremely credible at the top of their fields, and I can name some of them afterwards. But these guys made a lot of sense. Of course, I'm a contrarian and I'm looking for examples of why this isn't serious because in the end, I remember H1N1.

[00:15:20] There was a lot of controversy at the end. The CDC was accused of doing really, really bad stuff by investigative journalists after the fact kind of hiding the number and over-blowing the entire thing. In the end, it was pretty much a non-crisis if you look at history. And that's just 10 years ago, people, of course, forgotten about it, like we tend to do. And I had forgotten about it because 10 years ago, I wasn't really researching that much.

[00:15:47] I just remembered not thinking it was serious, but it was just out of, I guess, gut instinct or even some could call it stupidity. I mean, in the end, I wasn't informed about H1N1. I was just, maybe it's not serious. Could have been serious. I could have been wrong. Now, I consider myself more informed. So, when I say coronavirus isn't a problem, I'm not arguing that it doesn't kill anyone, it's killing people. What I'm arguing about is, really, are lockdowns effective? And what consequences from the lockdown will there be? And are these accounted for?

[00:16:26] I was listening to Dr. David Katz from Yale, who's a very mainstream scientist, very respected in the US. And he just did an interview that's been posted last week, on the 9th. And he was saying, basically, we need to look when there is a problem like this and we are doing interventions like this, which is either a complete lockdown or enough restrictions to society that there is an associated economic devastation. Well, you got to look at both, what the economic devastation is going to do as far as increasing suicides, addictions, domestic violence, and whatnot.

[00:17:15] There's a lot of consequences. These are called debts of despair. There's an umbrella term in science that would be social studies. So, studying the effects that economic crises have had on the health of a population, right? So, you do have deaths of despair if you have people that go in poverty. So, that's one side of the equation. The other side is how many lives you can save, right? So, if you don't look at how many lives you can save and how many lives you could take from an intervention, then you're kind of, I guess, putting your head in the sand.

[00:17:55] So, that's my first problem at the moment. My first premise is it's a huge mistake to not have a public debate and not be talking about the consequences of the lockdown on certain populations, including people that have addictions, including people that have horrible mental health to start with, depressive tendencies, suicidal tendencies, people that are lonely and that, at the moment, are just more lonely, right? So, the consequences of the lockdowns, it's as if, at the moment, I feel like it's something controversial to talk about somehow because it's insensitive.

[00:18:40] Well, like what life is more important, someone who someone who dies from COVID, which is tragic or someone who kills himself? That's tragic, too. So, if each life is important, then not talking about the lives that an economic crash will cause or will take, it's not ethical, it's not the right thing to do. And I think it's downright irresponsible to talk about just the lives that we save and not the life that we kill.

[00:19:12] And it's inconvenient, but that's the reality of it, that if the economy crashes the way we're seeing it crash, I have one friend in particular who I personally consider, I guess, my personal guru in investing because he's a guy who's been doing just that for the best of the last decade, I think, and he's making good returns. And even during this crisis, he's like a plus 20% with bitcoins, and gold, and whatnot. And he's like, yeah, like the market wasn't stable.

[00:19:41] So, this guy knows what he's talking about, and he's just one guy. But the economy and the people he follows, well, they say that this is an unprecedented economic crash that will probably be the worst that modern society has seen. So, if that's true, then the consequences of this economic crash, and at the moment in the US, it's 20 million job losses in the last three weeks. I don't know if the numbers have been abated, but as I was doing the article, there was 6 million, then they added another 6, then they added another 6, so we're, what, between 18 and 20 million as we're recording this.

[00:20:20] There are consequences of people losing their job. And of course, you can say, "Okay, well, some people are going to regain their job back. We're going to try to restart the economy." Sure. But when you look at precedent, I am not an economist, but it is very unlikely, in fact, that there will be no consequences to that entire like stopping the economy and food rotting in the middle of the fields, right? So, I guess the first point is, okay, well, what do we know about deaths of despair? And can we put that into the models when trying to decide?

[00:20:57] Because in the end, it's not favoring one death for another, but it's kind of accounting for all of society when you do a lockdown measure. Because lockdowns, it's a new way of confronting a pandemic. In the past, it was other things, like, well, social distancing could have been done or could have been enforced in some way or another, large gatherings and whatnot. But in certain countries, they're doing different versions of the US lockdown, I think it's half the states right now that are in complete lockdown, 158 million Americans.

[00:21:38]Luke Storey:  I'm embarrassingly unaware of what's going on. I was talking to someone a couple days ago just in Northern California, and I was like, "Well, you guys don't have the lockdown thing, right?" They're like, "Yeah, the whole country." I was like, "Oh, I thought it was just LA and New York. I'm totally oblivious, admittedly. That's why I talk to people like you that I mean, I'm looking at other sides of this on a more, I think, macro level than I am with particular state and things like that. But anyway-

[00:22:14]Nicolas Pineault:  Got you. But yeah, at one point, it was 158 million. And because of definition even of a lockdown varies from each state. So, is it that you cannot go outside the state? Is it that all businesses are closed or is it a partial closure? So, it varies from country to country. But Sweden and different countries, some countries have actually taken an approach that's not the same, where use social distance, you keep a distance, you try to stay home, but let's say, it's less enforced.

[00:22:46] Here in Quebec, you can get $1,000 fine if a policeman sees you talking with someone else and you're at less than two meters, six feet. So, it's being enforced at the moment in Quebec. And when I came back from my trip to Japan, I had the recommendation from the federal government, from Canada to self-isolate for 14 days. Three days later, it changed to the law being enforced. So, basically, I had to quarantine 14-day, not even going for a walk, or I could have been fined 750,000 Canadian or prison time.

[00:23:29] And I don't know, my brother announced that to me, he's like, "Yes, stay home, dude." And I'm like, 750,000, like if they said 10,000, it would have been ruined, like 10,000, it's still huge, so I don't know why the big number. It's almost fear-mongering to me. It's like we're going to fine you a million dollars, the average person doesn't have 10,000 to spare. So, yeah, it's just bizarre. Anyway, so deaths of despair is just one thing.

[00:24:00] Maybe I can read some part of my article where there's one PhD in particular and I guess we can find PhDs that would say, oh, deaths of despair maybe isn't a big deal, but there's precedent in different pandemics and we know that there could be a devastating loss of lives based on deaths of despair. There's one guy that I want to talk about who was on the Del Bigtree show, The Highwire, and oh, okay, that's an anti-vaxer thing, blah blah. Don't tune out.

[00:24:32] Okay. This guy is on many shows. Who cares where he was? I know a lot of people kind of, right now, that's very charged, but please just keep an open mind. I see so many people kind of reacting like, oh, anti-vaxer, this, that. I'm not anti-anything personally, and I'm a Canadian, so I'm not even a Democrat or a Republican. So, it's even better because I don't care about American politics per se because I'm just a Canadian and Trudeau is just scared of this entire thing and he's completely out of out of his mind at the moment, but who cares, right?

[00:25:10] So, I don't have any political preference. I just want the data to speak for itself. So, this guy is Toby Rogers, PhD. And in my article, basically, I talked about one blog post he did. And he looked at the data that we have over the period of 1940 and 1973. And basically, says that the number one increase in the unemployment rate sustained over a period of six years has been associated with increases of 36,000 deaths.

[00:25:45] And this includes 20,000 deaths from cardiovascular deaths because of overall anxiety and whatnot, a thousand suicides, 648 homicides, deaths from cirrhosis of the liver, 4,000 deaths from state mental hospital admissions, and 3,000 state prison admission. So, there's precedent that when you increase just 1% unemployment, there's trouble coming around the corner. Right now, it has increased way, way, way more than that. And of course, we can recuperate that, we can try to revitalize the economy, but it's silly.

[00:26:27] Anyone who's pro or against vaccines or pro-COVID and against it, is it super dangerous, is it not, who cares? But ignoring the consequences of lockdowns is just kind of postponing our problems later. We need to include everyone, including what will happen, because we're kind of living a miniature or small crisis here because it's, I guess, a small province of Quebec, 8.6 million people that loneliness and the fact that the elderly, some of them, now in the 90s or even early-100 years old cannot see anyone from their family. They're in lockdown.

[00:27:08] And the consequences of that alone is very hard on their health. And there's almost a public scandal around that because they're starting to realize, my God, it's been weeks, and these people, sometimes, they cannot even call relatives. So, I think there's been, again, a lack of staff, of funding. I'm not blaming anyone here, but it's just a reality that some elderly has been in their room for four weeks. It's like we need to think about everyone, include everyone.

[00:27:41] So, the populations that are at risk, sure, from COVID, and also the people that are just in a bad mental space even before COVID and that now, it's just getting worse and worse from the anxiety. So, it means supporting suicide hotlines like never before and taking care of everyone if we want to reduce the overall toll to society, not just COVID. I think sometimes, we're a little bit myopic about, oh, the virus, danger virus, virus, virus. Yes, for sure. Something is there.

[00:28:13] It's important, but there's also other aspects to it. And some doctors are starting to speak out to the effect that now that people are staying at home, well, if we have to maintain lockdown, for example, for several months, well, people aren't going to get checked up, I don't know, for breast cancer exams and for different things that now, we're going to start seeing more toll from doctors who cannot do their job for other things than just COVID-related stuff.

[00:28:46] So, it's important to account for all of this when making decisions. Right now, I guess the entire world is in a crisis mode, COVID, COVID, COVID, yes, but let's think about including everyone in all of society and discussion. And this interview by Dr. David Katz, I'll send you a link. Afterwards, you can include it in the show notes. But he's not someone that doesn't conclude anything as a scientist. He's very calm about the matter.

[00:29:16] And one thing he stressed in an article, and that was weeks ago, it was beginning of March, is exactly that. He just stated calmly, "You know what, we can go in lockdown, but let's not forget the consequences of a potential lockdown. And what we're going to do after and how to support all of society." You know what, Luke, I'm looking at the news every day, I have barely seen anyone in the news anywhere talking about this important aspect, as if it's something dangerous to say.

[00:29:50] But I mean, it will happen regardless of whether we think it's something comfortable to say or not. It's not to argue that COVID deaths are less important than something else, but if we are to follow this kind of silly or easy argument that every life matter, every life matter, we have to save everyone. Okay, cool. Well, let's save also people that are going to kill themselves. I mean, it's horrible, right? Then I talk to other people that are very close to non-profit organization in like suicide hotlines and some of them are just exploding at the moment.

[00:30:29] I don't have the stats, but it's just logical, right? It's just very logical that if you're suicidal before COVID, well, right now, it's a world that's the scariest period I've experienced in my life. Even 9/11, I was way younger, obviously, maybe I didn't comprehend the geopolitics implications and the war against terrorism, it was kind of a movie in my mind, maybe, but now, it's something, it's like a cold war against a virus that's very, very powerful in people's minds.

[00:31:01] So, my number one argument is we cannot ignore deaths of despair. And anyone who ignores it by choice, I think it's putting our heads in the sand. And when thinking about solutions, you want just to be solution-focused, well, okay. Some people have proposed, and I think that's just preposterous, 18 of lockdown. Life will never go, like we cannot revitalize the economy. We should lock the entire world down for months until the vaccine arrives. It just won't happen. It's impossible because too many people will die from the lockdown itself, right?

[00:31:46] So, the goal as a society is to find like how to protect people that maybe are more at risk from COVID while also, well, making sure that we start this machine. And the argument that I'm seeing at the moment, there is activism, especially in the US, and I know in Michigan, there's been thousands and thousands of people protesting that we need to start the machine again. And I cannot help but agree at the moment based on my big fear that the deaths of despair will be unprecedented and also that the data doesn't show that everyone will drop dead from COVID, really far from that.

[00:32:31]Luke Storey:  Well, yes. Thank you for that. And one thing you mentioned kind of in the beginning of that breakdown was people suffering from addictions. And one of the things that I've noticed from the beginning, as someone who was very life really dependent on the ability to have gatherings in 12-step groups and whatnot for a long, long time, and especially in the very beginning part of my journey. I mean, I needed to be around that kind of support at least once, if not a couple times a day.

[00:33:02] I mean, that was just like there there's no way I could have ever made it without that fellowship. And I think about all of the millions of people around the world who are newly recovered from alcoholism or drug addiction, and don't have the ability to have that human connection, and human touch, and love, and support that makes early recovery possible. And it's just a lot of people, I've observed people are moving to Zoom meetings and things like that.

[00:33:30] And I'm sure that's helpful and way better than nothing, but like, oh, man, I really feel for people that are in that position. And for someone who's not been so afflicted, I think it's difficult, if not impossible, to project what that would be like if you've not had that experience. It's like, well, so what, like just wait a few weeks, and you can go back and do your thing as normal. It just doesn't work like that.

[00:33:59] It's an hour-by-hour, sometimes, minute-by-minute game of survival when you're recovering from addictions, and your connection to other people in that group setting and that support is your lifeblood, especially in the first couple of months, if not even a couple years. So, that part of it is tragic. And there's no way probably to get accurate mathematical statistics on what the count is, but I'm certain that in line with everything you just said, that's going to be a huge cost on society. And some really big numbers are going to be affected just from that one-minute portion of the population, let alone everything else.

[00:34:44] Let's move into, when talking about the statistics and if we're looking at these other ways in which people might be affected, something that I think is really bizarre about this whole thing, and that's starting to unfold because you have people within the medical industry acting as whistleblowers now going like, hey, we're changing people's death certificates now to COVID after the fact. There are people that are dying of all sorts of different preexisting conditions. And if they test positive for COVID, it's being counted as a COVID death. So, in your fact number two, the confirmed cases of COVID are not so confirmed. At this moment on April 16th, what do you know about that side of it? Like can we even trust the numbers? Because it seems to me that we definitely can't.

[00:35:39]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, that's a huge problem. And I mean, we could argue, both arguments could be true. We don't know the real number of cases through the number of cases that we're thinking are cases of COVID, probably a lot of them are not COVID cases or are also people afflicted with other viruses or other infections that could, in the end, kill them. And that's a huge problem that we're facing at the moment because there's a few indications right now that—let's take Europe because Europe at the moment, they've seen pretty much the worst of the crisis, even in Sweden, where a lot of people kind of said, you're not doing a complete lockdown.

[00:36:32] They've been accused of being very careless because it's basically the only country in Europe, to my knowledge, that has decided to have, let's say, more laxed techniques to contain the virus. So, just social distancing, these gathering's above 50 people that are considered unlawful. So, I guess if people are still going to restaurants, to bars, it is just that the maximum attendance is reduced. Of course, there's a bunch of different things that they're doing, but what they're not doing is a complete lockdown, the way we've seen it in a third of the planet, at least.

[00:37:15] So, what we're seeing at the moment is that across the board in Europe, the overall mortality rates, so that's how many people died this year so far, January 1st-April 16th, compared to previous years, it's similar or slightly elevated. So, it's not so elevated that it is unprecedented, so many people have died. And this includes Italy. And the second number that you want to look at is the deaths from respiratory infections.

[00:37:57] So, this includes flu, but also bacterial infections or other causes of pneumonia, for example. So, this entire agglomerate of people who die from respiratory infections, the overall mortality rate from that has not increased that much. It is slightly elevated in certain what we could call epicenter, like Italy, like France, but that's about it. So, I don't know exactly. And there is a lot of hypothesis around why Italy or why France or why this and why that, and we won't know before more science comes out.

[00:38:36] So, I don't want to get into speculation, but the fact is that looking at the number of total cases, and total deaths, and how it evolves over time, they have seen the peak of their crisis, and actually, now, the numbers are starting to climb down. Sweden has announced three days ago that they've seen the worst. Denmark has reopened school as of yesterday. And some scientists in Denmark are starting to say maybe a lockdown was a bad idea, considering that we were very ready to handle that crisis. It was smaller than expected.

[00:39:14] So, they're far ahead of us in North America as far as the evolution and the spread of the virus goes, and yet, the mortality rates are not up that much. They are not more elevated than 2017. And 2017 flu season was especially deadly. So, that's one problem I have with it, is that, overall, we can argue about many things. We can argue about, okay, it's a death from COVID, a real that from COVID, and we do see that 99% of Italians that have died with COVID had, well, preexisting conditions.

[00:39:53] So, this is going to include the high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, autoimmunity. There's a few of them that are listed in scientific studies. So, it doesn't tell you that COVID wasn't the one thing that finally killed him. It's complicated. And I have emailed a lot of journalists about that, that no one can give me a clear answer of how COVID-related deaths are reported differently than flu deaths, for example. And it's not simple because from country to country, you'll have different, things that you can write on death certificates, different standards, and it varies from country to country.

[00:40:33] So, it's very, very confusing. But in the end, let's forget all that and put all that aside, if COVID led to excess mortality, it would have meant that COVID was on top of flu, right? There are the flu deaths, and then you add COVID, and you add pneumonias that normally occur. But at the moment, since overall mortality hasn't increased that much, barely more than 2017 or equal as 2017, we're just looking at a difficult or especially deadly flu season or which we have never done much, right?

[00:41:13] There hasn't been any intervention that has been made special except supporting the ICUs and doctors fighting. Again, seeing thousands of deaths, right? In Italy, it's 68,000 people who have died in the last four flu season, 68,000 thousand people. So, that's a lot of Italians that if you want to—again, sensationalistic media has shown like the graves and, oh, bodies are piling up. Well, hey, folks, bodies are piling up every winter, right?

[00:41:46] That's something that we have never maybe realized as a global, I guess, or on social media or in people's consciousness. But every winter, people die, and a lot of it from the flu, from the regular flu. Most of them are old and most of them have pre-existing conditions. So, in other words, they have compromised immunity, they're old, and I'll say old when I'll be 65. If you say you're old, I'll probably be very angry. Sorry about that.

[00:42:20] And then, most of them that are dying are, on average in Italy, I think it was 81-year-old. So, I guess our older, I want to be politically correct with people that are 80 and in perfect health, but they're not in good health, generally speaking, in Italy, you have a lot of older folks that are heavy smokers, especially men. So, keeping that in mind, it makes sense at the moment to hypothesize that a lot of COVID deaths previously would have been something else.

[00:42:54] And Stanford has done one early publication on that, just released last week, and they found that 25% of all COVID-positive patients also have at least one co-infection. And that's an important finding because it means that you can look at 30,000 deaths in the US and maybe you would have 7,000 or 8,000 deaths that in fact, could have died from the flu if it wasn't—like what killed them? Is it the flu or is it COVID? And sometimes, you cannot know because we can have different—it's like the bad bacteria, right?

[00:43:32] You can have overgrowth of certain fungi and candida, and you can also have viruses, and you can also have heavy metals, and then what kills you in the end if you're toxic, right? It's a slew of different things that can kill someone. So, there's a lot of indication at the moment that—and what concerns me a lot is that some scientists at the moment, and this is just so damning to me that they're saying that, but that's what they're saying, is if we try to imagine it's difficult, but try to imagine for a second that we don't know about COVID, we don't test anyone, we just don't know it exists, and all the hysteria of the last months disappears.

[00:44:14] If you look at the stats, mortality rates, you would look at that and you would say, what's happening around the world? You would have difficulty to find something abnormal that's going on around the world. You would identify Italy, you would say, wow, Italy, a lot of people have died. And then, you would compare with 2017, you would say, well, that's pretty much like 2017. And unfortunately, 2017 was deadly, and so is 2020. You would say that and you would say people have died from, let's say, respiratory infections.

[00:44:45] That would include like pneumonia-like symptoms that COVID causes, although COVID does seem to have certain particularity to it. And that's something we can argue that is, let's say, novel. But still, it would have been included in that mass of deaths. In other countries, you take China, nothing to see here; Taiwan, nothing to see; South Korea; Vietnam; In France, you would see excess mortality. You would wonder what the heck is happening.

[00:45:16] In certain parts of France, it's been especially deadly. Maybe we could say the same for Spain. That's one of the top countries that I've seen a lot of deaths. So, 19,000 deaths. So, you would see excess mortality, a little bit of excess in certain countries, but maybe they would conclude, well, the flu has been, maybe there's a new strain or the flu is especially deadly or maybe the ICUs are simply underfunded and some people have just died because we cannot treat them fast enough.

[00:45:49] But that's what damning to me, is at the moment, April 16th, might change, again, it might change in the next weeks, but I'm still waiting for that big amount of deaths that would have shown us that what we've done, the confinement was really worth it. And then, of course, and a lot of people like on social, they will say, okay, well, that guy, like the next logical thing to come to fight me with is, well, how do we know it's not the lockdowns that have saved all those lives? And that's a good point. That's a good point.

[00:46:24] In reality, we don't know exactly. Well, first, on a scientific basis, I was very surprised to find out, looking, for example, at H1N1 and what interventions have been effective and what not, there's a good paper on that that I read, and they concluded, "Well, after H1N1, unfortunately, the funding dried out because eventually, it wasn't a thing anymore in science, and the funding dried out. And we couldn't really conclude what are the best interventions to do when confronted with a pandemic.

[00:46:55] So, on a scientific standpoint, a lot of scientists at the beginning of the COVID panicked worldwide, were saying, "Well, sure, we can try lockdowns, but they're not proven to work." In other words, you don't know exactly if it will be worth it in the end, and we still don't know. We're going to have to, after the fact, study populations that have done various versions of a lockdown or social distancing, and then study the effects.

[00:47:23] So, it's a little bit of a shot in the dark and some could argue, again, better be safe than sorry, but there's consequences to a lockdown that are also a disaster to society. So, that's why I'm on the side at the moment without being the expert in epidemiology that probably, other types of interventions could have been a better choice, for example, and that's something a lot of scientists mainstream have argued on the media, if they were even given the right to speak because it's not a popular opinion, but you could have focused on populations at risk.

[00:48:02] And very quickly, in the crisis, even in February, it was pretty clear that people 65+ with pre-existing conditions were especially at risk. So, why not isolate those instead of isolating all the rest of the population? And there's arguments for both. It's just that, at the moment, populations like Sweden and other populations that have done other versions of a lockdown that are way more laxed have not seen really death rates or consequences that are over the top.

[00:48:34] In fact, Sweden is looking, at the moment, very similar or less of a deadly flu season compared to other countries that have done lockdowns. So, it really bears into question, at this point, it's a little bit speculative because it's going to evolve, and then every country cannot be just compared like, oh, Sweden isn't the UK, and the population might be healthier here, and the health care might be better in the second country, sure. But overall, there's no consistent evidence that the lockdowns have been what has reduced the lethality or the number of cases.

[00:49:20] And it's still up to speculation. But I just hope. I mean, it's two-pronged. I hope that this whole thing is way less of a trap than that was previously thought. And at the moment, it's looking like that. But also, I'm just almost grinding my teeth at the idea that the interventions were way overblown based on panic instead of science. And it's unclear who's going to be right in the end, but it's starting to look every day, now, I wrote my article, what, 10, 11, 12 days ago, it's just more and more proof is coming out that basically, the curves are already flattening in a lot of countries.

[00:50:02] There's basically no crisis except certain epicenters that maybe we've seen ICUs being completely overwhelmed. New York City is an example. I don't want to dismiss what's happening in New York City, right? It's real. People are dying. I mean, the medical staff there, my heart goes to them. It's real what they're fighting. My wife's parents are pharmacists. And one of them works in a hospital in Quebec. It's the apocalypse in the freaking system. It's very difficult.

[00:50:38] And I'll never understand really what's going on for them, the stress they're experiencing and whatnot in the ICUs, but the question is, because we've made this such a big deal and because people are in the front of their computer, in front of their devices, exposing themselves to a lot of stress-inducing EMFs and refreshing the numbers on the Johns Hopkins tracker every day like every hour, is it contributing to people going to the ICU saying, "Please save me, I think I might have the virus"? Is it contributing to the cardiovascular events? So, is the panic also part of the reason that we're seeing certain increases in certain cities, especially large cities? I don't know.

[00:51:32] It's speculative, but as far as the death rate goes and the overall mortality, at the moment, it's just not there. So, I guess you could take that two different ways. You could say, "Well, that's amazing news." I don't know if you know the guy called the ZDogg. Do you know ZDogg? He's like a very spoken-up doctor who's—and it's bizarre because I mean, let's say I'm part of the—I hate anti-vaxer, man. I just hate the term. I think it's so silly.

[00:52:13] And I think if you use that term, you're comfortably mistaken because yes, okay, some people are completely anti-vaccine, but just being flagged at something, and then we don't talk—I think it's an easy thing to just create a term, and then put people in that category, and not listen to a debate over vaccine safety, is really what it is. Anyway, that's my two cents, and I don't want to necessarily get into that. But ZDogg is someone who was the opposite of that.

[00:52:40] He's like pro-vaccine, vaccines are safe and effective, and also with certain doctors like Dr. Paul Offit, and what he's been saying, I think it's two days ago, he' basically created a video on Facebook, Facebook Live, where he said, "You guys will hate me for this, but I don't think it's an issue. I don't think it's a huge issue, coronavirus." And basically, he described all the talking points I've talked about so far. And he's a pro, pro, pro, pro, pro-vaxer, you cannot get more pro-vax than that.

[00:53:15] So, I was like, oh, my God. So, actually, I have unexpected allies on both sides of the debate. And he doesn't think that the vaccine is going to save the world because it's going to take a lot of time to develop, and also, the safety profile of past coronavirus's vaccines that have been attempted was not good. So, basically, they failed so far to create even a vaccine for SARS, the 2003 pandemic that was especially deadly. So, there are unexpected allies in this debate that think alike, that say, well, you know what, the numbers are just not there.

[00:53:54] So, yes, we should take precautions, still study. I don't argue that COVID-19 is not something new, but the numbers aren't there. So, I guess the good news is we can stop freaking out. If you're 90-year-old, and you have diabetes, and high blood pressure, and everything, well, continue freaking out a little bit, protect your health, right? We should support these people because it looks like COVID for these people might be way more deadly than the flu.

[00:54:25] But when you put that to the entire population and consider that studies support the idea that 50% to 80% of people will be asymptomatic, I might have COVID at the moment that I don't know, like it would be one like good health, young, normally, you don't get that much symptoms. Almost all of them are over 65, almost all the deaths. I know for sure, there's a few exceptions, but the media, the fact that the media points at a six-year-old that has died with COVID, and, oh, this teenager has died with COVID, well, it doesn't say anything, right?

[00:54:59] We have to stay rational about the overall statistics. Is it an exception? And was the person leukemic, or something like a precondition that could have killed them, or made their immune system struggle, or is it something where we really have to think about teenagers and how they're going to be affected with COVID? In reality, when you look at the cases worldwide and we have a lot of COVID cases right now, there is no need to panic. There's no need to think that you're at great risk for your health, great risk of death from COVID if you're under 65 and you have no pre-existing condition.

[00:55:39] And this is across the board. I haven't seen a single scientific study. I'm trying to look at both sides. And I've been studying that stuff for weeks, and weeks, and weeks. I'm following every study. Haven't seen any indication that it's dangerous for children, for teenagers, for adults in good health or even if you're 65 and you consider yourself at amazing health, maybe you're not at risk I'm not here to tell you that you're not. So, for these populations, there is an argument that we should have them eventually get COVID because we'd need to acquire immunity.

[00:56:13] And that's another part of that freaking argument, is that people, and I don't know why and I don't know if it's been mis-explained in the media and flattened the curve. And flattening the curve is not nullifying the curve, right? So, flattening, what does it mean? Well, there's a curve, right? And the amount of cases goes up, goes up, goes up, and then it goes down and the crisis is adverted. The problem is that the high spike, when it gets very high, that's how many people will get hospitalized.

[00:56:44] And then, you get more deaths. Why? Because the ICUs cannot treat people. They need to be put on ventilators. And that's one of the theories of how we need to treat COVID. And at the moment, it's looking that maybe, it's not even the right approach. So, flattening the curve is just pushing on it, but if it extends it over time, technically, flattening the curve is not trying to have fewer people infected. It's not the main goal.

[00:57:14] It might happen because you reduce transmission, but it's basically having the same number of cases, but over a longer period of time, so your doctors have time to treat those extreme cases and we don't ignore people who otherwise would have been saved. And I think like this makes sense, technically. But now, people, I think we've been so traumatized by the idea of COVID that just the government starts thinking about, oh, yeah, we should reopen things.

[00:57:43] No, no, no, no, no, no. What are you talking about? COVID. Well, yeah, they didn't get it that, well, in the end, most people will contract COVID, and that's okay, especially because of the fact right now that the overall death rates, when you look at the entire population do look similar as the flu, maybe a little bit more and maybe less, and we won't know that until next year. I can guarantee you that we need better data. But if you're not at risk, you'll get essentially the flu and no one is freaking out over the flu.

[00:58:16] I mean, when people have the flu in my family or maybe I don't shake hands during Christmas season, I'm like, you know what, just say, like I'm going to kiss you at a distance. That's it. But aside from that, I don't fear for my life. You shouldn't fear for your life according to science right now. And that's comforting. And I don't think that message has been stressed enough in the media or from government, just they've said it, but it's like we should say, guys, it's okay.

[00:58:48] Sometimes, Luke, I go to the grocery store and the reaction I see in population is pretty much there is a deadly virus like in the movies that if you open the window, you're going to choke to death, and maybe you transform yourself into a zombie, right? So, this is what I've been seeing. And this has nothing to do with reality. Nothing. At the moment, I could say that to be on the safe side, COVID is probably especially deadly if you're 65 and older and pre-existing conditions.

[00:59:25] If that's not you, you can probably relax, and eventually, you're going to get it, and it shall be fine. Like it's not everyone dropping dead. And I mean, my dad, he's a realtor, and he has a colleague who literally might add lights to a little bit teaser, I guess. And he's like, yeah, my son wrote an article about coronavirus. It's not deadly at all and it doesn't exist or he like deforms my entire argument there and just says, no, it's not an issue.

[01:00:00] And she was freaking out. She said, "You're irresponsible. Everyone is dying from COVID, millions of people are dying." And I'm like, yeah, that's pretty much what the average person thinks now. So, the perception is that everyone is dying. New York City is on lockdown. There's been a trillion deaths from COVID, it seems, because every death, there is almost a story behind, oh, John was only 34 and he died from COVID, and that's horrible. But maybe John last year also died from the flu because also young people dropped dead from the flu, but we don't make a big deal out of it.

[01:00:42] So, there's a difference between how reality really is when you look at the data and how it's been portrayed. And I think that in the end, it's a crisis that is probably 20% science and 80%, either it's—and that's when people will hate me for it, I don't know. Media, is it agenda-pushed fear by people that are either creating the COVID narrative, that could be a thing or they're recuperating the COVID narrative because it will help them for their bottom line, whether it's creating vaccines or enforcing more rules for citizens and control.

[01:01:33] So, there is a lot of opportunism that happens and maybe agendas. I don't know about that. Then, yeah, I went down this rabbit hole quite a lot, and I don't know. But there is, for sure, strong corporate interests throughout that two types of vaccine developed. And it will be a big payday for a lot of people if the vaccine is mandated and whatnot. So, it's very complicated, this whole story, but 80% of the fear is completely overblown, I would say.

[01:02:06]Luke Storey:  Thank you for the comprehensive. And I would say, again, pretty neutral and tame take on it, not as compared to the mainstream media narrative and the world government's reaction to this. But to me, as someone who's been quite far outside of The Matrix for a long, long time now and has looked at things, I think, from very alternative lens in terms of where I'm getting information from, there is a very obvious concerted effort by the media to mislead the public around the world.

[01:02:46] And the purpose of that, we can never say for sure, but it's quite obvious if you just unplug a little bit and look at things from your perspective that the story that's being presented is not the full story and not the true story, and that the reaction of the authorities around the world and the shutdown that has ensued as a result of that reaction is unprecedented as you said. And based on statistics, excessive and unnecessary in terms of the loss of civil liberties, and personal freedom, and just basic fundamental human rights.

[01:03:26] And so, I've done one episode that's more aggressively tearing down the official narrative, but more coming out that are much more, so this is a good kind of middle ground, I think, that we've covered with you just looking at the basic science and statistics and not so much on the fringe extremities of one side or the other. For me, I'm not concerned at all about becoming ill. I feel for the people that have, of course, as you keep saying wisely. What concerns me a million times more than any fucking virus ever could is that we have been incrementally led down the path of a totalitarian, authoritarian government takeover.

[01:04:20] And that is what people should be afraid of out, if they're afraid of anything, and how easily the sheeple that many of us are have just laid down out of our own, being so easily manipulated to give up our rights and our personal freedoms. And that is the confusion because we are inherently, I think, good people, and compassionate people, and we care about not only the well-being of ourselves, our loved ones, and our society as a whole. So, we want everyone to be safe, so we go along with it. But when you start to do a little bit of research, as you have, you see like, huh, the reaction doesn't match the actual statistics on this. And so, why is the reaction as it is?

[01:05:06]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah.

[01:05:07]Luke Storey:  And who stands to benefit? And when you start following the money and you start looking at who stands to benefit, it's the, as you indicated, corporate interest and it's in the interest of big government to control the populace and control the way that they perceive reality. And that's what the media's job really is, in many ways, is to control perception. And if you control a civilization's perception of reality, you control them. And that's the bad news of this.

[01:05:39] As I said in the beginning, to me, the good news is because this has been so extreme, and even to your average person who can just pry open their mind a little bit and just be somewhat objective about this in a global sense, as you've been, you have to admit that something is amiss. And that perhaps, it's time to start thinking more critically about the information that we're getting from the mainstream narrative.

[01:06:04] And also, again, this has been very abundantly clear to me for a long time, but thinking critically about the level of trust that we have for our government and government agencies such as the CDC, which I'm sure there are many great people working in and around the CDC, but there are also a lot of very bad, bad actors in there that are very corrupt. And that's been proven time and time again. The same goes for the WHO.

[01:06:35] I mean, you have like a lot of foxes in the henhouse in these big organizations, and there's corporate interests, and so much corruption that we, as citizens, who are participants and observers of this phenomenon owe it to ourselves and the future generations to wake the fuck up, and realize that we have to start looking at things from a different point of view, and we have to start thinking critically, and really examining the narratives that are being force-fed to us, and looking at where this could lead if we don't stand up and start asking difficult questions. And so, I really appreciate people like you that are being as rational and unbiased as possible in looking at this from all sides.

[01:07:22] And so, thank you for doing that work and for sharing that really amazing comprehensive boil down on the show because it's really important that information like this gets out and people can make their own decisions. But where I like to always go with these things is to acknowledge speculation when it's speculation, acknowledge a conspiracy theory when it's a theory, but also to identify when it's not a theory, when it's a fact, and it's been proven as a fact, and when it's not speculation, and there's science and there's statistics, and there is such thing as a universal, undeniable truth about any given topic. And then, there are people's interpretation of truth, right?

[01:08:03]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah.

[01:08:03]Luke Storey:  Our job is to zero-in as close as we can using our heart, and our intuition, our intellect, our discernment, our prudence to really zero-in on what might really be happening. And at the end of the day, also knowing that as little ants that we are in the great scheme of things, that each individual really has very little control to exert over the situation, but collectively, we have a lot of power, in the power of knowledge; and the power of love, and connectedness, and compassion for one another. And our thirst and God-given right for freedom is a really powerful force. And so, that's why I like doing shows like this, which are a little bit out of the norm. I mean, normally, this is not even a topic I would ever touch.

[01:08:53]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah.

[01:08:54]Luke Storey:  This show is about like health, and spirituality. So, I've always avoided anything political or yeah, I did one show with Del Bigtree about vaccines, just questioning the safety and efficacy of vaccines in general. And I think it was a pretty moderate show, looked at things from all sides. I mean, he has his point of view and I would say I agree with his point of view. But other than that, I've not been too controversial on this show.

[01:09:19] But now, I'm sort of forced to feel kind of like through a sense of responsibility to people that listen to my shows and content that I'm putting out and also to myself to kind of get further educated and really take a look at some of these things. And it is difficult to weed through all of the information and arrive at some semblance of reality. And so, that is where I am with it right now. I'm, as I said, and I will close this, and I want to get into some other stuff because I really want to talk about EMFs too, which is your specialty, you just stumbled into this, as you said, because you're like, what the fuck is going on here?

[01:10:03] But when it comes to this issue, again, my position is I'm more concerned about the reaction and about the danger of and the harm being caused by the media and their misrepresentation of reality, which is no news to me, because when 9/11 happened and we experienced the most detrimental bit of fake news to ever grace the airwaves, which was weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which led to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people for the past 20 years, whatever it's been, that was when The Matrix broke open for me. And I was like, something is not right here.

[01:10:47] And that led me down the rabbit hole of looking into all sorts of different theories, some of them really far out and extreme. Some of them, a little more balanced and in the middle. But what became abundantly clear to me was that I need to make up my own mind; and I need to use my fucking intellect, and common sense, and critical thinking to get a greater picture of what's really going on in the world at any given time, and not believe that box in front of me that's called the television or any device we have now that you're being force-fed these narratives from four or five multinational corporations that own all of the media channels and are programming your brain to think one way or another for their own interests. We have to take back our autonomy and our-

[01:11:31]Nicolas Pineault:  There are two things, Luke, I want to add to that. I'll try to make it quick. I know you want to get into the 5G stuff. And-

[01:11:36]Luke Storey:  In my podcast, I gave up on having a time limit a long time ago. I said, I have my hourglass here for my Instagram Lives, and I did a recording yesterday on someone else's show, and I had to flip this thing over three times. It's a 60-minute hourglass, and it was just like, it is what it is. As long as it takes to say what you need to say, and people can tune in or tune out, and I'll give them that freedom.

[01:12:02]Nicolas Pineault:  Perfect. Well, I want to say something. Flagging something as a conspiracy theory, again, it's like flagging someone as an anti-vaxer, I think it's a lazy thing to do. And I think to be quite frank, it's just stupidity. It's people who don't want to think. I could say, oh, yeah, you could argue that anything is a conspiracy theory. If I say to you, there is a lot of corporate interests in EMF science and big corporations fund studies that show no effect. Conspiracy theory. Well, okay, cool. You can say that, it doesn't make it untrue.

[01:12:45] So, the same thing for COVID, I mean, I haven't talked about it. I have a next article coming up on that, I think, where I want to get a little bit more political. Because in the end, there is one freaking article I saw in mainstream media, I think was CBC in Canada who said something, the headline, it might have been removed now because of the political climate, like is Bill Gates in a conflict of interest? Duh. Oh, my God. Oh, no. Someone is asking the right questions.

[01:13:17] Come on, people. Journalists. And I mean, I don't want to bash on journalists. I guess I'm kind of a pseudo-influencer, journalist because some people have tried to argue with me, you're a journalist and you do affiliate marketing and you do online business, you cannot be called a journalist. And I'm like, okay, well, call me whatever you want. I try to bring information that's factual and highlight the conflict of interest.

[01:13:46] If you don't want to get into the conspiracy and big agenda 21, blah, blah, blah thing, you don't have to, but let's just talk about something called conflict of interest. Why is it that Bill Gates is the one that's the spokesperson on the American media on the main CNN show a few weeks back? I think it was two weeks back. And Del Bigtree talked about it, so I got to give him big credit, his shows were very well-made, and he's an incredible journalist.

[01:14:15] Whatever your views are about vaccine, you should look at his COVID series because he has an incredible team, and I have a hard time arguing with him because the information is factual, it's calm, and he's thinking for himself. He's really, really precise on that. Well, why is it that Bill Gates is talking about this stuff, right? Oh, yeah. He's at the WHO. Well, Bill Gates basically has more power than most countries at the WHO. That's a problem.

[01:14:44] Because he's one guy, that's a problem. I'm sorry. I don't know how we came to this. I haven't studied WHO enough. I know a lot of people have slammed WHO after 2009 H1N1 because they said you have major conflict of interest. Well, nothing has been solved. And Tedros who is, at the moment, the general director of WHO is Bill Gates' buddy and Fauci is the buddy, and they all make money of the vaccines that are being developed, who are we kidding here? How are these guys allowed to have such power?

[01:15:22] And I mean, stuff like we can remove them, but we should talk about these issues. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's called conflict of interest. If you think that you can stay completely balanced and unbiased, but all of a sudden, you'll get a check for $12 million or $12 trillion if vaccines are being mandated, how can you be really unbiased? That's impossible. And in scientific research, it's a well-known fact that even when you think you're not being biased, if you're going to receive a check in the end of the day, you will be biased even when you think you're not.

[01:16:03] And it's been proven over and over and over again. So, Bill Gates is biased towards something, his idea that vaccines are the only thing that can get us out of this mess? Maybe. But he has huge financial interests. And it's this John Hopkins and the Bill Gates Foundation, and like, I'm not getting into conspiracy theory, it's a money machine. It's a lot of different companies and developing then the microchipping technology, and having vaccine task force, and all these ideas. These are ideas.

[01:16:37] But people, I think they feel bad even talking about conflicts of interest because we're in just in this climate, well, you'll be flagged as a conspiracy theorist. And now, I think if I read Bill Gates on my Facebook and say, hey, Bill Gates is in a conflict of interest because of this and that, it will be flagged as conspiracy theory. What the hell? I mean, that's propaganda. I'm sorry.

[01:17:04] Like sometimes, I'm very balanced and very calm about things, but this is just unacceptable because we're just slipping into extremism where you can't even question people that have huge vested interests in certain causes and ask ourselves with our rational brain for a second, well, what is their opinion towards vaccines if they're going to get millions or billions or trillions if vaccines are created. Well, probably, it's pro-vaccine.

[01:17:35] And does it affect how they think about vaccines? Yes. Does it affect how they influence others and everything they do in life? Yes. So, why are they in such a position of power if we are to rely on the WHO? It should be nonprofit. It should have no ties to any industry. It should be international. It should be multi-disciplinary. That's an organization I would put my faith into, not the WHO at the moment.

[01:18:10] And I see, unfortunately, another thing I want to say, I won't be popular amongst Americans, I was listening this morning to just the humor shows, like what is it, the John Oliver and all the different funny guys of the late shows in the US, and it looks like everything is about being anti-Trump. It's okay. Think about what you want. I'm not pro-Trump or against Trump. I'm a Canadian. Who cares, right? I don't mind that much about it. I'm not Republican, or Democrat, or anything.

[01:18:42] Trump, I don't like his style that much. I think sometimes, he says stuff that's completely disrespectful. I don't like him as a leader, but who cares? In America, I think there's a poison of the mind at the moment that people who don't like Trump because of what he said about women or this and that will automatically conclude that everything he says is a lie. That's not true. Maybe sometimes, he says something that's right.

[01:19:12] And the fact that Trump wants to defund WHO, well, I see this news at the moment while I'm researching this article and I say, geez, maybe it's time that we really take a stand against the World Health Organization because it seems to have ties with industry, and this problem has not been resolved. And they're way too close to pharmaceutical industries and different corporate interests. And that's my take. But all people see is, oh, no, Trump is doing another stupidity and right in the middle of the crisis wants to defund WHO.

[01:19:47] Well, I think that maybe behind the scenes, there are players at play that said, you know what, WHO is corrupt as hell and we will leave the boat. I don't know what's happening, but just take it with a grain of salt. It's not always anti-Trump, and pro-Republican, and against Democrats, and this, and that, the truth is somewhere in between, but don't make it always a political fight. I think unfortunately, a lot of people are focused on that.

[01:20:17] It's like in Quebec, we would make it separatists who won the Quebec to get out of Canada against the non-separatists. It's not always about that. Sometimes, it's an issue of that, but right now, it's an issue of everyone as united front, we have to fight the virus. We have to make the best out of this situation. And politics are intertwined in it, but it's not the sole thing. So, sometimes, I find it dangerous to just conclude, his defunding WHO is probably stupidity.

[01:20:49] Well, do your own research. WHO, is there something there? I've seen a German documentary two years ago that talked about WHO being extremely corrupt and applies to industry. Well, right, so it's not just about Trump, or re-election, or this and that. So, take all the news that are happening. I know it's hard because the media will spin off, and then, I don't know, Fox will be pro-Trump, and then CNN will be against, and this, and that. And it's a whole war in the US.

[01:21:17] I don't know how you guys do it. To just even watch the news, I would go crazy, but don't make it always political. And that's how you stay rational. And unfortunately, geez, where are the good journalists these days? I don't know. Because one journalist says, as the question is, is Bill Gates in a freaking conflict of interest? Well, I don't know. Is he? Yes. It might be like a guy who has given a lot of—we could argue that he has done tremendous philanthropic work and blah, blah, blah, okay.

[01:21:50] Stay in the background, funds scientists, independent science, and let them talk. That's being respectful and in integrity. Well, that's my opinion. Like I would rather see that than just have him as a spokesperson. Yeah, Bill. And you say life will never go back to normal, folks. He announces that, I don't know, like a death sentence to America on mainstream media. And I'm like, well, yeah, you might think that. But when you say that, you know that you're influencing decision makers to push towards vaccines.

[01:22:32] So, even if you're not in it for the money, what you say creates money, man. So, you're not in a good position. You're in a completely unethical position and completely overextends his role as someone who wants to give money to charity and whatnot. You can do that, but have people that are more independent with no ties to the vaccine. And let's see what they think in end. And maybe he doesn't want to do that because maybe he wants to control things, I don't know.

[01:23:04] But there are a lot of games of power. And conflict of interest is just something we need to start to think about. Even people who don't want to get into conspiracy theories, let's not do that, let's just think like, can we have people that are not corrupt, please, because I have a hard time finding them these days? Like who has no ties, no money, let's just remove the money from the equation and see what scientists say.

[01:23:25] And you'll find a lot of them that say, well, guys, I've been trying to scream from the rooftops and I'm just Dr. Woodward in Germany or Dr. Raul, who's just the number one expert worldwide in communicable diseases, that has said that basically, COVID is a collective hallucinated drama that we're going through. Well, why is he saying that? He has published 2,300 papers in his career. He's one of the most important scientists on the freaking planet. And he's been saying from day one, no, this is not important.

[01:23:59] Well, no one listens to him because he has no vested interest. He's just saying the truth, but it's not interesting. It's not interesting to have like CNN say, whoops, COVID isn't dangerous after all. No one will do that. This sells copies. So, it's just everyone has a vested interest, even the media has a vested interest in like keeping the hysteria going because it sells. In the end, money is a huge issue in all that we're seeing right now. It's everyone who wants to get their part of the cake. And I guess that's the end of my rant.

[01:24:35]Luke Storey:  Well, on the note of Bill Gates, I will go on record, in my opinion, he is a diabolical, evil control freak who is, on record, wanted to depopulate the planet. He's a eugenicist. And if you do your research on him, you'll find he is not a good person.

[01:24:51]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, there's a lot of stuff I found, too, that even the way he pushed GMOs and basically, he's been accused of continuing the work of Monsanto. That's the most evil company in the planet. So, I mean, some things he might have done might have been good, but some other things might have been completely in the wrong direction for humanity, including, I mean, the use of GMOs, encouraging the use of massive pesticides. I mean, anyway, so that's a whole rabbit hole. But he's definitely not all clean, so stop also just taking people at face value like, oh, he's a good guy. Well, it's shades of grey. So, like stay rational and just conflict of interest, man. It's ignored. It just pisses me off. It's incredible that people don't think about it.

[01:25:41]Luke Storey:  Well, when you have the media propping someone up as this insta-spokesperson on something, no education in virology, that has no education in science, that has no medical background, that has a history of investing in and supporting companies like Monsanto that are responsible for the degradation of the entire world population's health, and you have someone that's speaking nothing of how to improve your immune function, how to lead a healthy lifestyle, how to prevent yourself from getting any diseases, you have someone who pops on TV and all they have to talk about is the need for vaccines, and to make them mandatory, and widespread, I mean, come on, people, like seriously? Like how fucking dumb are people?

[01:26:31] I'm sorry. Like it's infuriating to me that people are that easily manipulated. It's absolutely insane. And you just look at, as you said, the conflict of interest, and the hypocrisy, and do a little bit of research on someone before you give any credence to their recommendations. And look at someone like that, as you said, there's all of these scientists that have written all of these papers and spent their lifetimes researching viruses, and you have someone who is a software inventor, if that's even true, you know that?

[01:27:08]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, that's true.

[01:27:10]Luke Storey:  As partner, you would get a different story on that. But why is the news popping that person up as the one that we're supposed to listen to? You've got to really kind of step back from this and go, huh, does that make sense in any way? And if that's the case, why is that person being selected as the authority that we're supposed to all bow down to when they have no background, and they have extreme conflict of interest, and also have a background to the contrary, which is ideas that are harmful to so many people. But anyway, enough about that. I have my opinions and maybe some of them are right, maybe some of them, not so much, but I protect my right to express them. And also, I protect Bill Gates's right to express his opinions, whatever his motives are.

[01:28:02]Nicolas Pineault:  He does a lot.

[01:28:04]Luke Storey:  And I also don't think that anyone should just listen to my opinion because if I have an opinion on something, like, okay, red light therapy has benefits. I have a vested interest in promoting red light therapy because Joovv is going to write me a check for my podcast, and it's like everyone has a motive to do something. And sometimes, it is monetary. And I think when you have that motive and you outwardly express that motive and make it very transparent, that changes the way you're doing things.

[01:28:37]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, I want people to go to my website. I want traffic to my website because that's my living. So, in the end, I mean, conflict of interest, okay, I make a living, I sell a book, I go on podcast shows, I hope you subscribe to my newsletter because right now, my business is struggling in the last three months because people are just reading about COVID. So, there you go. So, I mean, everyone. Yeah. If you have an online business as online influencer, it's also important to mention it. So, my conflict of interest is I want people to, I guess, give me money in exchange for me doing my research, something like that. It's like my goal in life with EMFs is really informing people about an issue and being able to just make a paycheck.

[01:29:20]Luke Storey:  Yeah. Amen, brother. Okay. So, let's take a pivot, just hold tight, idea where we're going to like go off this hard on that other thing, but anyway, it's timely and it's on top of mind for many people right now. And it's almost like I feel like we need to do two episodes. But while we're here, let's just do it. We'll just go for it.

[01:29:43]Nicolas Pineault:  Sure.

[01:29:45]Luke Storey:  Due to the fact that I've done multiple shows on EMFs and while I don't have the episode numbers on hand, but I've probably done five or six dedicated shows where we talk about what to do with your Wi-Fi router, how to make your cellphone safe, the dangers of living near a cell tower, geopathic stress in your home, how to test for it, electrical fields in and around you, at your computer and by your bed, magnetic fields that can be created from bad wiring in your home or living under high-tension power lines or dirty electricity that can be caused by appliances that are not made well inside your house or dirty electricity coming from the mains on your street into your house. Like we've talked about all of this.

[01:30:29] And so, I'll refer people back to those shows just in the interest of time because I know you have a lot of knowledge about all of that, very extensive body of knowledge. What I want to maybe look at now is clarifying for people, and most of the questions that were posted when I did an Instagram poll today were about specifically 5G. And as I understand it, and I want to see how far my understanding of this goes, is that, A, it stands for fifth generation, meaning fifth generation of cellular networks in the world, and that there's sort of two phases of the fifth generation.

[01:31:08] One is the one we're in now, which is piggybacking different frequencies and wavelengths on the existing infrastructure of 4G and really upgrading the 4G network using different bandwidth of frequencies, which we can talk about at depth. And that's being done now and has been done. And we have that type of 5G on T-Mobile, Verizon in LA. I think T-Mobile is like 600 megahertz. And then, there's other 4G networks that are 1,900 megahertz that were already here.

[01:31:41] So, it's not like that much different. I think for me, the concern about that level of 5G, sort of the first phase of the rollout, is that now, we just have more towers going up. We have the 3G, the 4G existing networks that are transmitting these frequencies. And we just have a wider range of frequencies polluting the places in which we live. Then, the second phase of 5G is the one that people are very concerned about, and I think should be, which is the millimeter-wave spectrum where you have these out of control frequencies in the gigahertz that are going to be or perhaps, already are rolled out.

[01:32:23] You can tell us that, where these are technologies that are used by the military for crowd control. And some people on the more conspiratorial side would say altering the way people feel, and changing their decisions, and beaming a building, and making everyone inside go fucking crazy, and all of these very like nefarious or potentially nefarious uses of the millimeter-waves. And those are waves that we've not experienced in a widespread way. So, that's kind of where I am with it right now.

[01:32:57] And I think it would be most useful for you to kind of give us a historical background on the different, the third, fourth, and now, into the different phases of fifth generation, and ease people's minds a little bit about where we are perhaps with it. And also, give us a reality check on where it's going and what the proposed plan is because I think people think we're farther along in the development of the fifth generation than we actually are. And where we are also sucks and is very disconcerting. So, give us a breakdown on the infrastructure of the cell networks as they stand right now.

[01:33:40]Nicolas Pineault:  Sure. Well, we still have some 2G around, but mainly, what we have is 3G antennas. In certain cities, they're starting to be removed. That's the, I guess, old technology that was rolled in, I would say, the early 2000s. And you had the 4G in 2010. 5G, let's say, we can say 2020, but they started doing tests as soon as the end of 2018. So, each generation brings different technological advancements. The 4G could also be called 4G LTE. So, long-term evolution is the acronym.

[01:34:20] So, depending on what carrier you have, sometimes, you don't see 4G on your phone when it's connected to the network, you'll see LTE. That would be the rough equivalent to keep things simple. And the 5G is the fifth generation. That's what is starting. And we can say in the future, it's pretty safe to say we're going to see 6G and beyond because the industry was just starting to test out 5G, and at the same time, there was a meeting in Finland, I think, 2018 about 6G.

[01:34:50] So, they're kind of thinking ahead of what's the next generation because each generation, for an industry that depends on technological advancement, it brings basically the promise that their industry is going to survive. People need to purchase new phones. Users need to have other cool things to do with their phone, including maybe eventually holograms and like new tech that's going to help sell more stuff. So, the telecoms want to send the users the data that they demand.

[01:35:29] So, the faster speed, the fidelity to always connect to the Internet of Things, also the fact that you have trillions of sensors everywhere here, so your toaster can talk to your phone and you can start your toast as you're stuck in traffic and you're like, oh, I'm just craving peanut butter and jam on two toasts, and you're like, ding, ding, ding, and maybe your robot even at home could listen to your voice and kind of prepare that for you.

[01:35:56] So, it's a future that they envision where you have more and more applications that are wireless. So, 5G comes with also that. And 6G and beyond is, well, we don't know yet because it's like the future. So, they're always thinking ahead of new applications. The main problem with 5G, obviously, when it comes to health is the densification of let's just call it electrosmog. So, if you imagine that right now, we have 2G, 3G, 4G, LTE antennas, Wi-Fi routers, hotspots, Bluetooth-enabled things everywhere, it's a lot of electrosmog that has just increased tremendously in the last 10 years, in the last 20 years, it's crazy.

[01:36:38] In the last two years, it has increased like crazy. In developing countries, the increase is even more steep because they're just getting on board instead of going to the 1G, 2G, 3G, like jumping straight to 4G. In the middle of Africa, you can get cellphone signal. So, there's not even a lot of countries now where you cannot get a cellphone with a fairly fast speed. So, there's fewer and fewer remote areas that is not being, let's say, polluted by this electrosmog.

[01:37:13] So, 5G is that 5G, but also, on the health standpoint, something that a lot of people don't think or talk about is the fact that is how electrosmog is disruptive to human biology. And it's not a linear effect. And that's something that is inconvenient. It makes it hard to study. It makes it also hard to comprehend for the average person and makes it very frustrating also. So, what I mean by that is that let's say you have one unit of radiation, and you have a second phone that emits two units of radiation, well, most people would conclude that, oh, that's two times as dangerous.

[01:38:01] Well, it doesn't work that way exactly. You have such thing as intensity windows. So, you could have a greater effect at lower intensity in certain situations, and you also have, sometimes—so, you could have greater effects from one to three units of radiation, and then from 100 to 105 units of radiation. So, it is weird because biology doesn't respond to electrosmog the way it responds necessarily to other poisons. There is also frequency windows.

[01:38:36] So, the human body might be affected by 900 megahertz to 1 gigahertz, and maybe, if you do rat studies where it's 1 gigahertz to 1.1 gigahertz, there is no effect. So then, some certain studies will study the effects and say, "Well, look, there's nothing. Humans don't react or rats don't react." Yeah, but because the human body uses different frequencies and it reacts differently to different frequency, so it makes it extremely difficult to have reliable results and a reliable assessment of the dangers.

[01:39:12] And that's one of the reasons that EMF science is very controversial. The industry will use that as, let's say, an argument of no effect. Like you see, there's nothing here. And the studies are inconclusive, right? So, that's one of the main problems. The measure of how chaotic a signal is has to do with how much engineers have modified that signal. Okay. In nature, you have different EMFs. Imagine, just look at the sun outside the sun, and there's all kinds of EMFs in a certain spectrum.

[01:39:49] Some of which is visible. You can see the colors of the light and some of it is invisible, like certain waves of infrared and certain waves of UV, but we know that they impact us. We also know that there is a dose response relationship. You get too much UV, you burn, you get not enough, you don't get your vitamin D. So, natural EMFs, we know that they can harm, we know that they can heal, and we know that they exist. We also know that they have certain characteristics.

[01:40:19] One of them is that these signals are unpolarized. And what it means is that they're are sent in all direction. The sun isn't like a beam that's shaped in bizarre shapes like the way we do with 5G, for example. So, that's called polarizing a signal. So, you'll have an antenna and you'll have a phone, and the phone will send the signal, but instead of sending a signal that is in all direction, it will send it in one direction.

[01:40:50] But not only that, but it will be shaped in a treaty environment so that the antenna can recognize, this is the phone. And that's, let's say, a very basic way of explaining it because I'm not an engineer. But you have different ways that we play with the signals to make it better able to be faster signal, and that phone A doesn't talk to phone B because this one is listening to a funny cat video on YouTube and this one is having a conversation. And you don't want to have the two to disrupt, basically.

[01:41:29] So, we change the signals. We engineer the signals in ways that are even more unnatural as we go higher in the generations. So, that's something that's very important. What does it mean? Well, when you get to 5G, even if you took an EMF meter and you saw a lower number in, let's say, the amount of electrosmog and NBN that you measure, the average person would say, oh, cool, it's half the usual that I read around my vicinity or in my home, so I'm safe.

[01:42:03] Well, no. Maybe it's, in fact, 10 times more dangerous, and we don't know that because 5G is more engineered, more chaotic than ever before. And at the moment, that's theory, but that's supported by the different studies on animals, on plants, and on humans that support the idea that the more you have pulsation compared to a signal that's continuous in nature. If you have the earth's magnetic field, it's continuous. If you have the sun, it's continuous. There is no one playing with a signal in artificial ways.

[01:42:42] So, if you play with the signal, you have more effects. You could see, for example, more oxidative damage in rats. And that's across the board very consistently the more you play with the signal and the more you make it, I guess, extraterrestrial to the body or foreign, the more effects you see. So, the problem with new technologies is not even just the amount or the density of electrosmog, it's also how each unit of electrosmog is impacting us.

[01:43:15] And we could call it like the deep biological effect potential, the potential to disrupt human biology. And if people want to get more about this idea, I guess the best resource is a guy called Pavel Wipizowski, who's an engineer from Poland, working on that theory and that understanding. He understands engineering. He understands science very well and also medicine. And he's working on, let's say, the first theory around that to try to assess how could we better—basically, if you take an EMF meter in the environment, you just see a number. It doesn't tell you exactly.

[01:43:55] Well, how much is it disruptive to my body really? Right? If you have 4G, and 3G, and different sources. So, we need a more complex and complete understanding to be able to better assess the biological effect. So, he's working on that. I have an interview that's going to be on my new podcast. In fact, a three-part series with that guy because he's such a geek, and we really have a lot of fun geeking out on these things. So, 5G, my biggest concern is densification, more antennas, but then, more chaos per unit of radiation. So, even in the lower frequency range, right?

[01:44:32] You talked about the first frequency range as being rolled out. Basically, they have the 4G antennas. They just installed an upgrade, and then there's a 5G-enabled thing. It's fairly quicker. Sometimes, it can achieve greater speeds. But how can they really achieve greater speeds? Well, it's by having more sophisticated modulation patterns in a way that they play with signal. And this is part of the reason that they're able to achieve such speed and connectivity.

[01:45:03] And 5G, when it comes to privacy, it's a huge issue. And that's not my specialty. But just looking at how it's been rolled out in China, for example, it's not just 5G, but it's, I guess, the Internet of Things as a whole. There is a huge question, too, that everyone needs to ask themselves, when looking at the Chinese example, is it where we want to move as a society? China has a blacklist of millions of people who have reduced rights because they talk on podcasts like you and I do, and the Communist Party doesn't like that or they have crossed the streets, like the jaywalked or something stupid sometimes.

[01:45:56] You can get different levels of penalty. And that's kind of scary that this is happening in a population of 1.4 Billion people. And in the meantime, for us, I think here in Quebec, I would ask the average person, it kind of sounds like a sci-fi movie. No, it probably doesn't exist. Well, in China, because of all these cameras and because of this hyper-connectivity and all these objects, they will find you, they will recognize your face, they will recognize your voice.

[01:46:25] And I guess it's an aspect of 5G. If you multiplied the antenna as you install them everywhere, you give much more power to surveillance technology. So, that's a big concern. I'm not against surveillance. Again, a lot of people could say, oh, I have nothing to hide. Cool. Perfect. But it's the potential for misuse of the technology. I don't know. If right now, you trust the president of the United States, cool, perfect, you love him. But what about in four or five presidents?

[01:47:00] Maybe it's going to be someone who is more of an extremist, and then the way they're going to use the technology that's in place, well, now, they decide what to do with the antennas. So, it's the potential to spy on people or even use it for nefarious racial profiling or religion profiling, who knows? And for me, that's a huge concern also, the fact that we're installing all these things and moving in the direction where it gives a lot of people the power to use surveillance technology for whatever agendas that they like at the moment.

[01:47:38] And we, as citizens, are kind of, oops, it's there, how can we roll it back? I mean, I don't know how exactly to fight back against that, but to demand that, you know what, this is the smart city idea. Again, 5G, smart technologies, Internet of Things is kind of all intertwined right now. And it's an idea that's being pushed. But when you look under the hood, it's more of a marketing idea and a technologist wet dream than a real solution for humanity that's going to raise everyone towards greater health and greater well-being.

[01:48:21] It's cool gadgets and surveillance technologies for a few companies. There's been discussions among them. I think it's Peter Schutte or it's in the 5G Summit by Josh del Sol and Sayer Ji from Green Men Info. And I'm sorry, I'm just butchering his name. Basically, he's very critical. He's an expert in telecom, basically infrastructure. And he says, "You know what, 5G is more like a marketing trick right now because the first thing we should demand for is fiber optics to the premise."

[01:48:59] So, in other words, what they use right now for 5G antennas, which is super ironic, like how does the internet go to the 5G antenna? Right? Some people, well, maybe it's another antenna. Well, what about this antenna? Well, normally, they run fiber optics that are cables where the signal travels as light, and it's extremely fast. Way, way, way faster than 5G. It can be in the billions of times faster than 5G because it's in the wire and not in the air. The air isn't a good way to transmit a signal, it's just a convenient one.

[01:49:35] So, they run the fiber optic to the antennas. Sometimes, they also use point-to-point communications. So, sometimes, it's other scenarios, but most of the time, they will connect the antennas via wire, and then the 5G will connect to users via wireless. So, sometimes, if they have this plan to run, for example, in residential areas, they want to install one 5G antenna every three to 12 homes. Well, that's a lot of densification.

[01:50:00] And the wire, the fiber optics will be rolled out right up to the antenna, like 15 feet from your home, but they decide not to take the wire and plug it inside your home on your Wi-Fi router and have everyone have ethernet cables because it will kind of kill the industry, right? So, it's really a wireless push right now. 5G is part of this corporate agenda. They want to push wireless. They make money with wireless. Wired, well, they wouldn't make a lot of money.

[01:50:36] So, it's really something they try to convince people that they need to go wireless, everything, ditch your landline, wired internet, it's old stuff, right? It's kind of for people who don't understand how technology works. And it's really this push towards more and more wireless, unfortunately. So, 5G, I guess it's a new technology, but also a push for a global use of wireless like anything we've seen before, really. And unfortunately, it's going to move us in a direction where the health effects are going to be worse.

[01:51:14]Luke Storey:  So, going back to where we are in terms of the technological progress, people, I think, in a city here like LA are freaking out because now, 5G is active and live. They don't know the difference between the frequencies being used in the current version of 5G and what people are really afraid of, which is the short-range millimeter wave gigahertz, whatever it is, 24 to 80 gigahertz or whatever. I forgot the numbers, but break down like the difference between those two stages of 5G.

[01:51:57] Now, I'm not excited about the current stage of 5G because they're just more electrosmog in the environment where I live altogether. I mean, I tested it here the other day with my friend Brian Hoyer, and I want to get into some of that also, like how we test in the meters, and what ones work for what, and what don't. But we went and tested the neighborhood, and there is indeed 5G here in the 600-megahertz range, which is what's claimed on the T-Mobile side.

[01:52:24] But we've also gone around and tested with his very sophisticated equipment, trying to find things within, I think, 30- to 80-gigahertz range on some of these new-fangled street light cell towers and stuff to see if we can pick up those frequencies. And we really are unable to really pick anything up within that range, which tells us that that level of 5G is not active, at least in the areas where we tested. Some say that in downtown LA, they've got that live, the millimeter wave stuff.

[01:52:54] We've picked up some radar, and military things, and other things like that, but not the specific range that's supposed to be the next 5G. So, perhaps, tell us about what stage we're in and what the different towers look like and do. Because I think what I used to think around LA when I saw these new street light towers pop up, these really weird ones that are very close to businesses and homes, I thought that was all the 5G. But when we've tested them, they're just transmitting the frequencies of 4G.

[01:53:25]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah. Well, they're the same frequencies. But again, the health effects might be worse at equal power level, and that's something to talk about. But mainly, the first part of the rollout is the FR1, frequency range one. And that's, at the moment in the US, the bulk of the 5G service is 600 megahertz to 6 gigahertz, around that. And the good news is that with the average EMF meter, if you just buy a cheap one, you would see it on your meter.

[01:53:57] Again, the problem is that it wouldn't differentiate 5G, 4G, 3G, so it doesn't tell you exactly how it impacts you, but you can at least measure environment, see a before and after if you do shielding or if you get away from the city. So, your standard meter is basically all of 5G, except some applications right now that are being used in downtown areas that I'm aware of where they've done testing basically for what's called the FR2.

[01:54:30] And the FR2, there are certain bands that are going to be used around, let me find, it's 12, it can go up to 60, but most of them, the millimeter wave starts at 20 gigahertz more or less. So, it will be 20 to 40 around that area. And there's even applications for a new type of Wi-Fi that's trying to emerge. I don't know if it will be really a thing because it's a technology that's in its infancy. And I have seen a few articles that talked about the fact that technologists aren't really picking up on it, but it would have been 60 gigahertz for Wi-Fi because there's just a technicality, but that's an unlicensed band.

[01:55:24] So, in other words, anyone can use it at any time, whereas other bands like you have certain that, let's say, 12 to 13 gigahertz would be purchased by Verizon. And then, 13.5 to 14.5 would be purchased by AT&T. So, each one has their highway of information that they can use. So, as we move forward to the higher millimeter wave bands, what's going to be different is these antennas, I'm not positive if it's going to be brand-new antennas or if the current antennas have already this capability, but they need to install a lot of them because this is basically a line of sight technology.

[01:56:10] So, imagine you're walking on the street, if you come around the corner in the street, well, the millimeter wave has a hard time really finding you. Sometimes, it's going to use some technologies to bounce off buildings and certain reflective surfaces to still find a signal. But mostly, it's going to connect you to a different antenna every couple seconds, 30 seconds, when you walk by. So, there's going to be intense densification in urban areas. But it's something that's costly and hard to implement in areas where there's not a lot of people.

[01:56:45] So, it's more likely than not going to be a technology where there is a lot of people, where people meet, maybe especially at the beginning streets where people do business. So, downtown areas, maybe areas with bars, like the cool neighborhoods with bars. So, we're going to put a lot of 5G antennas. And then, people are going to walk around and the antenna is going to literally point at your phone as best as they can. And of course, there's kind of the side effect is going to hit other body parts and what not.

[01:57:17] And this is when millimeter waves come into play because it's way, way, way faster. It gives you the ability to transfer data at a much higher speed because you go up in the higher frequency range. And there is this perception at the moment that the higher you go in frequency, the more side effects. And it's not necessarily true. We don't know exactly what the effects will be. Personally, I think it will be pretty bad. Don't get me wrong. But I don't know how it will compare on a biological standpoint to other technologies.

[01:57:55] In the end, millimeter wave technology has been studied. There are older studies on it. But the way they're, again, playing with the signal, who knows what it's going to do to human beings. And really, geez, the problem in everyone that wants to oppose that 5G rollout is really that we should be reducing our electrosmog exposure based on the studies. And we should have done that long time ago if it wasn't from the huge—again, you want to talk about corporate interests, just study what kind of money is there to be made in wireless and tech. That's huge.

[01:58:35] And folks, this is bigger than Big Pharma, so imagine how much push there is to make sure that it takes as much as many decades as possible before this stuff is mandated at lower levels, and we start reducing levels. At the moment, they're just basically controlling essentially the FCC that's supposedly the regulatory agency, although they have zero medical people, the FCC. So, it's a bizarre state of affair. It's mostly engineers and industry people that are responsible for setting guidelines for health.

[01:59:17] So, there is no one really looking at health in these bodies. There is also ICNR, the international agency that's supposed to be independent, but investigative journalists from Europe from a group called Investigate Europe did a completely disastrous hit piece on ICNR in 2018, calling it basically an industry cartel. And ICNR, and ARPANSA in Australia, and the FCC in the US, and all of these agencies have been controlled by the industry for decades or greatly influenced.

[01:59:53] If you have a lot of people on the board, you can hamper decisions and play around with the regulations. And basically, the state of affair is, well, nothing is dangerous, we can just do business as usual, and there is no one in our way. So, this is why, really, we should oppose 5G, it is straight up silly that the science is starting to show that it's going to be very close to a class one carcinogen like tobacco smoke. This is where it's moving towards.

[02:00:26] I really doubt it's going to be easy to have this classification at the WHO as if the WHO itself is really the best body to trusted based on the rest of that freaking conversation. But, anyway, they still classify EMFs as a class 2B carcinogen in 2011, and that in itself made waves around the world. But the same scientists were in this work group for EMFs since 2011, a lot of them say, based on the new science that has come out in the last 10 years, when it comes to how much of a carcinogen, is it radiofrequency?

[02:01:04] That's your cellphone, Bluetooth, and Wi-Fi, we should probably reclassify as 2A, probable carcinogen, which is very high or one. And if it's one, it's tobacco smoke, asbestos. If it's one, it will be regulated worldwide. But how can you do that in a society that wants the opposite? We want faster signal, more wireless, more wireless, more wireless. And against an industry that's multi-trillion. So, it's going to be especially difficult.

[02:01:30] So, 5G to me is a big problem because it's adding up and adding up to the entire problem we had before, and this millimeter wave thing will only—who knows what it's going to create on top of everything that we're seeing at the moment, including the very real and extremely dense science-proven, I would say completely proven that EMFs will reduce your sperm count, quality, motility, all aspects of male fertility. There's no denying that the Mayo Clinic researchers, the Cleveland Clinic of all people, mainstream researchers, mainstream fertility experts say, don't put a cell phone in your pocket.

[02:02:18] And that's already a done deal. There's been a done deal for a few years now, that they've been saying that. And yet, I mean, the average person has a cellphone in their pocket. It's not mandated. There's no warning. They can't even vote on a warning because the industry lobbying pushback would be so huge. So, it's really advancing at a snail's pace right now, and other activists, and lawmakers, and incredible nonprofits are fighting that fight, trying to do their thing and lobby at a city level, at a state level, at a country level to make sure that regulators understand the scope of the problem because they've been sold a bill of goods.

[02:03:04] They've been influenced to say, well, if you want to be modern in New York City, well, it's all 5G because you're going to be a modern city. If you miss on installing 5G, you're going to be an old, rusty city, and you won't make it in the top charts of the most tech savvy cities in the world. So, it's kind of a trend at the moment. And there's a lot of hype behind it. And that's why they're moving with the 5G rollout. The millimeter wave band, I don't know exactly when it's going to be used.

[02:03:37] I think that in the industry, again, there's so much hype and so much money that they were kind of saying, oh, it's going to be 2019. Oh, no, now, it's going to be 2020. Oh, no, now, it's going to be 2021. It's moving towards that, the 5G phones were the main thing, I guess, slowing down that rollout because there weren't a lot of 5G phones. Now, there's a handful. And it can be safe to conclude, 2021, every phone on the market that's coming out will have 5G capabilities. And after that, they need to install the infrastructure that is a lot of millions and billions invested.

[02:04:15] And then, we're going to see, unfortunately, huge densification of electrosmog in cities, especially in downtown areas. So, what can I say, like if you live in densely populated areas, you already have to deal with, well, viral diseases, wink, wink, and transmission of all sorts of bugs, stress, traffic, smog, and then electro smog is just adding on top of it. So, being healthy in a very, very densely populated area, I think it's safe to say it will become increasingly difficult. Someday, it's nothing new to say. It's just that it's just another factor. What makes it especially dangerous is that it's being massively denied that it's a problem.

[02:05:05]Luke Storey:  And I think this is where the corporate powers that be and their convoluted relationship with media are really starting to rear their ugly head.

[02:05:20]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, I know what you're talking about.

[02:05:23]Luke Storey:  Because of the correlation some people have made between the 5G and Wuhan, China becoming activated and I think it was 2019, and then all of these people falling ill and the correlations between 5G in different Italian cities and New York City, et cetera, there is some overlay of the map of where 5Gs roll out and where the worst hit areas of this virus are. And so, where the media reaction has gone is that it's a conspiracy theory that people are saying 5G causes sickness that we're calling COVID.

[02:05:59] And I've not heard anyone say that. What I've heard, are very credible scientific people, for the most part, saying that it's known that radiation damages your immune system and lowers your immunity, making you more susceptible to all sorts of different pathogens, one of which being viruses. And so, when that theory or that observation came to light, then you have media organizations now banning any news reports or independent media like this just bringing up the conversation, hey, is there any correlation between public health, and safety, and our susceptibility to viruses like COVID-19 and the proliferation of radiation in our urban centers? Like that seems like a really valid question to ask.

[02:06:54]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah.

[02:06:54]Luke Storey:  Now, just talking negatively about 5G is getting you banned from different platforms, which is terrifying and should sound the alarm for people. Obviously, it's dangerous and not good. Otherwise, like why would these news organizations care that we're talking about it? I mean, that's just like it's already kind of admitting their guilt just by the censorship behavior. And what's really funny to me, and I'm not recommending that people do this, I don't think this is a good strategy.

[02:07:27] I think the legal route that so many great people are taking is the strategy to push against this, but someone just this morning text me an article that like 50 cell towers had been burned up in the UK in the last couple of days or something because people are like, fuck this, we don't want this here. Again, don't think that's a great strategy because then, it further paints everyone as lunatics that wants to be tested as safe. So, it's not effective. But there was a little part of me that's like, God, you got 50-

[02:07:56]Nicolas Pineault:  For a second, I must admit, sometimes, I see that, I'm like, bastards, but at the same time, yeah, I know what you're saying. I want to talk about, well, first, my business. Oh, no. My agenda, my business—well, I'll be banned. I mean, you know what, when I started talking about COVID, I told myself, and I told my wife and business partner, she didn't like it for many reasons. But I was like, well, I have to talk about it. I have a moral responsibility because I'm finding that I don't think the numbers really match the reaction, and I have a moral responsibility to talk about it.

[02:08:37] I was launching my freaking blog at the same time. So, basically, I can conclude that I'm going to be banned from search results eventually. I'm going to be banned from advertising on Facebook and maybe even having a Facebook page meeting, maybe my personal profile is going to be banned. I don't know what steps are going to be taken by the tech giants. I'll be banned from Reddit. I'll be banned from LinkedIn. I'll be banned from Amazon eventually.

[02:09:01] So, all these tech giants are taking tremendous steps to control information around COVID in the name of fighting misinformation. And now, it has spilled over to 5G, like you said. And when I saw that, I was like, there you go. I called it. I called it three years ago. I was talking to my wife. I was like, you know what, a lot of vaccine information has started to get censored on these media platforms. I bet you that eventually, will be 5G. There you go. It was just a matter of time.

[02:09:33] And again, not conspiracy, I think that in the tech industry, there's a dangerous utopia going on. And I don't know how they think, really. I want to interview someone on my—I have a new podcast I'm launching, Smarter Tech, and I want to interview someone from the industry who thinks it's a good idea that Facebook, Google, Amazon and all of this group of tech giants control messages because it's the right thing to do for your money because misinformation is killing people. I want to hear them.

[02:10:14] And then, I want to challenge them. Well, okay, guys, who decides what is true? And then, they will say, "Well, it's the WHO?" Is the WHO independent? Clearly not. So, we have a problem right there. So, it means that through corporate agendas that are imposed on certain organizations that are supposedly independent, we will get that misinformation, that censorship coming from whoever is interested in WHO, in the FCC, so that would be the telecom giants, in the official organizations.

[02:10:52] And then, it will spill over to censorship at the Google, and Facebook, and Reddit, and LinkedIn, and Amazon levels. And then, all of a sudden, you can control an entire population. You control the narrative. Basically, you control what is true for humanity. This is an extreme danger to democracy. And I sure hope that these guys know what they're doing and that if they ban everything that's said on vaccines, I sure hope that every single vaccine that will ever be created in the history of future mankind will be safe and effective, but guess what, there will probably be one or two vaccines that kill people because not all technologies are completely safe per se.

[02:11:40] So, if we get the idea that all of a sudden, we cannot talk about vaccine safety, where will be the debate? It will be nowhere. It's madness. You cannot do that. You cannot do that. And not talking about the fact that Facebook and Google have investors, and these investors, part of it is Big Pharma. So, I mean, it gets crazy. But again, conflict of interest. Why would you censor all information on 5G? It doesn't make sense. It's like putting everyone in the conspiracy theory etiquette and just saying, yeah, these guys are crazy anyway and 5G is safe. Are you kidding me?

[02:12:21] Again, it's a huge, slippery slope, I think. But what's going to happen, though? And I mean, I heard a great interview Dr. Mercola did with someone who's a professor studying kind of how Google might modify search results to be in line with certain agendas, and it's fascinating work. Very, very credible professor. I cannot recall his name. But basically, he said, "Well, people eventually are going to get smarter and they're going to get on a new search engine. They're going to purchase products from other companies. They're going to leave Facebook."

[02:12:59] So, I think that very soon, I'll start recommending my readers to start using other platforms because, geez, I mean, I want to talk about 5G, I want to be informed, you want to inform your friends. And if I want to be calm, and rational, and not completely lunatic about 5G, I cannot even talk about it now? Well, that's not democracy. That's not free speech. And that's just unacceptable to lump an entire topic. I mean, imagine the entire topic of the future use of wireless radiation all of a sudden has been censored on the planet or it's like in the process of disappearing.

[02:13:41] Geez, come on. It's like you do the same with pesticides, all of a sudden, everyone thinks pesticides are safe and effective. So, I find it completely crazy, Luke. But at the same time, there's a response to that, and it's called talking to each other, and going on other platforms that are independent. And eventually, tech giants will actually have to change their behavior because they'll start losing money. That's how we can impact that, I think.

[02:14:08]Luke Storey:  Yeah, that's a great point as I live-stream on Facebook and Instagram right now.

[02:14:13]Nicolas Pineault:  Whoops. Yeah, but we'll be banned. We'll both be bad eventually. It's like a question of time. That's unfortunate.

[02:14:20]Luke Storey:  It's like I guess the more integrity platforms that are now, of course, going to emerge and heads up any entrepreneurs, like what an amazing opportunity we have to build robust, secure communication technologies within social media that are uncensored. What an amazing opportunity. So, anyone listening, like, hello, here's your chance. But it's like I wonder sometimes, when do we make the jump? Because as much as like I'm sitting here live-streaming on Instagram and Facebook, which obviously, Facebook owns Instagram and you know they're compromised, you know that they're evil.

[02:15:06] I mean, it is, it's just evil. Like think of how many families are going to be harmed because they can't research the safety of immunizations or how many people are going to be—unknowingly, like I was for three fucking years with a cell tower next to my bedroom that almost killed my ass because now, we can't talk about like, hey, is this safe? Like how far should you live from a cell tower? Which type of tower? But when do we make the jump? Like when do I really say like all right, goodbye.

[02:15:35] And these followers that I built and this kind of perceived value that I have in my social platforms and all of the content that I've dumped into them, it's like when do we trust these new platforms enough that they're going to be secure, and robust, and well-trafficked, where we literally just shut down the old paradigm accounts and just leave Facebook, leave Instagram, leave Twitter, don't use Google, have our own thing.

[02:16:05] I think it's something that we're going to be forced, many of us, to make those jumps and make those decisions, but we'd like to because I love the platforms right now for what they were built for, to reach people and communicate different ideas. But when they start to be controlled from the upper room there, it gets very George Orwell, and really bizarre, and scary when you see like people being taken down now that are just yet all critical of some of these like obviously controversial topics that really do need to be discussed in the interest of public health and just the future of our civil liberties. It's insane.

[02:16:50] And on the other side of that, it's all theater. And I recognize this whole thing is just kind of a game that is called life. And it all is an illusion in one sense, meaning that it's just kind of part of the melodrama, and we're just caught up in this myopic point of view in our evolution right now and all will be well. But at the same time, I don't feel comfortable just sitting back, and doing nothing, and not saying anything, and just going like, oh, it will all work out in the end.

[02:17:15] It will, but we have to put up some kind of a conscious fight or resistance, or present at least alternatives to the direction things are going now. So, that's kind of where I am with that. It's sort of this love-hate relationship with the technology. And I'm watching people that I'm about to interview, like David Icke, and now, I'm like, holy shit, the London Real, which is a very middle of the road, like I'm way more controversial than Brian Rose, and I have people on that are like way further out there than he does, I think.

[02:17:50] But because his reach is so much bigger now, he's being kicked off LinkedIn and banned from YouTube. And it's like that's that guy's livelihood just for giving a platform to someone like David Icke to give his opinions, whether they be valid or not, about like what this whole pandemic is and all of that. It's getting really close to home for me now, like, oh shit. Now is when my own personal integrity is starting to get closer to that line, like when do I sell out or not? And do I start to edit myself, or turn down requests for guests, or not pursue certain guests because they're going to be controversial, or get my revenue source cut off because I gave them a platform?

[02:18:30] I think someone told me Dr. Shiva just got banned from Facebook and I'm like, "What?" Like to me, he's not even controversial at all. Like it's just very common sense. So, yeah, it's a strange time we live in, man. I do want to cover with you, though, a couple of things that have been requested by people. And that is when it comes to the EMF issue, I don't think anyone with half a brain can argue that living surrounded by these invisible fields is unhealthy, and that while we want to maintain a positive attitude instead of fear and anxiety, which compounds the physical risks that we're enduring when we want to just be logical and try to mitigate those things when it comes to our living environment, what I always recommend to people is like they want to know what meters to buy and stuff.

[02:19:23] If I say, if you live anywhere near a city or a large town, like just save the money and all the meters, and hire someone to come do an analysis of your living apartment, and then shield your kids' room and your bedroom. And at least while you sleep, live in as EMF-free environment as you can. And I think people are waking up to that concept of like don't get caught up in the minutia of like what's happening, just fix it in a blanket way, which can be quite expensive. Maybe you can speak to that. But when it comes to 5G, and the different frequencies that are being used now, and the millimeter waves, do the shielding paints, and fabrics, and all the things we can do to create a more harmonious environment within our homes or offices work?

[02:20:14] Like is there a way to protect yourself against 5G? Like I have my LAMBS radiation-proof underwear now, which are one of my sponsors, but like one of my favorite sponsors because thank God, this company exists. We need more of this like I want all my clothes to be EMF-proof all the time, which is maybe an idea that I'll toy with at some point having a fashion background. But are there simple things we can do without getting caught up in the paranoia to just make our bedroom safe even against the oncoming onslaught of all these new frequencies that we're being bombarded with?

[02:20:48]Nicolas Pineault:  Yeah, the advance solutions are still going to work. It's just a matter of ensuring that the paints you use, or doors, window films, or curtains, and floor mats, and bed canopies. So, different types of shielding fabric that's kind of intertwined with silver, or copper, or even stainless steel. So, all these technologies need to be tested at higher frequencies down the road. One of the problems is the labs, I am not aware of labs that do it.

[02:21:27] If they do it, they're probably just a few around the world that do it. But eventually, it will become more of a thing because right now, there's not a lot of labs for these materials because there's not a lot of these frequencies being used for many applications in today's society. So, it will evolve. And companies like LAMBS will have to test their boxers on higher frequencies because it's a good question. You want to steel your body. Maybe you'll have to have an upgrade, like have the 5G-ready boxers.

[02:22:00] I mean, in the end, it's that as technology changes, we'll have to adapt to it. But I've seen that EMF-blocking paints. I know that Y Shield and the T98 Alpha from GEOVITALl that Brian Hoyer sometimes recommend. These two paints are ones that come to mind, are good up to, I think, 100 gigahertz, have been tested, if I'm not mistaken. So, they have shielding efficacy in this higher millimeter wave range. I guess the good news in the midst of the terrible news of this entire podcast is that millimeter waves do have a difficult time getting through objects overall.

[02:22:42] So, if you're inside a building, it's a line of sight technology for a reason. It will have a difficult time entering your home per se, if there is a lot of stuff blocking it. Wi-Fis can penetrate through wood and almost anything besides maybe if you have a lot of rock or big concrete walls in a condo, for example, would block it pretty well. But if you have a huge window, well, it's inviting the signals in, come on. So, basically, you have to keep that in mind, and that the materials will evolve.

[02:23:18] And normally, you have mitigation specialist, you mentioned Brian Hoyer, most building biologists, they're working on that actively. That's their livelihood. So, I would refer to them and ask your questions like, will this last? Right? If I'm to shield a room, will it last to 5G, and then 6G. Well, 6G, we don't know because we don't even know what it's going to look like. So, obviously new problems will demand newer solutions as well. But normally, it will last and it can be tested in the higher millimeter wave range.

[02:23:50] So, that way, you don't have to redo an entire like $10,000 two-bedroom shielding job for nothing, right? You don't want to do that. So, normally, they are aware of the problem and that it needs to be shielded against. And I guess another use of millimeter wave range, and in that range is satellites. And I mean, I'll have to leave in a few minutes here, but that's another use where it will be global exposure to higher densities that can arguably be very high.

[02:24:25] So, also people looking to shield that have to think, yeah, well, I'm in a rural area, there's no problem, no millimeter waves. Well, Elon Musk, has 42,000 satellites planned for you coming around the globe, and he's not the only one. So, a lot of corporations are doing global internet. It will mean that if you want to do a shielding job, you might as well make sure that you block millimeter waves because some of it will be coming from the sky now.

[02:24:55] And again, geez, if some people have been listening for, what, three hours and they're like, come on, another problem? Well, it's just new applications, right? So, global internet on top of 5G, and Internet of Things, and whatnot, why not? Because it will give almost free internet to everyone at least 1 megabyte per second. On the educational and democracy standpoint, it can be a good idea in theory. I think in practice, it's a horrible idea simply because the science we have at the moment just doesn't support the idea that rolling satellites around the planet to send out signals towards everyone is a good idea.

[02:25:34] It's just quite the opposite. I think there will be global opposition. We're already seeing that a little bit, but it will be growing. And in the end, these enterprises like the satellites, I think they will fail. I think they've put their eggs in a very dangerous basket. And I just saw, I recorded an episode on my podcast about that, that the insurers, you will not find a big insurance company in the world who will basically insure against health defects from EMFs.

[02:26:09] And Lloyd's of London, one of the biggest ones, has completely left the boat a few years back. And the top three reinsurers on the planet have left the boat. So, what they say is they put provisions in all of their contracts. They do not cover for any health damages related to EMFs. And that's because they're convinced that it's a huge liability, basically, because they're like, well, it's kind of a carcinogen and it's being rolled out everywhere, so we're not paying for that.

[02:26:43] And it's been in discussion for decades. Even back when the first lawsuits for alleged brain cancer is being caused by cellphones in the early days of Nokia, the already insurers were starting to say, oh, my God, this is probably the next asbestos, so we're going to kind of move away from that. So, it just tells you that, well, who's going to pay, it's probably the users, not the companies. But keep that in mind when you do anything at home that basically, you can do two things.

[02:27:16] The first thing you can do is get rid of your devices, turn them off, remove them, not have them. It's easier said than done. You do one step at a time. I'm not for an extremist or for a judgmental approach to people who have Bluetooth things and whatnot, but minimize your exposure. So, it means, if you have a Bluetooth toaster, well, okay, good for you, but unplug it. Make sure it's not on 24/7. Plug it when you need it or maybe when you leave home and you want your freaking toast to be ready in time. I don't know what fancy use you want from your technology.

[02:27:49] And if you're into these things, fine, but it won't support your health. And it will probably do the opposite. So, just keep that in mind. Minimize your use, turn off Wi-Fi, try to go wired. And then, the second thing you can do is to shield against your environment. The stuff you cannot turn off, the satellites, and the 5G. And what you've said, Luke, is exactly that, shielding the bedroom is the number one thing to do. Shielding an entire place if you have the means to do it, it could be a thing.

[02:28:15] But the bedroom is so important. And Brian, I've done a collaboration lately with Brian Hoyer. Actually, I don't know when it's going to be posted, but we're working on a course, and basically, we're teaching people how to clean up their environment. And when it comes to the exterior, the best you can do again is just shield your bedroom. It's an investment. There's no like magic thing that you can install that much that's going to protect you 100%. The shielded room will protect you 100% at night. It can essentially bring you back to a very, very natural level and just make your body more resilient.

[02:28:58] I guess it's akin to deciding to living in New York City and never wanting to breathe in poisonous air. Well, how do you do that exactly? You wear a mask like in '95, day in, day out. People don't do that. They breathe in the smog, right? So, at home, you might have the air puff filters in your bedroom, right? So, it's the same idea. So, think about it in this way, try to control your home, your stuff, your bedroom as best as you can. And then, if you live in New York City and you have lungs problem, maybe it's time to move, right? Same thing for electrosmog. You feel sensitive, you struggle, you have so many health issues. Well, maybe it's time to move on to another place.

[02:29:42]Luke Storey:  Well, I think that's a sober analysis and recommendation, and falls in line with what I always recommend to people. And I'll just add to that, I think that it's really important rather than trying to become an engineer yourself, save up some money, hire a building biologist like our mutual friend, Brian Hoyer, to accurately assess your house because things could be a lot better than you think they are within your house. I have a friend of mine who just had this other guy who's in LA named Oram Miller who's big-

[02:30:15]Nicolas Pineault:  Oh, yeah. He's one of the top ones. Very, very nice guy.

[02:30:18]Luke Storey:  My buddy's place. And he sent me an e-mail, he said, "Man, he came out and he said, there's a couple of things I've got to tweak, but basically, inside my house is like as good as camping." He lives in, but he might have been freaked out. I'm getting 5G radiation. I'm going to get cancer. And you get a guy that comes in with $30,000 worth of meters, and knows how to use them, and does the test, and he's like, no, you're actually pretty good. You're on a great block right here, you're next to the ocean or in a valley or whatever the case may be. So, I think in some cases, your exposure is much worse than you think it's going to be.

[02:30:50] And in some cases, it's not actually that bad. So, saving up a few hundred bucks. I mean, I think most these guys really charge $800, $1,000 or depending on the size of your home. If you're in a smaller apartment, it could be less. But getting someone who's got the gear, knows how to use it, and can come give you like an unbiased scientific appraisal of what your environment looks like, and then make some recommendations in terms of what the highest priority, lowest hanging fruit issues are. For me, for example, in my home, one of the reasons I moved to this house is because it had no RF here at all, there was no cell service. And I was like, yes.

[02:31:28]Nicolas Pineault:  Nice.

[02:31:28]Luke Storey:  Of course, I didn't think that through. That meant, now, I have to have Wi-Fi on in the house all the time. Otherwise, my phone won't work. So, I was like, goddammit, kind of shot myself in the foot on that one, but at least I'm not next to a cell tower. And then, what I discovered was, which I had no way of testing for when I came and looked at this place, was that there's bad wiring in the house. And then, some of the areas in the house, there's insanely high magnetic fields because there's ungrounded wires or something wacky going on with the circuit breaker, et cetera.

[02:31:56] And so, now, when I sleep, I've elected to manually turn off the breakers in the bedroom to stop that magnetic field. I would have never known that, though, and I could have bought a bunch of meters off Amazon and tried to figure it out. I would have never been able to figure out that's what was causing that without a professional coming in, and turning one breaker off, and testing, and turning it back on, and testing. And I mean, Brian Hoyer was in here for hours testing everything to discover that. And then, the quickest fix is to mitigate it. So, I just told people like, you don't need to learn all this shit yourself, there's someone else who's made a living and a life mission out of learning it, just hire them and listen to what they say.

[02:32:36]Nicolas Pineault:  I agree. I agree 100%. A lot of people tried to even shield by themselves or ask me, yeah, I'm kind of doing this. Like what is the best shielding materials? And I'm like, "Well, I wouldn't even play with it myself, even with my experience, because I don't have the hands-on engineering side of it." So, I would hire, exactly what you said. That's perfect advice right there.

[02:32:58]Luke Storey:  So, like if your toilet was spewing good God knows what everywhere, would you get out your wrenches and try to fix your goddamn plumbing? No. You call a plumber, like that's their job.

[02:33:08]Nicolas Pineault:  Same thing.

[02:33:10]Luke Storey:  Have mitigation specialists or building biologists, and that's their job, and they'll come in. And like I said, you might be pleasantly surprised that your house is relatively mellow depending on where you live. It's a roulette or kind of a crap shoot on how bad it's going to be. And you might be really good in one area, you're not getting cell tower exposure, but you have a magnetic field. And that might be much easier to fix than moving your entire life to a different neighborhood because you're in the line of fire of a cell tower or something like that.

[02:33:41] So, with that, I also like to add that we're all going to leave these bodies at some point, and that being totally paranoid, and living in an excited state, a sympathetic nervous system state where you're feeling like everything around you is trying to kill you is probably worse for you than your Wi-Fi router being on in your office. So, it's like that delicate balance of awareness, and just kind of surrendering, and letting go, and understanding there's many things that are just outside of our control. I mean, if Elon Musk is evil enough to pop satellites in the air that send down 60 gigahertz of radiation all over an entire swath of land, then like what are you going to do? You can't leave Earth right now.

[02:34:28]Nicolas Pineault:  Exactly. Oh, maybe that there will be a reason to go to Mars.

[02:34:31]Luke Storey:  Yeah, right. He's going to create a problem, and then offer us the solution, Mars camp.

[02:34:37]Nicolas Pineault:  That's awesome.

[02:34:39]Luke Storey:  Made a great business move. Make the Earth inhabitable, and then create a fake habitat somewhere else. Well, man, I think we covered it. God knows, we've been gone seven-and-a-half hours here, whatever it's been. So, I want to thank you for your time and expertise. And I'd like to perhaps check in again in the near future and maybe do another episode where we kind of give an update on some of the EMF issues and things that you're discovering because I know you're here on the front lines of this, so you're a great resource to really get a snapshot of where we are. And it's, of course, evolving and changing all the time. So, thank you for doing the work that you do. Tell us about your book, website. Let's drive some traffic over to your social media and all of those things.

[02:35:23]Nicolas Pineault:  Sure. Just go to theemfguy.com. It's my new website. Everything is on there. My book is called The Non-Tinfoil Guide to EMFs. It's found on my website. There's also Amazon. But who knows, eventually, maybe will disappear from Amazon. So, that's why. That's part of the reason why I started printing my own books and shipping them from a warehouse in Michigan. So, now, if Amazon bans me, well, I'll still sell my book by myself. So, I'm still on social media platforms if you want to check me out.

[02:35:54] On YouTube, I have a few videos there. On Facebook, Nick Pineault, but that's a complicated name. Just go to my main website and you'll find all my resources. And eventually, I don't know when you're going to listen to this, but we're going to come up with a course, how to clean your home with Brian Hoyer. We don't even have a name for it yet, but it's in the projects, probably this summer once life restarts. And I hope that everyone loved the episode.

[02:36:23] And again, I mean, I'm not a COVID expert by any means, but at least I want to invite everyone to ask questions. That's important. Nothing that you know everything or start fighting on the internet over arguments, but ask questions. Where are the conflicts of interest? The questions that journalists should be asking really, but they're not. So, ask questions. Are these numbers valid? What are the numbers? And we're going to get through this. In a few weeks, things will have calmed down as far as COVID goes, especially if you're listening to this on April 16th.

[02:37:03] And after the fact, we're going to be able to look at the situation and look at the data. And if it turns out that COVID wasn't the problem it was displayed to be, well, we can keep certain people accountable for the panic or at least keep that in mind for the future. Maybe we've overreacted in what has happened, and then we'll have a calm discussion about it, then we'll be able to point towards this event being maybe when humanity fell into a little bit of panic for a while that wasn't granted, who knows? But there's going to be great lessons that's going to come out of it, if you want my opinion.

[02:37:45]Luke Storey:  Most definitely. I think we're on the verge of a global awakening as a result of the jumping the shark of the powers that be or anything. In closing, tell us who three teachers or teachings have been in your life that have influenced your work that our audience might be able to go learn some more from?

[02:38:06]Nicolas Pineault:  Geez, one is a guy you won't be able to learn from. His name is Salvatores Kelly. He's a copywriter who gave me to the love of writing. And that's when I was doing copywriting for TV, for mainstream media of all things, doing TV promos for shows, like reality shows and whatnot. It was a good patch for three years in 2010. But he taught me so many things about—I guess that's why I can do persuasive selling, and that's why I'm able to sell my information, I think.

[02:38:43] Without that, I would be a struggling author trying to make a point, but really, without the business skills behind it. Geez, another one, well, I want to mention Brian Hoyer. Geez, he's a colleague, but he's a pioneer in a lot of things he does. We communicate often. We're going to do a new course together. And he's been an inspiration, kind of same age as me, but he has fifth now? No, his fourth is for daughter, I think. I think he has an older son. Anyway, he's a father of four, traveling all around the world, very nice inspiration to me.

[02:39:21] And another one to mention, geez, I would say, Professor Oleyo Hanson from Sweden, who is a kind man, who has supported my work tremendously, gave me incredible props, and he's a high-level scientist with over 600 studies he has done in his long career. And he's still fighting the good fight, trying to inform governments all around the world, doing presentations at the parliament in different countries, European countries. And he's a big inspiration because he's such a nice man. And he knows the problem, but he always stays so calm and happy still. So, even after an entire life studying the topic, so I guess that's it.

[02:40:08]Luke Storey:  Awesome, man. Thank you. Thanks for the recommendations. And thanks for coming on the show, man. I look forward to seeing you soon.

[02:40:15]Nicolas Pineault:  Thank you, man. It was awesome. Anytime.

[02:40:32]

‍