Jennifer Sharp: Society Abandoned and Gaslit the Vaccine-Injured–Now I’m Telling Their Stories
- EPOCHTV
- Jan 18, 2023
- 44 min read
Today, we sit down with filmmaker Jennifer Sharp. After being injured by a COVID-19 vaccine shot and meeting others in the same boat, she made the documentary film, “Anecdotals.”
“I was told specifically by somebody: Your story is just an anecdote… So it’s really irresponsible for you to talk about it because you could stop people from being vaccinated, and you could be responsible for their death,” Sharp says.
Her film “Anecdotals” tells the stories of the vaccine-injured, many of whom are being gaslighted and ostracized by friends, family, and the medical community for associating their symptoms with the vaccine.
“A lot of people learned that when they went to the doctor that they could not even tell the doctor that it was a vaccine reaction. And they’ll get better care,” Sharp says.
Interview trailer:
Watch the full interview: https://www.theepochtimes.com/jennifer-sharp-society-abandoned-and-gaslit-the-vaccine-injured-now-im-telling-their-stories_4979379.html?utm_source=epochtv
FULL TRANSCRIPT Jan Jekielek:
Jennifer Sharp, such a pleasure to have you on American Thought Leaders.
Jennifer Sharp:
Thank you. It is so great to be here.
Mr. Jekielek:
Let’s start with this. When I read the words safe and effective, what’s the first thing that comes to your mind?
Ms. Sharp:
The vaccine, the Covid vaccine. Obviously, it’s like the manipulation of it.
Mr. Jekielek:
Okay, the manipulation of the vaccine or of the messaging?
Ms. Sharp:
The messaging. Catchphrase messaging. It’s funny because when I first heard safe and effective, at the beginning of the pandemic I didn’t put it with any catchphrase or anything. I’m like, “Of course they’re saying safe and effective because they have to be.” But then more and more as I’m hearing more and more people and they’re all saying the exact same thing, safe and effective, safe and effective, celebrities, television hosts, just tons of people, and then I’m like, “Wait, this is actually a manipulation, because that’s what they’re told to say.”
Mr. Jekielek:
Did you know at the time that there was a lot of money behind that, and that it was a marketing campaign?
Ms. Sharp:
I didn’t know that there was. No, honestly, I feel like if somebody would have really had a conversation with me, I probably would have figured it out in that conversation, but I just wasn’t even trying to put two and two together like that. I never thought like, “Oh, there’s this huge campaign for safe and effective.”
However, this is a tiny bit of a jump, but I just saw the documentary on Hulu, Dopesick with Michael Keaton, and it’s about the Oxycontin crisis. It talks about how when they were trying to up the dosage of Oxycontin, they would call something breakthrough pain. And if you have a patient that has breakthrough pain, that’s a reason to give them a higher amount of Oxycontin, instead of realizing that the Oxycontin wasn’t actually working or it was becoming addictive.
There was a whole campaign. I saw this in the Hulu series, and I was like, “Breakthrough pain.” And it was like, “Breakthrough infection.” Like in the Covid we have this breakthrough infection, therefore you need a booster. Now, I’m more aware and I’m seeing that all these words are marketing campaigns, and now right away I’m like, “Oh, that’s what it is.” But at the beginning I was not.
Mr. Jekielek:
Well, here we are. You’ve made this wonderful, wonderful, and sometimes heartbreaking film, Anecdotals. You went on quite a journey from, like you said, not really thinking about it to these days really thinking about it quite a lot and talking to a lot of people who’ve been forced to think about it. How did you get here?
Ms. Sharp:
It was a slow and fast process. I’ve always been somebody who asks questions. When I was a kid, I always had a hard time on true/false tests because I’d be like, “Well, true if this, but false if this.” That was me in second grade. I’ve always wanted to look at different sides and had a hard time with black and white.
But it was my vaccine injury, basically. I got vaccinated, and I had a vaccine injury. I couldn’t get my second shot, and that put me on the outside of society, it put me not in the mainstream. The mainstream was saying, “Safe and effective.” The mainstream was saying, “Get vaccinated. It’s the only way to live, otherwise you’re going to die.” And then, I was like, “Wait, they’re not talking about me. I can’t get vaccinated.”
I started to really question everything when I was told I wasn’t allowed to speak about my reaction. I was told it was irresponsible and unethical. I was specifically told by somebody, “Your story is just an anecdote. It’s just anecdotal. It’s really irresponsible for you to talk about it, because you could stop people from being vaccinated and you could be responsible for their death.”
That was the first time I asked, “When is it ever not okay to tell the truth? When is it ever okay? When is your truth not okay?” And then from that, everything was a question, everything. The whole pandemic has been a lot of questions. What about natural immunity? Why is getting the vaccine better than natural immunity?
Why am I in a support group with thousands of people who have been vaccine injured, whose lives have been ruined, and yet it’s safe and effective? It’s safe, it’s safe. I just started seeing more and more wrong things being said, and I started questioning more and more. Yes, now I question every single thing that anybody says to me, regardless.
Mr. Jekielek:
Something that strikes me about what you just said is there was this total loss of a risk-benefit analysis. Someone told you that if you even make a suggestion that there could be harm from this vaccine, maybe someone won’t be vaccinated. It’s like everybody should be vaccinated. That’s the a priori assumption. There’s no conception that there could be another side, that there is a risk, as with any vaccine. It just completely got lost. Was there a moment when you realized this?
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. When I started telling people about my reaction, and it really was from the start of my reaction, I would say, “Oh, I had a reaction from the vaccine.” And they would say, “Oh, well, it’s rare. Oh wow, sorry you had that. It’s going to happen to a few people, it definitely happens. We know vaccine reactions happen. We know they’re rare.”
And then it’s like, “How do you know they’re rare?” Because nobody’s following me, my data is nowhere. I entered it on VAERS, but once enough knowledge and enough facts came up on VAERS, they started discounting VAERS. No one is studying me, no one’s calling me, no one’s calling anybody in my group. So, how do we know it’s rare? I would just see these mechanical reactions from people. “Oh, it’s rare.”
Mr. Jekielek:
Can you tell me a little more about what specifically happened to you?
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. So, I got vaccinated. The night of the vaccine I had a reaction. It was the left side of my face, left arm, left leg, pins and needles buzzing, left ankle, left knee swollen, and it hurt to walk. I woke up in the middle of the night, the bed was dripping in sweat. Then when I woke up, I was just drenched in sweat on my left side, but my right side was totally dry, and my left side had a fever. It was hot to touch. My right side was cool.
There is this weird reaction happening all on the left side. I couldn’t feel my face. It was pretty bad. I called my mom. I’m like, “I can’t feel my face. This is weird. You can’t really feel it.” But then I just thought, “Well, maybe it’s a reaction that will go away, but it never went away.”
It definitely got a lot better, but by the time it was my third week to get the second shot, I was just like, “I can’t get the second shot.” And it never got worse than that. It was the worst during the first six weeks, and then it slowly got better.
So, I’m really lucky, but what that did was it allowed me to be a part of a support group and be a part of this community and seeing people who were way worse, who’ve lost their houses, people who are homeless, people who cannot work anymore, and they’re getting no help and no acknowledgement.
I was just blown away. On the support group, every day there’s somebody who’s like, “How do I deal with my life? How do I deal with my new life? Everything is broken down. Since I got the shot, it’s been horrible.” And these are true stories, people talking, and nobody knows about it.
So anyway, I was in the group and mine were not nearly as bad as most of the people. But I think that happened to inspire me as a filmmaker, and also to have this access to this group, and to have the energy to make a movie. Because if I was as bad as a lot of these people, I wouldn’t have had the energy to put this together.
It’s been almost two years this March, and I actually had a flare up the last week. I don’t know if it’s because I’m so stressed out with this movie. I don’t know what has made it happen, but the last three nights I couldn’t go to sleep, I was in so much pain. My whole left arm, my whole left leg, it was electric. Like when you fall asleep and your leg falls asleep and then it’s waking up. When it’s waking up it has that super buzzing and it’s like, “Ah, this really hurts.” I was like that on my whole left arm, my whole left leg for five hours and I couldn’t sleep. That was four nights ago.
Then the next night I had the same thing, but a different pain. It was more pins and needles, like stabbing, and sometimes I just have to get the stabbing away. I’m like, “Oh, there’s a pin, or there’ll be a prick right here, and if I don’t do this it won’t go away.” I still have this, and this was the last four days. Also, my palms itch a lot.
I say mine wasn’t that bad, and I say it’s not that bad because I’ve seen way worse, but still to live like this, I wonder, am I going to develop multiple sclerosis, or Parkinson’s, or what’s going on with my nerves? I don’t know, and this is still two years later.
I’m totally functional though. I was able to make a movie. I was able to do all this stuff, so I feel lucky. I downplay what happened to me. But the thing is there’s actually a lot of people like me who have this random neurological stuff, and a lot of people who don’t even know it, they don’t even realize it’s a vaccine reaction.
There’s a lot of people just on the milder side walking around with this stuff that we don’t know what it is. And then there’s the people we’re really trying to highlight, which are the really horribly hurt people who can’t walk and all that stuff, but there’s levels.
So, that’s my reaction, but still, the fact that it’s two years later and I’m still having symptoms. These last few days have been worse than it’s been in a really long time. All I can think of is either the stress of the movie or it was raining in California. The rain.
Mr. Jekielek:
It’s amazing to be able to laugh about these things. I have a friend who reached out at one point who I haven’t talked to in ages and told me, “Thanks for what you’ve been doing. By the way, I have tinnitus, and I’m pretty sure it just started immediately after I was vaccinated.” This is one of these common signals, it’s strong in the safety signals. It’s one of these common reactions, but it can be incredibly bad.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
In the movie, I remember you have at least one person who describes this.
Ms. Sharp:
Debilitating.
Mr. Jekielek:
An inability to think almost or hear anything, it’s that bad.
Speaker 3:
Immediately after dose one, I developed paraesthesias in my right arm. The numbness and tingling traveled to my right side of my face, my eye, and my ear. I saw a neurologist, one of the top neurologists in New York City. He said, “Oh, if it subsides, get the second shot. We just don’t know. It’s all new.” Those two sent me into a tailspin. Within four days, I developed debilitating tinnitus. The month of February, I curled up in the fetal position on the bathroom floor, wondering, how will I ever live with this?
Ms. Sharp:
Yes, the tinnitus, really it’s debilitating. I also have had it since I got the vaccine. It never happened before, but I hear this ringing in my ears. But for me, it never lasted longer than 30 seconds. I’ll have a wave of a sound, long enough that I can say, “What’s going on?” And then it goes away. So, I’ve experienced it a tiny bit.
But for the people who have it in a debilitating way, that’s one of the things that drives people close to suicide. It’s hard to imagine if you don’t have it. You can’t hear, you can’t hear conversations, and for your whole day and your whole life there is this ringing.
Yes, it’s weird. It’s weird things that are hard for people to imagine and from the outside look normal. People are like, “Oh, okay. It’s a reaction. Oh, it’s tinnitus.” Or tinnitus, however we want to pronounce it. Yes, it sounds really bad, but you can’t really relate. Now, if I’m limping along in a wheelchair with a bag, then suddenly people can get a little more empathetic. Tinnitus is actually a really, really horrible side effect.
Mr. Jekielek:
I can’t help but remember right now there’s one medical practitioner in the film who describes this sort of sense of abandonment. There’s this whole social element, and I really want to talk about that, because basically anybody who’s been affected by these vaccines, either through injury or even simply deciding they’re not going to get it, there is this bizarre social reality that they have to face.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. Abandonment is a really important word, and I have gotten so many messages from other vaccine injured people after watching my movie. A lot of them echo the word abandonment, and they’re like, “I have felt so abandoned as well.” And they say, “Thank you for helping me not feel so alone.” But that’s a key word for them as well.
And for me, and for us, that’s a key word, abandoned. A society you thought you were a part of, you’re now abandoned from. It’s exactly like you said, even if your choice was just not to get vaccinated when the mandates came, it’s like everybody in the mainstream was like, “Oh yeah.” Even Don Lemon says, and it’s in the movie, you should be left behind. If you don’t go with it, you should be left behind.
Speaker 4:
The people who are not getting vaccines, who are believing the lies on the internet instead of science, it’s time to start shaming them. What else? Or leave them behind.
Ms. Sharp:
And then, I would tell people, “I actually got vaccinated, but I can’t get my second vaccine.” I didn’t choose not to be vaccinated, which I actually don’t have a problem with either. I don’t like separating myself from the people who chose not to. But just in terms of talking to the people that are so pro-vax, I can say to them, “Hey, I actually got vaccinated. You should have compassion for me.”
And their compassion lasted about 10 seconds with, “Oh, I’m so sorry, you’re one of the rare ones. Can you come to my birthday party next week? Oh, that’s right. You’re not allowed. You don’t have a card. You can’t go to the restaurant. Sorry.”
I’d be invited to things, and I’m like, “I’m not allowed to go to that restaurant. I live in Los Angeles.” There were a couple things I was invited to, and I was like, “I’m not allowed.” They’d be like, “Really?” And I’m like, “Do you realize there’s a lot of people right now that are not allowed to participate in society?”
And they were like, “Oh, I never really thought of it like that. Well, that sucks.” And then they go on with their life. They care at that moment, or they’re interested, but they don’t care enough to be like, “Hey, this is wrong,” and make a stand.
Mr. Jekielek:
I have to ask the most stereotypical question about film. Why did you make this film? The reason I’m asking is because it didn’t occur to me. I can see you’re making this film to raise awareness about the reality of people who have been vaccine injured and have been left behind by the system.
I want you to tell me later a bit more about how that plays out. But it seems like you also made it for people who have been vaccinated and realized, “Oh wow, there’s others like me out there, and there’s a whole community of people.” You show that community in the film as well.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. When I started editing it together and showing cuts, Josh Stylman, who is one of the producers, was really great about watching the cuts. The first cut is dangerous to show people, because they change first cuts. He asked me, “Who’s your audience? What is your point?” You have to really formulate that when you’re editing it and when you’re creating it—what exactly is my point?
There’s three reasons I’ve made this film. One is to open the eyes of people whose eyes could still be opened. For people who are very pro-vax who don’t believe there are injuries, it’s really because of the stuff they haven’t seen. If they’re willing to watch it, I think that I can open eyes with this movie. I think I can bring us together. Some people just won’t watch it, but the people who don’t believe there are reactions, the people who are still very pro-vaccine, it’s just to kind of see the nuance. That was one.
The other one was because if nothing else as an artist, in 100 years, I want somebody to watch this movie and feel a slice of what life was like in this time period. I want this to be a historical piece. This is what it was like for a lot of us.
And then three, obviously, for the vaccine reaction people I wanted to make something for those of us who have been outcasts. I heard a story of this woman who joined our group who actually had already planned her suicide, and it was in Switzerland or somewhere, and she already had it planned. She was going there to do the medically assisted suicide, because she couldn’t take it anymore.
She had her plane ticket, she had it all. Then somehow, she found our support group on Facebook. She thought she was alone, and she thought she didn’t know there was anybody else who had been going through what she had been going through. This was only like seven months ago.
If she hadn’t found the support group on the day she found it, she would’ve been on a plane a week later. So, I want people who are injured to not feel alone and to not get to that point and know that there’s a lot of us, and hang in there. If we all speak up enough, we’ll get help, and you’re not so alone.
Mr. Jekielek:
I want to highlight this because I recently had a conversation with Brie Dressen who features prominently in your film.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
She is one of the co-chairs of React 19. She mentioned to me that she’s aware of a number of these types of situations where people can’t take it or are looking to take their life. The thing that stops them is the family support, or some kind of support system. It’s the people that somehow are gaslit or don’t have that support that often go through with this. It’s a horrible reality to contemplate.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. Especially when you’re so bad, like those people who have committed suicide. A few of them had specifically noted, “I had no support from my family, nobody believes me, and I just can’t do this anymore.” I understand that. My family is great, and on the spectrum of family they care and they made it clear they believe me.
But they don’t believe me enough to ask me before they get their booster. Or they say, “Oh, sorry this happened to you, we hear you, but I’m still going to vaccinate my children.” I’m not saying anybody should not be vaccinated either. I’m not here to preach, I’m just here to show things. But it’s kind of like at least ask me. Ask me what I know. Listen to the anecdotes. You don’t have to full heartedly believe them, but there’s a lot of truth in there.
Mr. Jekielek:
For the record, in speaking with Dr. Martin Kulldorff very early in the pandemic, he was aware of this risk-benefit analysis that you always have to do around any medical intervention. There’s always a cost and nothing is cost-free. For children, the risk of Covid was always so small for healthy children that there was never any credible reason for an intervention that had a non-zero risk. It’s one of these things that was a casualty, this kind of nuanced thinking. It was a casualty in the pandemic, and that also comes through in your documentary.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. I’m trying to bring the nuance back to this conversation, so that things aren’t so polarized, left and right, anti and pro. There is a lot of nuance in the center, and I’m hoping to just bring that up. Nuance comes from asking questions, and nuance comes from questioning yourself, and that’s everybody in this whole thing.
But nuance also in the vaccine. How does this vaccine program spread? Like you talked about children. And it’s like, does a child need to get vaccinated? Does an 80-year-old need to get vaccinated? They are different groups and they have different risk factors. Maybe it really makes a lot of sense that college kids don’t need to be vaccinated if myocarditis is a high thing, but there was none of that. There was none of that nuance. A lot of the answers were, “We were afraid that people wouldn’t get vaccinated. If we said kids don’t need to be vaccinated, then that might make other people think they don’t need to.”
As soon as you admit there’s an adverse reaction, as soon as you admit there’s a signal, as soon as you admit that children aren’t dying of Covid and might not need to get vaccinated, then you suddenly are making people afraid to get vaccinated, and that’s the worst thing ever. So, let’s just get everybody vaccinated across the board.” And it makes total sense that not everybody should be vaccinated. There is a risk. There is a risk, and maybe some people should, but these are conversations that should be had, instead of blanket statements.
Mr. Jekielek:
You were a filmmaker before you made this film.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. I was a filmmaker. I am a filmmaker. And that was scary too. I had just finished right at the end of Covid my last feature film, it’s fiction. It was actually my life goal as a filmmaker. It’s like my own story. So before I made this current film I made Una Great Movie. Una Great was my great life’s work as a filmmaker. It was very personal to me.
I shot it in Mexico in a town that I’ve been going to for 20 years that I love, and I used a lot of local Mexicans. As a filmmaker, I was just really excited and it took me six years to make it. I went through my life savings. This is the movie that I want to make that no producer will jump on and make and I’m going to just do it.
I had just finished it and then Covid happened. When I started making Anecdotals, I had just released Una Great Movie on Amazon. It was released in July of last year. I actually was like, “Is this going to hurt my filmmaking career, doing a film about vaccines?” I thought about that a lot, because I don’t want my filmmaking career to be this political thing, and Una Great Movie is a comedy.
I tell people if you’re sick of all the craziness, and you want to just laugh, watch it. It’s a very smart comedy. So, that’s what I do. And then suddenly, I’m making this movie that I know is going to make some people hate me, and make some people think I’m killing people. I actually tried not to make this movie for a long time. I was like I don’t want to get in these crosshairs.
Who knows? Somebody might want to hire me as a director on their movie and then be like, “Oh, that’s that anti-vax director. Let’s not hire her.” It could totally be career suicide. I was trying not to, but in the end, I knew it was right to make this movie. I had a clear vision, I had a clear situation, and I had to do it.
I did just finish my last feature. I do want to do another feature. I want to do comedies. I’m an all around filmmaker, and I think it shows in Anecdotals too, because I pretty much did the whole movie by myself. I was the editor, and the writer, and the director. In our shoots when I interviewed people it was me and two other people.
For the shoot where I interviewed the woman, Katie, who had to vaccinate her children, we literally had five cameras. I have extra cameras just in case I make a mistake because there’s so few of us , and I’m the one interviewing her. But we set up the cameras and we had one person doing a two shot, and then we had tripods set up, and then we had one microphone here and then a microphone down there, and we set it all up and then started the interview.
It’s really just me and two other crew people. And I’d be like, “Oh wait, okay, stop.” That’s why when I do interviews still, I’m always kind of extra aware of everything because you’re doing it without money. But the fact that I was a filmmaker and I know what I’m doing, and I had actually just made this very great international movie, gave me the confidence also do Anecdotals. I can do it for not a lot of money and I can tell this story.
Mr. Jekielek:
You’re not just the director, you star in the film.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
Which would be obvious because you’re vaccine injured yourself.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
How was that experience?
Ms. Sharp:
When I decided to make the movie, I was like, how am I going to make a documentary that’s interesting? Especially if I’m trying to get people who don’t want to hear the message. Who’s going to listen to an hour of vaccine injured people, an hour-and-a-half of vaccine injured people? Vaccine injured people will, maybe people who are very anti-vax will, but maybe they won’t.
They’ve seen the stories, right? What’s going to make Anecdotals interesting and keep people’s attention? And the answer was that I had to make it personal. When I thought about it as a filmmaker, how I’m going to do it, it has to be personal, it has to be my story, it has to be me telling everything I went through.
Also politically, I felt like politically it was a very interesting journey that I went through as well. I was someone who was very mainstream media and believed the CDC and the FDA. And then, slowly and slowly I was finding myself at anti-mandate rallies and being in this whole other world. I felt like that was a really interesting thing to cover as well.
I cover in the documentary my journey as a vaccine reaction person, but also as a human being in the United States during this time. I also knew it had to happen quickly. Once I started doing interviews and putting it together, it was like six months and I’m done. I was like it has to come out soon. I’m not even thinking, I’m just being creative and I can edit myself and not think it’s me. I don’t get all caught up in stuff, so I do it.
When the movie was done and I finally watched the whole movie through, I panicked because I was like, “Oh my God, what did I do?” I’m in this movie, I don’t want my face in this movie. I don’t want to be the one talking. There’s no escaping. I had kind of a panic attack because it wasn’t until the movie was done that I actually realized how crazy it was that I’m in this movie.
Mr. Jekielek:
And what an important part of it you are, obviously.
Ms. Sharp:
That I am, yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
That’s fascinating.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
How easy was it for people? Among the vaccine injured, are they ready to go, “Yes, I want to be on camera,” or is it difficult?
Ms. Sharp:
It’s difficult. It’s difficult. I had some really great stories. Some people I approached wouldn’t be on it, and I understand. I wanted to also keep it balanced as far as racially and sex, men and women and different races, and I wanted to show that. And so, I would reach out to some people specifically, because I needed another man at a certain point. I was like, “I think I have enough women.”
I talked to this guy and it was just devastating. He said, “My life has been ruined. I’ve lost my job. I don’t know how I’m paying my bills.” And he said, “I support what you’re doing, but I’m trying to get work anywhere at this point, and I can’t do my normal jobs, I’m too sick. So I’m out here trying to get work and figure out how to survive and I can’t have this. I can’t be anti-vax, I can’t be part of it.” He wasn’t the only one.
I have another woman who is actually a friend of mine and she couldn’t get out of bed. She was paralyzed for three weeks. She was traumatized. She hasn’t told anybody in her world about it. I called her and said, “Can I get you to talk about this?” And she was just like, “No.” She was like, “I’m not telling people. We have fights, we have arguments, and people still doubt me. So, I’ve just shut up about my injury. I don’t talk about it and I won’t.” I got a lot of that, people who were afraid to talk about it.
Mr. Jekielek:
One person that jumps to mind that’s in the film is actually one of the doctors. She’s a naturopath and one of these people. She’s explaining how she gives informed consent. It was just a fascinating moment because I’ve had a number of people on the show where we discuss this issue. They have this whole foundational concept of any medical intervention, of informed consent, as being something that has to happen. Nevermind with an emergency use authorization drug, but with anything, you need to know if you take this, there’s always some risks people need to know.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
She’s explaining this and as I was watching, it seems reasonable.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
But this is so far, as we’ve discussed, from the reality. There’s this push out there, as Peter McCullough says in the film, “A jab in every arm, whatever it takes.”
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. It was interesting because the day we shot that interview, I had two camera operators. Me and two camera operators, we all did everything. This is kind of a funny story, actually. I’m sidetracking a little, but I think it’s funny. There were four of us, me, the doctor, and my two camera operators, and I hadn’t discussed Covid protocol for the shoot.
One of the guys showed up in a double mask. I’ve just been in this world where it’s like mask, not mask, and I respect people who want a mask, but I’m also like, “Am I going to mask all day?” I’m kind of in this weird world of I get both sides, but you don’t have to mask. But then he’s working for me. I hired him. I think I need to respect him.
I went to him and I was like, “Do you want us all to wear masks?” And he goes, “No, no, I’m good.” He goes, “I just protect myself. I do a lot of shooting.” And I was like, “Are you sure, because I want you to feel comfortable?” And he’s like, “No, you guys can do what you want.” So the other camera operator just went ahead anyway and wore a mask all day too.
The two camera operators were wearing masks the whole day, and I just liked the situation, there’s no judgment on anybody. They wore masks the whole day and then me and the doctor didn’t wear masks the whole day. I found that really interesting. I don’t know, maybe because I’m the injured one and she’s the doctor and we’re kind of not as afraid.
I don’t even know what that means. I just think it was a funny situation. But the point was we had such a great discussion when I interviewed her and there was so much knowledge. There was so much stuff that didn’t make the movie. At the end of the day, one of the camera operators came to me and he said, they both were like, “That was so interesting. We learned stuff.” And he said, “What is that thing that you talked about? What is that? I forget, but it was really interesting, the heart thing.”
And I was like, “Myocarditis.” And he was like, “Yes.” He’s like, “I hadn’t even heard of that.” And I was like, “And you’ve gotten vaccinated.” He’s fully vaxxed and I think he was boosted. He’s a man who’s maybe 32 years old, double vaxxed and boosted, and had never heard of myocarditis until he filmed the interview.
That is the point, informed consent, especially for men who seem to get it more, but everybody and anybody, period. But if you know that there’s a signal of myocarditis in men, younger men, before you get vaccinated, you should be told about myocarditis. That’s informed consent. But not only for consent, but so that if you go home or in a few days you feel a weird thing in your chest, you know, “Oh my gosh, this might be myocarditis. Let me take care of it before it kills me or before it scars.” Or there may be other things that you can do.
If you knew that myocarditis was a signal, you could get vaccinated anyway and just be really aware of your heart. Are you exercising? Is it it feeling weird? That could save your life. But these people are getting vaccinated and they don’t even know what myocarditis is. At this point everybody should know very well what myocarditis is before you put that vaccine in your body, and that’s informed consent.
Mr. Jekielek:
The thing as you talk about masks now, with every one of these interventions, there was always a kind of moral imperative assigned to it. There’s the correct way to behave, get the vaccine, wear a mask, stay indoors and shelter in place, whatever it is. Or you’re a bad person, you’re bad, you’re antisocial, you’re against society. The moment where you’re on the other side of it, either forced into it or you see that thing that you can’t unsee, which is a common phrase that people use, suddenly you notice the thing that everyone is supposed to do isn’t just the obvious thing that everyone’s supposed to do. There’s actually something that needs to be questioned here, like you’ve been saying, and in some cases with terrible consequences if it’s not looked at with nuance and with questioning. To me, this has kind of been the theme of the pandemic in a sense, is this kind of realization and this trying to get out of this moral imperative thinking.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. That’s what we could all learn. I’m trying to think more, it’s not just a pandemic thing, but I think it really crystallized when we got more polarized. Maybe it started with Trump or started with Obama, or it got more extreme with Obama and people being against that, and then Trump and people being against that.
Now we have this thing that allows us to put all of our anger and our moral imperatives into the vaccine. The vaccine actually became a symbol for your politics, because there has been so much anger on both sides. It’s really important that on both sides we realize that it’s not helpful to hate each other, to be so extreme, and that there’s things that were fed to hate each other.
Mr. Jekielek:
One of the things I have noticed is that there’s been these people like Dr. Aseem Malhotra who’s been on the show who was at some point almost like vaccine evangelists because he was such a prominent doctor in the UK. And through a difficult personal journey, he realized, “Okay, this is not right.” He started coming out saying these things need to be halted until further study is done. That’s my conclusion, that’s my scientific opinion based on this very compelling evidence in the papers he wrote.
But some folks are still really mad at him, and I also understand that, especially if it’s someone that from the beginning was saying, “No, I’m not going to take this medical intervention. This is emergency use. This is unreasonable, it’s untested.” This was an extremely reasonable position to take, but at the beginning you know yourself the kind of vile things that were said about such people and the social stigma, and you’re a bad person. You were told you were a bad person. This is our milieu. It’s almost like there’s this need to label people in this saint or sinner way.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. I remember hearing this, and reading this study about these lab rats that were tortured or that had trauma, and I won’t tell you the whole study. But what the study ended up showing was that a rat that was under pain, the first instinct would be to go and cause pain to another rat. They did this whole series of shocking the rat. What does it do? They’re going to do this. What does it do? Now they’re going to put another rat in the cage and shock him.
What does it do? It runs over and bites the other rat, and they keep doing that. It’s like the perfect example of a hurt person wanting to hurt somebody else. I understand that people were really hurt. Especially the people who would not get vaccinated were really hurt by the people who were calling them names, who were acting like they were murderers, and who were okay with them losing their jobs.
“Yes, you don’t deserve to be part of society, lose your job, don’t feed your kids. You don’t deserve that. That’s what your kids get for having stupid parents.” The worst things were said about people who wouldn’t get vaccinated, they were hurt. I get it. I get that they were hurt, but how is it helpful to hurt people back?
It goes both ways. What is our main goal right now? Is our main goal to open eyes and make a change, or is our main goal to be like, “I was right, you guys are evil.” Malhotra, who has changed his vision, a lot of people still have issues with him, because he was very pro-vax in the beginning and telling people to get it. You can hate him for encouraging the pain that you were caused, but that doesn’t help the situation.
We do need to come to a place where we do not take things as personally and look at the overall goal that there were a lot of reasons that people believed what they did. Just because they believed, just because they hate you and they fell into that, you can choose to be a bigger person and not fall into that, because you end up being as bad. It just becomes this war, and then they can explain why they thought of it. And it doesn’t mean you have to totally forgive. What was that recent article about?
Mr. Jekielek:
Amnesty.
Ms. Sharp:
Amnesty, that was ridiculous. Amnesty, people need to be held accountable, and people should apologize. Malhotra is doing that. He’s just like, “I’m sorry I was wrong.” And that’s the best thing you can do, is realize you were wrong and apologize.
Mr. Jekielek:
And I might add, there’s significant accountability with what he is doing, because he has made it a mission to use his position to explain how he sees things. That’s a good example of someone who’s actually trying to make good on this. That’s not necessarily going to be everybody.
Ms. Sharp:
Right, and he is trying and he still gets kind of reamed by some people who are like, “Oh, he was part of the system.” Also, my point is that I understand that people were hurt and I understand that people are angry, but I don’t believe it’s going to help our cause. The cause is let’s open eyes and change policies and let’s help people who are hurting. We have to get above our own egos and our own pain and look at what the overall goal is. When we do that, we come together and we don’t blame and we don’t call people names. Nice to meet you, nice to meet you in the middle, like nice to meet you. It’s a new thing, it’s a new day.
Mr. Jekielek:
Do you have any sense of how many people are known to have been vaccine injured and their lives altered in some significant way, and now are trying to figure out what to do?
Ms. Sharp:
I don’t have a sense, but I can’t tell you since making this movie, and also in my support groups, people from Australia, people from Italy, I’ve been reached out to from people all over the world. There are so many people in my support group. I also have shown this movie. I’ve shown this movie to a couple people who after they saw the movie realized they had been vaccine injured and didn’t know it. Somebody who had a heart attack two days after his vaccination went to the hospital and they didn’t ever say anything. I was like, “So, the hospital didn’t ask you when you were vaccinated?” They replied, “No, no.”
My cousin had a stroke. It wasn’t until he heard my story, which was three months after his stroke. He heard my story from his sister who said, “You know what happened to Jennifer? Read this.” Because I’d written something, and so he read it and they were like, “That’s what happened to you.” And he had a stroke and ended up in the hospital. He didn’t know he was vaccine injured until I told my story.
They’re not the only ones. There are people who have realized they’re vaccine injured by watching Anecdotals. So you ask, how many people have been injured? Really a lot. That’s a very scientific number, a lot. There’s also a whole portion of people who are injured and don’t know it, that have the buzzing.
Like the buzzing I have all the time. They might just think their foot’s asleep more often, and you might just be like, “Oh, my foot falls asleep a lot.” Well, did that happen before the vaccine? It might just be that mild or it might even be bigger and they’re just not thinking of it. Then there’s also the question of who’s vaccine injured that we’ll find out about 20 years from now. What will we know in the future?
Mr. Jekielek:
Absolutely. As we’re talking here, I can’t help but think one of the really terrible side effects of this sort of ideological adherence to the idea that the vaccines are safe and effective, and doctors not being trained to recognize things which are vaccine injury, like people going into the hospital with a heart attack. And I’ve talked to a number of people, even on this show, about this type of phenomenon, but the doctors don’t know to look for that when it’s something that is probably obvious to look for.
In fact, with any vaccine you have, if there’s some kind of event that happens within a few days after it, that should always be considered. There’s always that possibility, even if it’s remote. But there’s this kind of situation where with vaccine injury, as I understand it, the early intervention is the way that people can be helped the most to overcome this, and there are treatments for these things, some of them. But in this situation, it just makes it very hard for people to get that early treatment.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. Not only are there doctors who are not trained or know how to ask, there’s another thing that people go in there and say, “I think this was the vaccine,” and they’re argued with. There are a lot of doctors, especially early on and in my group, where we would go to the doctors. When we would go to the doctors, when people in my group would go to the doctor, you don’t mention vaccine reaction. You don’t say, “I had a vaccine reaction.”
Very quickly people started realizing you get better care if you go and just say, “I’m numb. I’m having shocks, I’m having this and that.” If you say, “I think it was the vaccine.” You get counted as crazy. They don’t want to talk to you. “Oh no, it’s not.” So, a lot of people learned that when they went to the doctor that they cannot even tell the doctor that it was a vaccine reaction and they’ll get better care.
Mr. Jekielek:
What a terrible reality.
Ms. Sharp:
It is.
Mr. Jekielek:
In a sense, you have to lie to get better care.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes, and that’s the truth. Actually, I see whole health doctors and naturopaths. I have new health insurance, so I’ll be having a new doctor as soon as I make an appointment. And I wonder, should I tell this doctor that I had a vaccine reaction? I wonder. I don’t think they’ll believe me.
Mr. Jekielek:
This is another question. If doctors aren’t aware of the entire reality, available at any given point around these vaccines, how can they recommend them and uphold their hippocratic oath? I’ve been struggling with this question. Could you trust a doctor that didn’t make the effort to try to figure this out? Especially since there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence that should be considered.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes, exactly. I don’t know.
Mr. Jekielek:
Let me qualify this, a lot more than anecdotal evidence. But even with the anecdotal evidence, that’s grounds for looking at and taking something seriously. And that’s one of the messages, right? I’m sorry, I’m kind of-
Ms. Sharp:
No, please do.
Mr. Jekielek:
I’m jumping in here, but this is actually very important. These signals, like for example their signals, come from anecdotes.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
Right?
Ms. Sharp:
Let’s talk about that word, anecdotes, because it’s just become this weaponized word. If you are telling your reaction, it’s just an anecdote. It’s just an anecdote. When we’re talking about if the vaccines work, people are like, “I know somebody who got vaccinated and their Covid was really easy, so thank God they were vaccinated.” It’s funny because people will shut me down because my story’s anecdotal, but then they’ll turn around and tell an anecdote on their side, but it’s okay. Anecdote is a good word. An anecdote is someone’s personal story. No, it’s not scientific. It’s not the science. However, it’s true to that person and it’s worth being listened to.
I love that word, and I think I made up the word Anecdotals. I don’t think that word actually exists. I made it up for the movie, the pluralization of it. But it’s a really important word because people like to dismiss anecdotes and they say, “Oh, it’s an anecdote.” But actually an anecdote is the best thing. It’s what starts you needing to study, and that’s the whole point.
Dr. Ryan Cole says that in the movie. He’s like, “I’m seeing patients coming with these reactions. I’m seeing more sickness. Yes, what I’m seeing are anecdotes, but that’s what science is. It starts with anecdotes.” You start seeing something that is like, “Okay, I’m hearing that again and again. I’m hearing it, now we need to do a study, now we need to make it scientific.” The problem with the Covid vaccine is that we are not going from anecdote to study. We’re going from anecdote to censor. What do we do when there’s a lot of anecdotes and no studies? Why aren’t we studying them?
Mr. Jekielek:
Yes. This was the case, even in other realms of inquiry related to Covid. Now there are quite a few studies, for example, on some of these early treatment options like Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and other, I think at least 18, and there’s also at least 20 drugs which are used in combination to treat early. But again, that research was somehow really suffocated in lots of ways. In some cases, there were even studies where there’s evidence they were just simply done wrong, almost with an effort to show that these things don’t work when they’re done wrong.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
Just bizarre stuff like this.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes, really bizarre. I realized this early on, as I said, as I started questioning more and more things, There were so many strong reactions about it. People I knew were calling Ivermectin a horse dewormer and making fun of people who took it. These are people who I know for a fact don’t know what Ivermectin is. They just are hearing the headlines. You know, you don’t have to have an opinion just because you’re hearing headlines.
I actually read the Ivermectin studies and I saw how they could be swayed either way, and that was my point. Yes, I see studies that show it doesn’t work. But also a lot of those studies took place in the hospital when it was too late, and the point about Ivermectin is it’s a protease inhibitor. It inhibits the duplication of the replication of the protein, which is why you need to stop it right away before the protein keeps replicating and goes to your lungs in Covid. That’s the point. You want to stop it before the replication gets really bad.
So, for some kind of protease inhibitor, it makes sense that if the first few days, something that will help stop the replication of the protein is a good thing to do. These were the studies I was reading where it was really good, but then I saw the studies where it was bad, and all I knew was like I don’t know, but I think I have a right to talk to my doctor and decide something.
It’s also something that I believe is over the counter in Mexico. It’s not something that’s totally going to kill you. And with both of the sides, no matter what I want to believe, I could pick a study, but people were so sure that doctors were getting penalized for prescribing Ivermectin. Like drugstore pharmacists were reporting doctors who were prescribing Ivermectin because it would suddenly be this criminalized thing, and you might be a doctor who needs to be investigated, who’s spreading misinformation.
Mr. Jekielek:
Or refusing to fill prescriptions that doctors wrote. It’s just everything seems to have been turned on its head, this whole profession, this whole system.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. If there’s nothing else that’s clear, isn’t it clearer that whatever you want to believe you could find a study that backs it up. Just understand that people were so clear about Ivermectin doesn’t work because of this study, but I could show you one where it does. I’m not saying what’s right, but maybe don’t be so sure about your side. Maybe don’t, just maybe. That’s all I’m asking too with Anecdotals. If you think it’s just anecdotes and you think the vaccine is the best thing ever, you don’t have to agree with me, but maybe just don’t be so sure about what you think you believe in.
Mr. Jekielek:
We talked about how people were kind of abandoned in various ways. That was a very, very powerful testimony to me in the film.
Speaker 5:
That is one word that describes how I felt in the first few months after my diagnosis, abandoned.
Mr. Jekielek:
What support exists for people that have these anecdotes?
Ms. Sharp:
Definitely React 19, which was started by vaccine injured. React19.org is an organization that Brianne and a few other people started, and they are collecting resources, they’re collecting things that work. There’s a lot where you can look at a symptom and see other people with the same symptoms. So, there’s that. That’s our own resource that we’ve created.
Mr. Jekielek:
And by the way, just to answer a question I asked earlier, it’s about 21,000 people that are involved in React 19 now. That’s the last number I heard.
Ms. Sharp:
Okay, 21,000.
Mr. Jekielek:
Yes.
Ms. Sharp:
I can’t even dare to think of a number because I would be wrong, so I just say a lot. But yes, React 19. FLCCC, Frontline Critical Covid Care doctors have protocols on their website, and they’re actually helping some vaccine injured people. These are all people though who have been ostracized and are doing it from the outside.
There’s also the Facebook support groups, which get censored, which is really a shame, but there’s a lot of sharing of information there. My Facebook support group has a lot of, “Has anybody tried this drug, what did it do? How many times did you do it? Did you get better?” There’s a lot of that. There’s a lot of helping people not feel abandoned. And then suddenly Facebook shuts down the group.
So, in the group, we have to speak in code. We’re not allowed to use the word Pfizer, Moderna, or Covid. There are words that we can’t say in our support group, because otherwise it gets flagged and we could be taken down. I feel like your bigger question is, what support is there governmentally? Shouldn’t there be some sort of support from the government, from the companies? Is there any support system?
The answer is no. I’m talking slowly and thinking, but there is no support for anybody who’s injured. There’s no support. We are supporting ourselves. We are our own doctors. There are doctors that are great who are helping and joining our groups, but as far as a systemic organization that studies us and is helping us and is making us feel like we’ll be okay, and investing money, no. And you can’t sue the pharmaceutical companies.
There’s one program that you can apply to for money if you’ve been injured, but you have to really prove this and that, and then in the end, they don’t give you that much money if they do give you money, and it’ll take a couple years. So no, there’s no fund to help us. There’s nobody dedicated to helping us. There’s nobody telling us what to do.
I called the NIH when I had my reaction and when it was time to get my second shot, and everybody was still on television saying, “Get both shots. It’s safe and effective. You should do it. You should do it.” And I’m like, “If I don’t get my second shot, am I going to die of Covid?” I was always a little skeptical of that and saw that it wasn’t as bad as they were saying for some people.
But the NIH replied back to me because I said, “This is what’s happened. Tell me, am I supposed to not get the second shot?” Somebody at the NIH replied back to me and she said, “We cannot give medical advice. Ask your primary care physician.” That’s an official stance of one of the official agencies. At that point I didn’t have insurance and I didn’t have a primary care physician, and I can guarantee you that most primary care physicians aren’t in a place to understand the reactions. They need to be led by the agencies.
Mr. Jekielek:
I just saw a graphic from somewhere in New Jersey where they were offering children ice cream for getting Covid vaccinated.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
What’s your reaction to that?
Ms. Sharp:
Wow, there’s so many things wrong with that. But wasn’t there a Sesame Street program about the vaccine as well?
Mr. Jekielek:
I think so.
Ms. Sharp:
I also saw the Marvel Comic characters. I feel like there was a whole campaign with the Marvel Comic characters saying, “Be a hero.” It was something like be a hero, save people, get vaccinated. The ice cream is horrible, then I think about these other things that are really playing on kids’ emotions. But ice cream is bad because ice cream is sugar and it’s actually not good for you.
The whole point of the way to beat Covid is being healthy. The people who died, not all, but a majority had comorbidities and they had a lot of comorbidities. It’s very clear that the healthier you are, the better chance you have. Let’s stop these young kids from getting obese and eating sugar and not being healthy, in order to fight these diseases.
Mr. Jekielek:
What comes to my mind is, and this is something I discussed with Dr. Robert Malone early in the pandemic, just there’s this idea of the noble lie. With vaccines in general, over years there’s been this idea, every vaccine has harms associated with it. I don’t even know if most people realize that now or then. There’s systems created to help those people, at least in theory, that do get injured because ostensibly it’s for the better of the populace.
But the idea was we’re not going to tell people that. We’re going to tell people they’re completely safe, because what if they know that there’s even a small chance, then maybe they won’t be as eager to do it. This is the idea. That’s the idea of the noble lie. We’re not going to tell people the entire truth. And then, that can metastasize into telling people things to elicit a very specific behavioral response, irrespective of the reality of those things.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
Right?
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. When I would get into discussions with people who were super pro-vax about what I was going through and about the mandates, and I would bring up things that were blatant lies that the government and the CDC had said. I’m like, “We can go to their website right now and I’ll show you.” Because I knew where to go.
I’d pull up the CDC website and I’d show them something the CDC was touting about the vaccine and touting about natural immunity. I’m like, “Now I can show you that even in Israel, even here, they’re all saying this works.” I would be really systematic about it, and I would get met with, “You can’t tell people all of this stuff because then they’ll take it and run and they’re not capable.’
People literally said this to me when I’m trying to say this is why we’re not being told the truth. I got met with, “Some people can’t handle the truth. They’re not smart enough to think on their own. If you tell them things, then they’re going to take it another way, think it’s bad, and use it for their agenda, and they’re going to make it this big propaganda that, ‘Oh, vaccines are bad and nobody should get vaccinated because of this,’ when those people aren’t able to see the nuance, so they can’t handle the truth.” I heard that a few times from people that are really smart and who I really respect, and when I saw that happening, I was just astounded.
Mr. Jekielek:
What a bizarre irony.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
Because you already know the answer has to be very specific.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
As long as you choose that, you’re smart. As long as you choose that one thing that I have already decided, and don’t think about it too much, then you’re smart. Interesting.
Ms. Sharp:
Really interesting. And that to me is one of the things that woke me up. There was a whole process of being woken up. People would say things so blatantly. People would say all over and they’d love to post on Facebook, “You’re a preschool teacher, don’t try to do science. Listen to the scientists. You’re a trucker. Don’t try to do science, listen to the scientists.” These are smart people saying that, who aren’t scientists. And it’s just like, “Wait a second, so are you telling me not to think? Are you telling me I don’t have a right to think, because I’m not qualified, so I just need to listen to the people who do?” It made no sense.
Mr. Jekielek:
You have this moment in the film where you pull up Dr. Anthony Fauci and everyone knows he said, “I am the science.” But I somehow didn’t know until I watched your film that after that he says, “Everybody knows that.”
Anthony Fauci:
I represent science, and if you’re attacking me, you’re really attacking science. I mean, everybody knows that.
Mr. Jekielek:
Really? Everybody knows that? That is amazing.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
The reason I mentioned this is that it encapsulates the idea that you already know someone has told you what the science is. This person who’s taking this position with the sciences, they know because they’ve had the expert guidance. They’re kind of an expert themselves, and everybody else is obviously wrong.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes. Right before I have him in the film, I have Joy Behar from The View, and The View was very opinionated. The ladies in The View were very opinionated, and that always got me too. It got me when I would watch things like that and they’d be hating on the people who weren’t getting vaccinated. And I’m just like, that’s a really opinionated stance to take and a really hateful stance to take. It’s okay to have an opinion and think they should, but there was so much hate.
Then I also knew that I wasn’t vaccinated, so they’re hating on me. I’m just like there’s so much they’re not looking at. But Joy Behar said, “Well, I just listen to Fauci. That’s all I do. I don’t need to listen to anybody else. I listen to Fauci. That’s good enough.” She said that on national TV and it was really crazy to me. I’m just like you don’t just listen to one person. Fauci became more and more arrogant about things and said that he’s the science, when that’s the opposite of science. Science is debate, and talking, and it evolves.
Mr. Jekielek:
I kept thinking about this noble lie. In the film, there’s multiple times where this idea comes up. You quote Dr. Vinay Prasad saying, “You cannot do science differently because you want people to do something.” He’s obviously against the idea of the noble lie here. Where do you stand on the noble lie?
Ms. Sharp:
100 per cent against it. You have to tell the truth. You have to tell. Is there ever a reason to lie to somebody? Maybe to your two-year-old who’s having an attack and you have to have them put on their shoes, and you know it’s better for them to put on their shoes. I don’t know, maybe. But yes, you’re talking about a two-year-old. No, I think you always have to tell the truth. You always have to lead with the truth, and then it’s your job to figure out how to make people see it.
Mr. Jekielek:
That’s one of the lessons of the last few years, something in this vein. It’s not that I felt you should go around lying to people, not at all, but I was much more open in my mind. I could understand why you wouldn’t have unfettered free speech. Why should you allow for Holocaust denial speech? We can get rid of that. Why would we want to have to deal with that?
These days I’m still thinking about it a lot more, because once you allow for certain types of censorship or certain types of lies, what happens? Apparently, people who don’t know what they’re doing or have ill intent will take advantage of that. The social cost of that, as we’ve learned, is massive. So, I’m becoming this kind of absolutist in these areas.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
But also, that has its own problems too.
Ms. Sharp:
It does. It’s hard, but you can’t trust people that have agendas. You start lying and you don’t know what’s the truth. And I’ll tell you, I can give you handfuls of people I know now who were pro-vax at the beginning and are now not only anti-Covid vax, they’re anti-all vaccines, because now they have seen so many lies that are maybe noble lies. But because of that you start getting the spiral of, “If I can’t believe that, what else can I believe? That’s the thing. You get caught in the lie and then suddenly nothing you say is credible and that’s the danger.
Mr. Jekielek:
And then maybe you have a case on top of that.
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
When I say that I mean we’re always learning. For example, we have a headline today in The Epoch Times that FDA normal safety protocols were not adhered to when looking at this vaccine. When else was this the case? What is the likelihood that this is the first time?
Ms. Sharp:
Yes.
Mr. Jekielek:
Now, these are real questions that need to be asked. You talk about accountability, it’s like throughout society, right?
Ms. Sharp:
Right. Yes. One line, exactly, and you spiral into it. The problem is who can say that they know what is misinformation. Anecdotals was taken off YouTube a day-and-a-half after I put it on for misinformation, and it’s been taken off of Vimeo. It can’t be on any platforms, any mainstream platforms, or it couldn’t. However, I fought this with YouTube and I have to say, “I’m seeing that I’m being censored for misinformation.” But then I reach out to them and I’m like, “Will you please tell me what in this movie is misinformation?”
Because I’ve spent a lot of money and three months with a lawyer to fact-check everything in the movie. I paid the extra money to make sure. If you go to the website, anecdotalsmovie.com, there’s a reference tab where for every single study mentioned in the movie, and every single news clip in the movie, there’s a link. You can watch the entire news clip. If you think I pulled out a sound bite to serve my agenda, go to the reference page, and find that part. It’s in chronological order, and you can watch the whole interview, you can walk through the whole thing. Also, every study is there. I’m very clear about it.
I wanted to make this as bulletproof as I could. I knew it would be skeptical for a lot of people. I ask YouTube and I ask Vimeo, and I’m like, “Can you please just tell me one thing in this movie that’s misinformation?” And they won’t tell me. They’re just like, “It’s misinformation.” So, that’s the censorship. When you’re suddenly censored, there was a time I might have been like, “Oh yeah, some stuff is a little crazy and shouldn’t be out in the mainstream.”
Because it’s true, some people can’t handle it and it’ll start making people really radicalized. But it’s like, no. Because then you realize somebody gets to decide what is misinformation. And with the Covid, the people who are saying it’s misinformation a lot of times are giving the most misinformation.
Mr. Jekielek:
In a lot of cases, these are people that we trusted.
Ms Sharp:
Yes, totally. And then, I have to also say that YouTube has actually put the movie back up, which is huge.
Mr Jekielek:
Wait, with an apology, as I understand it, right?
Ms. Sharp:
With an apology, yes. And good for them, so I want to give them props at the same time. For whatever reason they did it. They’ve rejected my appeal, and this is what they all do. They reject your appeal. But we’ve been causing a lot of problems, tagging them on YouTube, misinformation. Because of the Twitter files and Twitter being a little under the microscope for their censoring that the other ones are starting to be like, “Okay, let’s make sure.”
Then Senator Ron Johnson tweeted about YouTube and the movie’s censorship. I think it took all of that. He got like 60,000 views on that tweet in two hours, and it was that afternoon that I got a letter from YouTube saying they mistakenly took down the movie and they apologized and they put it back up. So that’s huge, and I’m thankful to YouTube for that, but also it should have never been taken down. There’s many things on YouTube, there’s other things that should be put back up as well, but it’s a start. It’s a start.
Mr. Jekielek:
I’m glad to know that the film is back on YouTube and available. Please tell me where they can watch the film Anecdotals and also where they can watch Una Great Movie. Probably everyone is ready for a comedy right now.
Ms. Sharp:
Thank you. Yes, so for Anecdotals, it’s on the web. It’s free, so we have it free, no ads. We talked about should we have ads, how do we make our money back? All that, but the most important thing is that this movie is free. We want this movie to be shared, especially with the skeptics in your life. We all have somebody in our life that since the whole pandemic we’ve been trying to get them to see what’s going on and they won’t, and I made this movie for them on a large level.
The people who kind of don’t want to believe but still might, have them watch the movie. Pass it along to people in your life who are skeptical. It’s free on the website, www.anecdotalsmovie.com, which is actually the YouTube link too. It’s on YouTube, Anecdotals movie. On YouTube is @Anecdotalsmovie, Instagram, Twitter, we’re all there. You can watch the movie for free on YouTube. We also have Rumble and Odysee, and so it should be easy to find, and easy to share.
Then for those of you who could really use some levity in this hard dark time, I have made a fiction comedy that’s really awesome and also very cerebral. It’s not a typical comedy. It’s called Una Great Movie and it’s on Amazon Prime. You can watch it free on Amazon Prime, or you can rent it on Amazon. You can also rent it on YouTube, there’s a YouTube channel, just Google Una Great Movie. Or you can watch it for free on YouTube with ads or free on Tubi with ads. So, you have many options for Una Great Movie. I suggest not watching it with commercials, but if you want it for free, then that’s also fine. Those are my movies.
Mr. Jekielek:
Jennifer Sharp, it’s such a pleasure to have you on the show.
Ms. Sharp:
Thank you for having me. It’s been great.
Mr. Jekielek:
Thank you all for joining Jennifer Sharp and me on this episode of American Thought Leaders. I’m your host, Jan Jekielek.
To get notifications about new Kash's Corner and American Thought Leaders episodes, please sign up for our newsletter! Here 👉 Get Alerts
-
The Real Story of January 6 | Documentary BUY Jan 6 DVD: https://www.epochtv.shop/product-page/dvd-the-real-story-of-january-6, Promo Code “Jan” for 20% off.
-
Follow American Thought Leaders on social media:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AmThoughtLeader
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@AmThoughtLeader
Comentários