https://youtu.be/-a7nld57f2M closed captions (subtitles)

Closed captions downloaded from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a7nld57f2M

Discussion: https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/g8inkf/en_subs_nobel_prof_montagnier_covid19_caused_by_a/

----

Q: and we're back with the latest news on VIDOC-19 and we are with Professor Luc
Montagnier. Hello and thank you for being with us. Do we have mention it, you're
a Nobel laureate in Medicine and you're the one at the origin of the discovery
of HIV. It's history, but also interesting for current events, because we have
an experience of things that have happened In the past and have been very
difficult to check in there at that time, and that led to the truth, just like
today.

Q: What I'm interested in this morning is that you're working on the virus right
now. We work, but not necessarily in the lab. since we're working on a computer
with a colleague and then that's it. We don't have any experiment, let’s say,
but the experience comes from the disease itself, of all the measures that are
currently being done in the labs, on patients.

Q: Have you reached any conclusions? We have come to the conclusion that,
indeed, there was a manipulation done on this virus.

Q: What do you mean? Well, that a part - I'm not saying the totality, right -
but there's a pattern that is obviously the classic virus and there it is a
model especially coming from bats. But on this model, someone added on top of
that some sequences including HIV, the virus for AIDS.

Q: But when you say "someone added"... who added? I don't know.

Q: It's not natural, is that what you mean? No, is not natural, it was a job of
professional, a job of molecular biologists. It's a very meticulous job, we can
say of precision if you look at the sequences.

Q: But for what purpose? For what purpose, it is not clear. I am exposing facts.
My job here is to state the facts, that's all. I'm not accusing anyone, I don't
know who did it and I don't know why. The possibility may be that they wanted to
do... well... "they"... we don't know who… they wanted to make a vaccine against
AIDS. So they took little sequences of the virus and inserted them in the larger
sequence of the coronavirus.

Q: So, I'm not sure to understand everything you're saying... that is to say: in
this virus there's a component of HIV? That's it, that's it. The genetic
material of the virus is a long ribbon of RNA, isn't it, like DNA, but it's RNA.
And in that long ribbon, at some place, someone has inserted small sequences of
HIV and these sequences are small, but are not that small so that they mean
nothing. They have the possibility to modify for example what are called
antigenic sites meaning:. if you want to create a vaccine, you can very well
modify the protein who is exposed for the vaccine by a small sequence from
another virus.

Q: Are you sure about this? Because it was said that…. a rumor has been going
around that it was of human origin after all, and then it was rebutted from most
of the scientific authorities anyway? There's still a will to cover this up, if
you will... the works... We're not the first. A group of Indian researchers,
very renowned, had published the same thing. They were forced to retract it.

Q: How were they forced to do that? That means it was withdrawn. If you look at
their publication, you have a big "withdrawn" warning, because...

Q: What you're saying here, most of the scientists say otherwise, still... Less
and less. Less and less, if you will... this has happened, so, it was at the
beginning of this year, and we're seeing more and more research that suggest
this. But I am, shall we say,.., out of age, and a Nobel Prize winner, and I can
work freely. And so there's no pressure that can work on me.

Q: What you're saying... I'm making the connection with what President Emmanuel
Macron said, he obviously has a duty of confidentiality infinitely more
important than you have, by definition... and what did he say to the Financial
Times? He said that there are "obviously things that happened, that we don't
know about". Well, that's the first connection I am making. The second
connection I make is with Mike Pompeo, the head of the US diplomacy who said:
"we are conducting a full investigation into everything we can learn about how
this virus has spread, contaminated the world and caused such a tragedy." And
the United States doesn't seem to rule out that the coronavirus came from a
Chinese laboratory in Wuhan. And evokes a investigation to shed light on its
origin. This is all from the last hours. He's the head of American diplomacy,
Mike Pompeo was being asked, was interviewed on Fox New Wednesday night about a
Washington Post article, which claimed that the Embassy of the United States in
Beijing had alerted the U.S. Department of State two years ago about
insufficient safety measures in a laboratory of Wuhan which was studying the
coronavirus in bats. Mr. Pompeo was questioned also on informations from Fox
News reporting that several sources now believe that the current COVID-19,
reported for the first time precisely in Wuhan, in December, emanates from that
same lab, even though it could be a natural virus, not a created pathogen
created by the Chinese, and that its escape was not voluntary but due to the bad
security protocols. That's what was said.

Q: But of course you have to be careful.

Q: I understand, I understand. And then we will be asked about the the way you
work today In order come to those conclusions. Ivan Rioufol...

Q: What you are announcing is huge, it's a nuclear bomb, I may say. But to make
sure we understand, this trace of HIV cannot be the result of a natural
crossing, well, or of a crossover, in any case between… NO animal and human
species. It can only be someone's hand, the hand of a human being? Absolutely,
there is in this case a question of concentration, if you will. You have a long
ribbon. There are 30,000 pairs, 30,000 bases, if you will, 30,000 signs on it
that carry the genetic coding and everything is concentrated in 1,000, within
those 30,000, in 1,000 bases, even less than 1,000 bases. So it is tied up in
little pieces, there's part of that genome, so, that's like, which is actually
made of HIV... but it’s got, there's a majority set of sequences of HIV.

Q: How do we see it? Very simple: by the sequence. We have a very simple
equipment, it is a a computer system that allows to find a sequence you're
looking for.

Q: No, but if I say, for example, for things to be clear, if I say "some HIV in
COVID." is it correct what I'm saying here? That's correct, but that doesn't
mean that there's enough HIV to make a big HIV protein, and enough material to
modify what we call an antigenic site i.e. to modify a little bit the
coronavirus protein to make it recognized by the immune system as HIV.

Q: But the impact on HIV, which is an extremely serious disease, with the
consequences that we know, the consequences for those... and then now, I'm
obviously paying close attention to what I'm saying, because I'm thinking about
the people who have had the COVID- 19… Can you evaluate today the consequences?
Exactly, it would be interesting, it will be interesting to study, to see if
there are antibodies produced in these patients against HIV, against one of the
HIV proteins. It would be interesting to do

Q: And to your knowledge, do you know if Professor Raoult, who is indeed one of
the world experts in this field, also had this tracing in sight, diagnosed it,
If I may say, this HIV trace and is there drugs that can cure it? No. But there
were medications, anti-virals, anti-retrovirals, against HIV that have had some
effect. But not as good as hydroxychloroquine. So they have been dropped now.

Q: And, allow me, one question: all suspicions turn to China and the President
of the Republic has taken up this thesis, saying that at least that China lied
on the seriousness of the epidemic, in any case at the beginning, as early as
January. But do you also target China and a Chinese laboratory in the fact that
this kind of terrorism would have happened? Because in fact there we are in
another world, we're in the world of bacteriological terrorism.

Q: Not terrorist! Because that would be to create a vaccine...

Q: It's accidental

Q: Yes, there you go.

Q: Wait. Was this accidental? No, I understood that it was deliberate and not
accidental...

Q: But you said a vaccine...

Q: No, but you did say yourself that it was a will to have combined two... Yes,
but not for military purposes, if we may say.

Q: All right.

Q: It would be, if I understood correctly, it was to create a vaccine...

Probably...

Q: against HIV? If you will, only the people who have done that will be able to
tell the truth, fully.

Q: But then, forgive me, what I... forgive me, but it has has it been confirmed
by other doctors, researchers, scientists, laboratories etc.? There are a number
of groups that have been doing the the same research but did it, let’s say, a
little bit on the sly, well, without making too much noise, but there are
several groups. Yeah, it's been going around.

Q: But forgive me, I'm asking always questions... Someone builts that up. in a
lab, they want to make a HIV vaccine. Well, after, how does it get out this
vaccine? How does it get out this virus? How is it coming out? How does it get
out of the laboratory? It is produced by the laboratory. At that point, that's
what is called a recombinant. This virus is produced by the Chinese laboratory
that made it, or by other labs.

Q: Yes, but they take people to test it... how does it get out? Of course... so
if we're talking about a vaccine... Now, that's another subject, that's a
coronavirus vaccine...

Q: No, but I want to know how it gets out, from the lab? How did, for the
manufacture of a vaccine against HIV, we're reaching a global pandemic. It's
that connection that I don't understand. What they've done is a construction, a
construction which is therefore a coronavirus a RNA from a coronavirus, and in a
little piece of this ribbon, you have HIV sequences. In such a way that they are
exposed, of course, to the immune system. So the prediction is that indeed there
are antibodies against HIV in infected patients by the coronavirus. This we
can't prove, we can look for it...

Q: How does it get out? Is it because they take patients and they try to test
this vaccine being developed and then it just spreads out like that? That's what
I don't get. So this is going to take a long time. We're talking about a
vaccine, in general, from a coronavirus, it's gonna take a long time, really. We
need to do first. experiments in animals, in mice...

Q: I feel like I'm making myself misunderstandood, actually... Vaccine
manufacture in the laboratory. Manufacturing. We are in agreement. You're
actually telling us We are looking for a HIV vaccine... The Vaccine must be
attenuated, i.e. one can treat...

Q: Okay, but How does it get out of the lab? Why are people infected afterwards?
Because It has to be tested? But I repeat, this is what that's being said all
over, is that There has been a leak. The viral construction escaped from Wuhan's
laboratory.

Q: What does a leak mean? Q:How can it escape?

Q: It can escape voluntarily or involuntarily? Involuntarily.

Q: But how? But by someone who has manipulated this virus, without taking too
many precautions.

Q: I am asking questions since I'm all very ignorant in this area... It's a
guess.

Q: Okay. And the way you work today. You seem to be having certainties. So where
do you working today? Yes. We are working on the sequences, that’s right, what
is fundamental are the sequences. And I can go back a little bit, since the
history of AIDS, is being repeated... well, of the origin of the the AIDS virus,
well, is repeating itself a bit today. So back then there were several
laboratories that were working on the virus, including mine at the Pasteur
Institute. There was an American laboratory, led by Professor Gallo, isn't it?
And it is proved by the sequences that the virus that I had sent to Dr. Gallo
had been renamed with another name. But it was the same virus. Why the same
virus? Because the sequences were identical. And it was... It's important to
realize that viruses are agents that change all the time. And especially viruses
with RNA, there are always mutations. I'll get back to that, because it's very
important to explain the outbreak today. But then we had the proof, the Pasteur
Institute had proved that the sequence of the virus isolated there at the
Pasteur Institute, and the one of the American virus were the same, absolutely
the same, character by character. So now we really have, if you will...
molecular biology, through the sequences, can tell if a virus is identical to
another or not, all right? And so, if you have a foreign sequence in the
coronavirus today, well, you can easily detect this through what is called
Bio-computing, right.

Q: Why don't they do that? And why hasn't it been done? Because it's molecular
biology. Well, we, we're a little bit of a group, a small group, working on it
for a long time, but we're not the only ones. I repeat: the Indians found the
the same thing and published it, and they were asked by someone to then retract
their study...

Q: But when you say that mysterious "someone"... Who's that "someone"?

Q: Who is asking to withdraw the study? Someone asked the editors of the
magazine, It’s the editor of the magazine.

Q: Okay. What you're telling us seems simple, it is that as there are several
sequences, if I have understood correctly, there are several sequences in this
virus, by definition these sequences have artificially been placed in this
virus. Are we still in agreement? And that any virologist will see this
immediately? Sounds simple. So why doesn't anyone say, "Look, that virus, it's
not natural, it is something that has been fabricated, there's something
artificial in there"? And why isn’t anyone saying this? There's one wrong answer
on that, and that's that those sequences are short and some are saying "They're
too short, it's by chance". etc etc.

Q: So there is a controversy on the issue? Yes, there is a controversy on the
issue.

Q: Okay. But we can answer right away: because those lengths are still lengths
that carry genetic information, contrary to what is said, that it's supposedly
random, that’s not true.

Q: And what is precisely a “sequence” for a virus? A sequence is the sequence of
nucleotides, isn’t it, there are four different nucleotides...

Q: It does not help me very much! But not much... I'm not really understanding.
We're all coded...

Q: As I understand it, there is a discussion on the analysis of this sequence
since there are people who say I already answered...

Q: that it's by chance... I've already answered: it's NOT by chance...

Q: YOU say it's not by chance, but some will tell you the opposite...

Q: What you are telling us on our set, is indeed, I use the expression of Ivan,
a bomb. Why? Because you're not just anyone, you're a Nobel Prize winner in
medicine and you are the one who discovered HIV. So your voice, it really
carries and there are going to be consequences of what we're saying here.
Professor Delfraissy [chair of the government's COVID-19 committee], for
example.... It's a responsibility. I actually thought it was necessary that I
mention it once we were sure...

Q: And for how long have you been sure?

Q: Why are not you saying it to professor Delfraissy? Why don't you talk about
it to Professor Raoult? Why don't you... I'm ready to talk about it.

Q: But why haven’t you done it already? That's also what I can't understand!
Yes... Let’s say that there's a process that takes time. We have sent
publications, of course, there are already a publication, in an Indian magazine
Because, I repeat, there is a huge pressure.

Q: The Indian publication, when was it published? It's from a few weeks ago.

Q: A few weeks ago? Yes, a few weeks.

Q: And you say there's enormous pressure? There's an enormous pressure regarding
everything related to the origin of the virus, it's a blackout, isn't it.

Q: It is China that imposes this blackout? It's China. It's the Chinese
government that currently wants to put its signature on, if you will, on
everything produced in China regarding the origin of the virus. But it can't
control the whole world, of course. So we are outside of China... Besides, we
think that China is also a victim in this case, of the leak, of the monster that
they've created. So, well, if you will, it's not my job to evaluate China.

Q: China knows what it has created, China knows indeed what it has created...
China, its official version is that the virus comes from the fish market in
Wuhan.

Q: So what wouldn't be true? A: That's it. So, what wouldn't be true? No, that's
not...

Q: If you show the sequencing you have been able to perform there, to any
specialist, Is he going to say "yes, indeed." That's right.

Q: Are you sure about this? Oh, yeah.

Q: Can there be pressure from the WHO? There may be pressure from all agencies,
global or national, which have an interest in hiding the truth...

Q: But what interest would they have in hiding things? ...

Q: Because the Chinese, we can understand that, but the others? I don't know. I
don't know.

Q: And you know a lot of great researchers. Have you spoken to them? Did you
send them your studies? Of course, I sent these results to a number of
colleagues...

Q: And they answer what?

Q: Well, if you will, these are facts, we can't deny them.

Q: I suggest we pause For a bit.

Q: About the scientific process itself, do you find it rational to have tried To
associate at any point, for a Researcher, COVID-19 and HIV? No, I find that
weird enough

Q: Weird? It's weird, because HIV is very dangerous.

Q: So nothing, a priori, related… it couldn't... Look, the facts are there.

Q: We're going to carry on and you'll tell us... because.... you will also tell
us if this virus mutates and evolves, and if it is weakening. And I think that's
also what you noticed, since the virus today is moving from West to East... from
East to West, sorry. And it is now in the States and you have noticed that in
the United States, it is much weaker and has lost, in a way, his virulence... In
some patients.

Q: Okay, I'll see you in a minute.

Q: Luc Montagnier is with us this morning. You've obviously triggered something
on social networks, something absolutely incredible. You tell us two things this
morning. That COVID-19 has been artificially manufactured in a laboratory in
Wuhan from the original virus

Q: He didn't say that… he assumed it was in Wuhan, There's a lab in Wuhan that
was able to do that.

Q: So that's what you're saying and you're are telling us that there's something
in this virus, a part of HIV. You triggered obviously a ton of reactions. Among
those by the way, very simply, people are asking very Simple questions: does
having segments of HIV in COVID-19 could... could mean it is transmitted
sexually? I don't think so. I think that this virus, is still essentially a
coronavirus, right, so that it is transmitted through breathing.

Q: So it's still a respiratory virus. even if it was manufactured just like you
said? Yes, because, I repeat, the HIV sequences are A very small minorities
amongst overall genes, in the overall of genes in the coronavirus.

Q: And they don't have the same consequences that HIV itself has. That's
apparently what you were saying, too. Yeah, maybe with one caveat. if we work on
the surface protein of a virus, we can change his tropism. That is that it is
going to attack other types of cells than the ones at the beginning.

Q: So the silence: what would explain the silence… and yes... please...

Q: Perhaps before elaborating on this thought, let’s ask how the community is
reacting the most official scientists.

Q: It's coming, I guess

Q: This is the first question I'd ask myself.

Q: But by definition, at the time we're talking, these circles are maybe just
finding out what you say...

Q: Because if they have hidden this, it's interesting... We have the facts, and
I repeat, there is a publication, originally Indian, which has been deleted
through pressure from the publisher.

Q: So I'm going to to ask you a question first, so forgive me, to ask you
questions sometimes that can be considered a little rough around the edges,
though. obviously But, you know, all of this stuff we asked ourselves all of
this first, too.

Q: There's also part of a newbie question but when you say there's some kind of
silence on this, does the silence of the countries finally is not there because
everyone does the same thing? That is to say that everyone would be doing, in
his corner, sometimes without saying it, the manufacture of vaccines in this
way, where they would get a virus and then they would inject another virus
sequence and that eventually all the labs of the world are doing the same thing,
and it's why people don't say anything. today. Is that even possible? I don't
know if all the labs do that, but anything is possible. In molecular biology
today, you can make any new construction of viruses that you want

Q: No but it's not... that kind of practices is strictly forbidden! we can't...
at the Pasteur Institute, for instance, people cannot do what they want?!
Absolutely, absolutely.

Q: There are very specific rules. But the fact that everyone follow these rules
in the whole world, it's unlikely.

Q: Allow me....

Q: Please

Q: An observation, it's just that, obviously, and in France and elsewhere, We
didn't want to research for the causes of what is happening to us, meaning that
when Donald Trump, for example, said that that virus was Chinese, he was
badmouthed, saying that he couldn't say that this virus was Chinese, because we
didn't know anything. When there were these rumors saying that this virus could
have gotten out of a lab, because these Rumors have been running around for two
months, everyone was screaming ‘fake news’. and now no one dares even assess the
hypothesis that it could be germ warfare. You said that it wasn't conceivable, I
hear you. But still, with these two denials, saying that it wasn't China, and
then that it wasn't a laboratory and now we're hearing that it's absolutely not
a bacteriological war, we can also... well, I can doubt it. I can hear you when
you say that this wasn't the point, that it was a vaccine at the end of the
day... But can't we just anyway take this hypothesis as well into account, of a
germ warfare that would have, and already may exist, which exists in the
scenarios and would have could also be established in Wuhan, or somewhere else?

Q: I read there for example that the American laboratory says "we have analyzed
things, it comes from a natural origin". It does not say the same thing as you.
It's a lab that looks pretty serious... They are playing with words. Because you
put a natural object in another natural object. HIV is a natural object, too.

Q: Yeah yeah yeah... so far, a number of recognized authorities say it was of
natural origin...

Q: No, but the world is going to become...

Q: I'm a little...

Q: I don't quite agree with Ivan's analysis, but I'm taking from it: conspiracy
theories exist, we see them, we can see that. I often fight, between brackets,
against conspiracy theories by saying "let's put that aside". But if what you
say is right, the world is going get completely paranoid. And it’s not going to
no more believe in anything, obviously. Because if this reality... you're
telling us that it's known, that they put a lid on it, that a study existed... I
do understand, I was doing the link earlier, as I said, with what Emmanuel
Macron said, that we can, at the light of what you say, interpret... I recall
this sentence: "Obviously, things have happened that we do not know about." It's
a very toned down, but what the U.S. says, when we listen to you, we tell
ourselves that the United States are aware of what Mr. Montagnier... Not only
does the United States know, but they did fund some of the research done in
Wuhan's lab. It's published, that...

Q: That's crazy... So it's a problem that is not just Chinese...

Q: If we want to reassure ourselves, since you have continued to work on this
virus... that virus today it has lost, you say, all its virulence and you
imagine that it will no longer be specifically dangerous in the next few weeks?
Yes, what is interesting, if you will, is that my mathematical colleague Perez
thinks there's some kind of harmonization of the sequences, of the genetic
information, which is carried as well in our own chromosones as by the virus. So
nature doesn't accept anything. That is, we can do anything to nature but if
you're making an artificial construct, it is unlikely to survive. That is to say
that nature loves the harmonious things and what is foreign, such as another
virus coming from another virus, is not well tolerated. So, what is happening as
time goes by, a the epidemic is spreading, notably in the United States where
there is the largest number of cases, there is an evolution through mutations,
right. The sequences will mutate. Mutate means one nucleotide changed for a
other, the genetic code is changing. But it also means deletions that are made:
It means that there are whole chunks of the genome, including… what is
extraordinary is that, precisely, the region that carries the HIV sequences are
mutating much faster than the others. So, it itself disappears by deletions. So,
we have patients on whom we have isolated the virus and sequenced the virus, in
the western part of the United States, in Seattle, and this sequence is almost
demolished and no longer works.

Q: So the HIV is gone? You'd think if the new pathogenicity, if you will, of the
corona is related to the introduction of these sequences, that it is going to
disappear. It's a bit of hope.

Q: Well, I just wanted to react...

Q: When is that going to happen?

Q: So, there is no, there was no denial! The proof is for now that the rumors
that were out there, and that were unfortunately... that were meeting
credibility... but then again... a lot of people believed it... of something
that would have been manufactured. So far there was no evidence. Here, what
brings, what Luc Montagnier says, that's interesting. I'm unable to tell if it's
actually the correct hypothesis, but in any case there is an hypothesis. But
before, we weren't in denial because we didn't have precise information.

Q: If you will, we were in denial about, Say, that it was from China, we were in
denial that it was the Chinese... Remember the controversy...

Q: From there to talking about a Chinese virus... it's something else... That it
is coming from China, no one has never denied it. But I don't know for sure.

Q: There has been a lack of curiosity.

Q: Mr. Montagnier and his word, we're interested in it, what should we do today?
What should we do? Well, doing the analysis of sequences...

Q: And you performed them, you say... But yeah, but it changes all the time,
every day that there are new infected patients. So we should follow, if you
want, the genetic evolution of the virus through samples, therefore through
isolating patient viruses, and do the sequencing of these viruses. And if my
prediction is correct, we're going to find more and more mutant viruses,
inactivated, and of course this must be related, if my hypothesis is correct, to
the loss of pathogenic power of this virus. So the serious consequences of the
infection will go away.

Q: So you talk about hypothesis, by the way, like all the scientists? What
you're saying to us this morning, it has to be a hypothesis... But it's still
based on a measure of evolution. We have measures for the month of March, for
January, right.

Q: So those are rapid changes? Here it is

Q: The analysis you performed on the virus itself, it's a very lengthy task to
do, very difficult? No, it's not difficult, computer analysis is not difficult

Q: So why did not anybody else do it? It's coming, I think. Because no one
mentioned it for now, it's a discovery we made ourselves, for that matter.

Q: You're the one who found out about this... We're the ones who did discover
this, and in principle, if we are right, it will increase: the number of mutant
virus will increase, the more time goes by.

Q: If I understood your reasoning, you told us in a very nice sentence that
"nature loves harmony" Yes

Q: And so in your reasoning, this virus will unravel pretty quickly, if I
understand... Yes, he's going to lose its sequences

Q: And quickly, what does quickly mean? For you, "quickly" is what? Is it in
months, is it in years? As time goes by, through transmissions. This is why the
epidemic has made us learn. Obviously, It's unfortunate that there is this
epidemic, so we must by all means, by all known means we have to stop it from
progressing. But in the U.S., this is a real explosion, there are now five
hundred thousand people who are infected in the United States.

Q: Is the contagiousness of this virus precisely related to its artificial
manufacture? Do you think it's possible? Yes, it's possible because the
transmission is linked, if you will, to the association between a virus protein
and a receptor on the cells. And thus, the more the virus finds receptors, on
these cells, and the more it is going to be able to stick and penetrate, and
therefore transmit information.

Q: And what do you think are the means to fight the contagion? Is a lockdown the
right solution? If you want, I've got a little solution... a bit avant-garde
because I have been working on this for some other reasons, it is that the waves
can modify the frequencies. Certain wave frequencies can change the presence of
these sequences. As they are foreign, maybe we can distinguish them from the
rest of the coronavirus and selectively destroy them. Now, that's science
fiction for now and now I can only verify this if I have the means to do it.
otherwise...

Q: But I don't, I'm not sure I understand... What do you call "the waves"?
"Waves" are electromagnetic waves, right...

Q: That could separate... We're surrounded by electromagnetic waves Why don't we
just use some of these waves to destroy sequences, selectively, of RNA or DNA?
That's one possibility, but it's not a certainty, of course,

Q: But is this virus, this new virus, accelerating the immune responses... I'm
sorry, I can't find the word... accelerates the fact that we have more of an
immune system likely to defend ourselves or is that irrelevant? Is it
eradicating the immune defenses, or not? Well, yes, I think we live in a very
different environment from the one of our ancestors, and without taking notice,
we love the waves, we communicate over the waves all the time, right? But there
are ever more projects in the pipeline, always more important, for these waves
to be even more around us. Then I repeat: it's a subject to be studied, isn't
it, the role of the waves. It is said, for example, that the city of Wuhan was
very early for the installation of 5G antennas, 10,000 antennas are in this
region and therefore they were maybe able to contribute to the pathogenicity of
the virus.

Q: Thank you. Unfortunately then, really we're already late.

Q: One question: I saw the...

Q: Can we have five more minutes? I'll also asks Marine Lançon and perhaps our
friend Jean-Marc Morandini: Can we exceptionally go over a bit, because that
it's true that what you're saying to us is so important at this time…

Q: Because I'm reading there, in the... it's a review, I believe, that you have
been violently challenged by other Nobel Prize winners on scientific positions
and that a petition that has been done against you. That's what I'm reading
here, huh... That is another story.

Q: But it's striking, Really, that others, that all the Nobel Prize winners are
lining up against you... Not all Nobel Prize winners...

Q: Part of them anyway...but why are they doing this, uniting against you?
Because, if you will, I endorsed the positions defended by Jacques Benveniste on
the ‘memory of water’

Q: This has been refuted, hasn’t it? No, sir! No, sir! It has been... it's the
same, there's some kind of veil, people are prevented from researching on
this...

Q: He searched for a long time, he was not prevented from doing it! But it's
just that people didn't believe to his theory, rather, it's not so much so that
he was prevented... I mean, yes he was...

Q: I mean me I knew him, Benveniste... He was mistreated, you might say.

Q: Laurent Joffrin, the truth. is that we cannot bring the contradiction to
mister...

Q: Oh no, I wouldn't allow myself to do that, I'm reading an article that says
otherwise, that's why. I wonder.

Q: Yes, I can understand, but you can see that on this subject many doctors are
not in agreement, a lot of scientists do not agree...

Q: Yes, and that's what I've been willing to stress: let’s be carefull.

Q: Yes, and that's why by the way, you were here this morning. What you're
saying is mind-boggling, let's just say it. What you're saying is indeed, and I
thank you for being here on the set of C-News, for telling this to us... it
deserves contradiction. By definition it is the scientific contradiction

Q: What I've just read is from an article in Le Figaro, I just found this...

Q: You spoke yourself about hypotheses and this word is also that I want to
underline, as often scientists are moving forward by talking about hypothesis.
And unfortunately we can't not continue this discussion, but I don't doubt that
we'll be able pursue it and hear you again... If I may say, the most important
is not the origin. It's interesting, the origin of the virus, but it's rather
What is going to happen now for all of us?

Q: That's the question I asked you earlier... I'll tell you part of the answer:
there is a possibility, a possibility, a silver lining that this outbreak
disappears because the virus will self-destruct.

Q: But are we to expect, this may be my last question, a pandemics like this
one, on a regular basis? Well, we need to avoid absolutely that it is repeated,
that it's reproduced, it's obvious. So then I believe that the rules of ethics
of researchers, it is necessary that everyone respect them. This are ethical
rules also for doctors: we don't kill. by the treatment!  'primum non Nocere’, I
speak Latin, and so that's really fundamental right, there.

Q: Thanks a lot, it's over.

Q: So there's an ethical misconduct at wanting to combine the two?

Q: It's over, Ivan, we're already going over here, for more than five minutes.

Q: Thank you. Thank you for inviting me.

Q: Of course. It's absolutely facinating! Your question, did you ask it? What
was it? your question?

Q: Is there an ethical mistake to have wanted to associate COVID with HIV? Yes,
I think so.

Q: This is important, indeed, to hear your answer. Thank you very much, Mister
Montagnier, thank you very much. Thanks to Marine Lançon. Thanks to Ana-Lisa
Cappelini who was with us today. Thanks to Stéphane Gallardo who was at the
director's office, and Remy, and Guillaume. Sorry for those we were to welcome
in the last parts of the show, but it was taken upside down. Thank you all so
much, rendez-vous to you on Monday. Thank you, Mr. Montagnier and please
Jean-Marc Morandini forgives me for those few minutes of overflow.

[Music playing]