Ask Dr. Drew - Dr. Naomi Wolf on Pregnant Women in Pfizer mRNA Trial Documents w/ Dr. Kelly Victory – Ask Dr. Drew – Episode 116

Episode Date: August 29, 2022

Controversial writer Dr. Naomi Wolf – though credited for decades as a feminist leader after authoring "The Beauty Myth" – is now ostracized by her academic peers after she dared to question the effects of mRNA on pregnant women. She returns with Dr. Kelly Victory to discuss her DailyClout organization's in-depth review of documents from Pfizer's trials of their COVID-19 vaccine and its effects on unborn babies: including findings that she believes to show decades of pharmaceutical misconduct resulting in over $30 billion in civil and criminal fines since 2000. Dr. Naomi Wolf is a Rhodes Scholar and former advisor to the Clinton and Gore campaigns. She is the author of several NYT nonfiction bestsellers, including The Beauty Myth. Her latest book is "The Bodies of Others: The New Authoritarians, Covid-19 and the War Against the Human." Dr. Wolf is the co-founder and CEO of https://DailyClout.io. Find her new book "The Bodies Of Others" at Amazon.com MEDICAL NOTE: The CDC states that COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and reduce your risk of severe illness. Hundreds of millions of people have received a COVID-19 vaccine, and serious adverse reactions are rare. You should always consult your personal physician before making any decisions about your health.  Dr. Kelly Victory MD is a board-certified trauma and emergency specialist with over 15 years of clinical experience. She served as CMO for Whole Health Management, delivering on-site healthcare services for Fortune 500 companies. She holds a BS from Duke University and her MD from the University of North Carolina. Follow her at https://earlycovidcare.org Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Kaleb Nation (https://kalebnation.com) and Susan Pinsky (http://twitter.com/firstladyoflove). This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. SPONSORED BY • GENUCEL - Using a proprietary base formulated by a pharmacist, Genucel has created skincare that can dramatically improve the appearance of facial redness and under-eye puffiness. Genucel uses clinical levels of botanical extracts in their cruelty-free, natural, made-in-the-USA line of products. Get 10% off with promo code DREW at https://genucel.com/drew GEAR PROVIDED BY • BLUE MICS - After more than 30 years in broadcasting, Dr. Drew's iconic voice has reached pristine clarity through Blue Microphones. But you don't need a fancy studio to sound great with Blue's lineup: ranging from high-quality USB mics like the Yeti, to studio-grade XLR mics like Dr. Drew's Blueberry. Find your best sound at https://drdrew.com/blue • ELGATO - Every week, Dr. Drew broadcasts live shows from his home studio under soft, clean lighting from Elgato's Key Lights. From the control room, the producers manage Dr. Drew's streams with a Stream Deck XL, and ingest HD video with a Camlink 4K. Add a professional touch to your streams or Zoom calls with Elgato. See how Elgato's lights transformed Dr. Drew's set: https://drdrew.com/sponsors/elgato/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hey everybody, welcome to another Wednesday show with Dr. Kelly Victory, and today our guest is Dr. Naomi Wolf. Naomi Wolf was the author of The Beauty Myth. She was one of the leaders of one of the waves of feminist movement, and has more recently been banned by social media and ostracized by her peers. She chronicles a lot of this misadventure in this book, which I enjoyed reading immensely. I recommend it highly. We're going to discuss it. I'm becoming increasingly, which I'm going to tell Naomi, interested in these sort of almost diary-like re-examinations of what we went through. I think we're all starting to look back now and go, what? What? What? Come on now. Of course, she's been in the eye of the hurricane quite a bit. She has had taken some positions that have been controversial. Some have been right,

some have been wrong, like many of us. I myself, let me say clearly that I advocate for the vaccine. I give it on a regular basis. I just did it again this morning with an elderly patient. I use Paxlovid on a regular basis as well. I have concerns for 17-year-old males, for instance, and the interval in between the two vaccines we're giving. There's lots of things to talk about, and we should be discussing all of these things. And I'm open to hearing other concerns as well, because this was something that we all know was rushed to market in the fog of war. And now, just now, they're starting to blame the, literally today, starting to blame the

Trump administration for the speed with which it was brought to market. we'll talk about that and more let's get right to it our laws as it pertained to substances are draconian and bizarre the psychopaths start this right he was an alcoholic because of social media and pornography ptsd love addiction fentanyl and heroin ridiculous i'm a doctor for say where's sake. Where the hell do you think I learned that? I'm just saying, you go to treatment before you kill people. I am a clinician. I observe things about these chemicals. Let's just deal with what's real. We used to get these calls

on Loveline all the time. Educate adolescents and to prevent and to treat. If you have trouble, you can't stop and you want to help stop it, I can help. I got a lot to say. I got a lot more to say. Bet MGM, authorized gaming partner of the NBA, has your back all season long. From tip-off to the final buzzer, you're always taken care of with the sportsbook born in Vegas. That's a feeling you can only get with BetMGM.

And no matter your team, your favorite player, or your style, there's something every NBA fan will love about BetMGM. Download the app today and discover why

BetMGM is your basketball home for the season. Raise your game to the next level this year with BetMGM. A sportsbook worth a slam dunk.

An authorized gaming partner of the NBA. BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. Must be 19 years of age or older to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have any questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario

at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. Welcome, everybody. We are on multiple platforms today. Twitter Spaces, I see you over there. Today, I'm probably not going to get to any calls. Between the three of us, there's a lot of talking that's going to be undertaken here.

So we might get some calls, but it's not likely a reminder that tomorrow we'll be doing calls only so twitter space is at three o'clock tomorrow calls only i believe next wednesday is dr robert malone is that correct uh caleb is that who's coming out yes that's correct we have that security from now that is correct and i want to remind people if you do want to interact with us here on camera, I am watching the Rumble Rants. You can go over to Rumble slash Dr. Drew or just Rumble Dr. Drew. And also on the Restream chat, which is for Twitter, Twitch, YouTube, you can express yourself there. I try to keep tabs on it.

Susan watches it all very carefully. Obviously, I have other things I'm doing here at the same time. If we do not respond to something you put there you'd like us to, I apologize ahead of time. We're doing the best we can. So let me first welcome Dr. Naomi Wolf. Naomi is a friend. Naomi is somebody I've admired for many years. Her writing is second to none. Her thinking is clear. She has been a freedom fighter for a long time, initially in the name of, I guess it would be third wave feminism, Naomi, or second wave feminism. And now in the name of excesses brought upon us through the public health system. But this has been the movement. This has been your effort that has caused you to be ostracized by a community amongst which you were a leader.

And that story is fascinating to me, so welcome. Thank you so much, Dr. Drew, and I consider you and Susan friends as well, and it's an honor to be speaking with you again. And so would we call you a second or third wave feminist? Do you push away those labels or can we even use them anymore? No, they're useful for kind of historical overviews. I guess I'm called a third wave feminism, but, you know, there's fourth and fifth waves now doing all kinds of exciting things. So it's fun to be in the flow of the

generations. It's interesting to me that most of the third wave feminists I know have been at least scrutinized, if not marginalized, which is so weird to me. The people who are really fighting their way forward. The Beauty Myth, of course, again, is her sentinel book. So The Bodies of Others. I really enjoyed reading it. I felt like I was there with you as you went through these experiences. The more sort of diary-like revisiting of this piece of history I think is going to be historically extremely important. And I thought you did a good job of that. Can you tell us, I guess we'll start with what motivates you to write the book? Sure.

Well, you know, I kind of feel like this whole trajectory of having been kind of ostracized by the community where I was indeed considered a thought leader, being so marginalized now, deplatformed on platform after platform. It's a little surreal to me, Dr. Drew, because I'm literally doing what I've done for 35 years. I'm just being a journalist and I'm just speaking up for the constitution. So basically, The Bodies of Others picks up where The End of America left off. That was a 2008 book in which I pointed out that when would be dictators are trying to close down an open society, they always take the same 10 steps, whether they're on the left or the right. And we were seeing some of those steps being taken in

Bush's America. And the last step is step 10, which is the argument of the bodies of others, the pandemic provided a pretext for a handful of bad actors to really engage in a massive power grab against humanity and to try to reorder the world and especially to disempower human beings in relation to tech oligarchs in relation to pharma in relation to the Chinese Communist Party the World Economic Forum the World Health Organization This loose alliance of negative entities who really acted in lockstep And very quickly I realized that a lot of these policies that in retrospect seems so insane Medically and the early on I was calling out is insane medically, ranging from lockdowns and the data are in, the Wall Street Journal just ran

a brand new op-ed. They do it periodically. The data are in showing that closed states like California did just the same as open states like Florida. And the data are in that masks barely make a difference. The data are in that children suffered more from being kept from school than they were ever at risk from COVID. But all of these policies actually do have something in common. They were very effective at what I think was the goal all along, a massive transfer of assets. billions of dollars went from mom and pop shops that were forced to stay closed to Amazon and Etsy and their tech competitors and billions of dollars, you know, when people are not allowed to gather in person, to worship in person, to go to school in person,

to go to town halls in person, all these tech platforms, and I'm a tech CEO now, so I really do understand this, where you're living your life now, you know, for the two and a half years that human contact was forbidden or made difficult or, you know, almost impossible to communicate, they're up 20 to 23% net revenue over the last two years. And lastly, what I really argue in the bodies of others is that there are things human beings do that machines can't compete with, like smile and express emotion, like communicate verbally, tell a story, make people fall in love, inspire each other, create culture. Those are the things that were suppressed during the pandemic. And these bad actors, you know, use the pandemic and then a rollout of this nefarious mRNA vaccine, which I can speak about more if you like, as a gateway to a CCP

style, a social credit system. They tried to do it. They did it in Israel. They rolled it out in Europe, the green pass. They did it here in york state and the the goal was to surveil and control us you're talking about the the vaccine passports yes yes yeah the the i i spoke to a young gentleman yesterday about this very issue and and really what the african-american community was what was done to them as a result of being ostracized like that. I mean, it was just an incredible, and why people are not taking responsibility for that, looking at that, examining it, maybe thinking, gosh, we made a mistake, nothing.

One of the things that troubles me is there's no active looking back, I don't think. Is there? It doesn't feel like people are looking back and trying to analyze what happened. Now, I understand you're pointing at a motivated group that had these, feel like they perhaps feel as though they didn't do anything wrong or got to the ends that they were looking for. But there certainly are lots of participants that must be questioning what happened, and yet we don't

really see it. No. I mean, it depends on where you spend your time i think america has been um cloven in two essentially by this experience and half of america is getting a completely different information stream uh the red states conservatives libertarians and i'm a lifelong democrat right so this is a little weird for me, but they are pretty sane and they got pretty good information throughout. And to their credit, people like Tucker Carlson, the War Room, which gives me a platform regularly, people I never thought I'd be talking to because I come from a very different world. They've been covering the craziness and the damage and the psychotic aspects of these lockdowns, these masks, and now these injections. And half of the country really cares about freedom and really cares about

the Constitution and realized right away or very soon, this is an assault. You know, what do you mean I can't assemble with more than six people? The First Amendment says I can assemble. You know, what do you mean Twitter is going to clear people off the platform? You know, the First Amendment says I can assemble. What do you mean Twitter is going to clear people off the platform? The First Amendment gives us certain freedoms. But moving on to the people that I know and love, they're in the blue states, they're inodies of Others, about how millions of dollars went from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and later from the CARES Act to buy up a lot of legacy news outlets to lie to people. For instance, you know, right now we're doing a lot of reporting on harms to pregnancy and harms to childbirth. And the New York Times over and over and over would say it's safe and effective, safe and effective. And I kept saying to a poor Vermont, really, where is the study? Because there

was no study. And I knew that as a many decades long reporter on women's health. But the New York Times took the money and lied. I mean, there's no nice way to say it. NPR took the money and lied. The BBC took the money and lied. So in that half of America, people are still kind of ill-informed and only waking up slowly to how badly our society has been damaged. Yeah. Dr. Victor and I have been obviously talking to people who have controversial opinions, but one of the things we're realizing is one consensus we always find is more science, please, more good science, please. That's what everybody wants. We want to be able to really assess these things. And that it's clear that the public health world made a decision to get to the vaccine uber alice, get to the vaccine, get to a vaccine. That is our

policy. And so anything that got in the way of the vaccine, getting to that vaccine and then rolling out that vaccine was extremely dangerous to this uber Alice opinion. And along the way, we have learned, which I didn't realize until now, that the fiat authority of public health, as specified by constitutions, both state and federal, is excessive. And we have to do something about that because it's, I hope somebody is willing to legislate or something because there should be some ability to kind of address the excesses. That they are not, I can't think of any circumstance where that kind of fiat would be appropriate. I hope this experience we've all had

kind of showed us that. But let's bring Dr. Victory in now to get on with this conversation. Of course, Dr. Kelly Victory is an ER doctor. She's someone who has very strong feelings about all these things. And she joins me every Wednesday. And she's here now with us, Dr. Victory. So I'll hand it over to you, Kelly, a little bit to see if you have any sort of opening questions for Naomi. Well, there's so many things I want to talk with you about, Naomi. I have been preaching about the debacle of this pandemic response from the very, very beginning. Everything from the fallacy of masks to the made up construct of social distancing, the damage that was predictable from the lockdowns, and on and on, the devastating impact on children and everything from their

delay in ability to speak to the sort of disastrous results of keeping them out of school in general, and on and on. Drew and I have talked at great length about the vaccines, and I have been a huge critic of the vaccines, not because I'm anti-vaccine, by the way, quite the opposite. It's these particular vaccines that are problematic and the total lack of safety data that was behind them. One of the things that I raised an alarm bell about really a year and a half ago was concerns on my part about potential impact on pregnancy, specifically as a scientist, because of the overlap of a specific protein that's found on the spike protein of COVID that is very, very similar, almost identical to a critical protein that's involved in the development and formation of a placenta. It's

called Synctin-1. And my concern was that if you got injected with these vaccines, you would develop, as the plan was to develop antibodies to the spike protein, and that you therefore would potentially be developing antibodies to the placenta. Now, lo and behold, we are seeing some very, very alarming data about that. And I really wanna hear about how it is that you went down that road specifically of all of the adverse events related to these vaccine,

and they are many, it's a long list from which to choose, but how it is that you went down that particular line and what it was that led you to it. And by the way, one of the interesting things that's happening today is that because I've noticed on Twitter what's gone viral is there's some article on AP, I think it was, that they're being critical of the Trump administration rushing the vaccines through the FDA and through the market. Now you can say these things because they're ready to hang it on Trump, which I don't care.

I don't care as long as we can talk honestly about our concerns and just discuss these possibilities. But now we can't, it looks like, because that is going very viral just this very day. But go ahead, Naomi. Oh, God, this is so hideously predictable. Well, let's, and, you know, I don't mean that in a partisan way. I just mean that I think that the various very credible critics who are bringing forward very good scientific evidence about the harms, especially to women and babies and fetuses, are making an impact. I think the

3,500 experts that I convened at Daily Clout, with the War Room's help, physicians, RNs, biostatisticians, medical fraud investigators, lab clinicians who have been going through the 55,000 a month Pfizer documents released under court order and issuing reports about what's in them. And they've been doing detailed work on pregnancy and reproductive harms in general. And we're seeing a 360 degree attack on human reproduction in the Pfizer documents. I think that's having an impact. And as a result, we're seeing recently the CDC backpedaling, Dr. Fauci resigning, and now the AP blaming President Trump. So now to answer Dr. Victory's question, you know, as I said to Dr. Drew, I'm not doing

anything I haven't done for 35 years. So I've written two bestsellers about women's reproductive health. One is called Misconceptions, and it was about childbirth. And one is called Vagina vagina and it was about female sexuality. So I kind of know my way around, you know, basic female biology and I care about women's health. I'm a feminist. Well, so to me, you know, when over a year ago I was hearing eyewitness accounts of women saying I'm having horrible menstrual problems. Well, Dr. Victory, that's not rocket science. You know, if women are having two periods a month, or, you know, casting of their uterine lining or postmenopausal women are bleeding, or 10 year old

girls start to bleed right after they've been injected with the mRNA vaccine, something is wrong. And I'm an English major, and I know that. I know that a healthy menstrual cycle is a key sign of women's fertility and women's health. And then I have this group of experts now, and I ask them to look at pregnancy and lactation, because I could tell you a year ago that many women were having problems with their menstruation. By the way, now a Freedom of Information Act request showed that the CDC was colluding at the highest levels with Twitter officials to de-platform and smear me for that very tweet in which I said, this bears further investigation. Over a year later, many studies have confirmed that the

injections disrupt women's menstrual health. And we have a new report in the Pfizer research team documents up by Dr. Robert Chandler, who's treated the Lakers, treated the Angels, highly respected, highly published sports medicine physician, showing that there are like 25 categories of menstrual harms in the Pfizer documents. And not only that, but that out of the adverse events, 16% of them are identified by Pfizer as reproductive disorders related to women versus 0.49% of the adverse events for men being identified by Pfizer as reproductive disorders. And I can go into detail about additional harms that our team has found specifically to the placenta, to the ovaries, to gestation, exactly related to the issues that

you identified, although you're adding a new piece of it, if you want me to identify the mechanisms we found that are causing miscarriages. Let me do this. Go ahead. Finish your thought, Kelly. I just want to interject, and we've talked about this on the show before, never in the history of medicine, I've been a practicing physician more than 30 years, never in the history of medicine have we given a therapeutic, a vaccine, any type of intervention on a group of people on whom that thing has never been tested. These vaccines were never tested on pregnant women, lactating women, women of childbearing age, and a lot of other groups.

Yet they went out, they marched it out there and said safe and effective with no data behind that. It simply didn't exist. Furthermore, we know from the documents that came out from Pfizer well before it was ever launched that they knew that the mRNA went, that 11% of it specifically, based on that Japanese study, that 11% of it ended up in the testes and ovaries. So I know Drew wants to get in here, but just as a sort of baseline for people to understand, this was information with regard to where the mRNA landed that was well known by Pfizer before the vaccines were launched to the public. And before, I'm going to go to break. I'm going to go to break.

I want you guys to hold your thoughts. I'm going to throw a little lighter fluid on this also and push back by saying, hmm, you know, this was the fog of war. They made a conscious effort for vaccine uberalice. I know, roll your eyes all you want, but I'm going to take this position. And clearly they were going to take risks to roll out this vaccine, way more risks than we would normally take. That was clear in their philosophy, if not their actual stated policy,

vaccine uberalice. So there's going to be problems with a vaccine you push out that fast. And it's pretty easy to cause reproductive irregularities, menstrual irregularities in women with something that has sort of protean effects on the body, right? I mean, any medication can do that. The vaccine fucked me up good. I was a mess. If I were a woman, I'm sure my menstrual periods would have been off for quite a while just from how sick it made me. So I'll give you guys a chance. Oh yeah, this is a picture of my, I don't even think this is Dr. Victory.

That is my raccoon eye. I had unilateral raccoon eye, woke up the morning sick as hell with that looking in the mirror. And that's the Johnson & Johnson vaccine for which the great untoward effect was a transverse sinus thrombosis in the central nervous system. And the presenting feature is unilateral raccoon eye. So I looked in the mirror, thought I'm going to be the only male to have gotten this complication.

How embarrassing, but here we go. And so, but be that as it may, I'm going to take a break. And then I want to give you guys a chance to get into, I know you're going to get into the specific mechanisms and really go to town on this, but I'm just giving that kind of general pushback on, you know, there were some risks taken. There really were. And there's no doubt about it. We should be looking at it and adjusting course.

My fear and concern still rest in the cardiac pathology and particularly in the young males. And why are we giving the vaccine so close together and why we really why that again it's the bureaucratization the centralization of a decision making that's making it this way but we'll talk about that be right back after the break i think we have found the holy grail of skin care genu cell has absolutely changed certainly my skin care regimen i like that vitamin C serum, the under eye creams, skin nourishing primer. Susan loves the eyelash enhancers, uses it on her eyebrows as well. GenuCell has everything to make us both feel and look amazing. Best part, the quality of the

products. Using pure ingredients like antioxidants, copper peptides, and a proprietary calendula flower base, GenuCell knows how to formulate products to perfection without irritation. For Susan, she hates that annoying dry area on her nose during allergy season, like right here. She's tried everything, but no matter what, the skin is flaky and dry. Nothing seemed to help until she started using GenuCell's Silky Smooth XV Moisturizer. Soaked right into the skin, she was hooked after one use and now loves all of their products as well.

I am a snob when it comes to using products on my face. The dermatologist makes a ton of money for me. But when I was introduced to GenuCell, I was so happy because it's so affordable and it works great. I was introduced to the Ultra Retinol Cream, which I love at night. All the eye creams are amazing. People notice my skin all the time, and I'm so excited because it's actually working. Right now, you can try GenuCell's most popular collection of products and see what I'm talking about for yourself. Go to GenuCell.com and enter code Drew for 10% off. That is G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com, and the code is D-R-E-W. Some platforms have banned the discussion of controversial topics.

This episode ends here. The rest of the show is available at drdrew.tv. There's nothing in medicine that doesn't boil down to a risk-benefit calculation. It is the mandate of public health to consider the impact of any particular mitigation scheme on the entire population. This is uncharted territory, Drew. So there's an internist on Twitter, Dr. Gonzalez, I believe his name is. Let me double check that. Yeah. Who very kindly put up the ACOG COVID-19 vaccine and pregnancy guidelines. And the ACOG position is that they are safe and effective, essentially,

and vaccines can be done any time, any trimester, let's see, as soon as possible to maximize maternal and fetal health. Go ahead, guys. Yeah, let me take that and let me push back. I'm going to push back to your pushing back respectfully, Dr. Drew. You know, I have a really privileged position having seen these Pfizer documents and working with them every day with these 3,500 experts. And one of the first things that emerges from the Pfizer documents that again, Pfizer thought would never be made public and that the FDA asked the court to keep

hidden for 75 years is that Pfizer knew by November of 2020 that the vaccines did not work. So they had vaccine failure, failure of efficacy. The third most common side effect in the Pfizer documents is COVID. So to Dr. Victory's point of a risk-benefit analysis, there's no way that you can justify giving these injections to pregnant women, even with warp speed, even Uber-Alus, because they knew they did not work and they didn't inform the rest of the world until April of 2021 that there would be waning efficacy. Now I want to go to the mechanism, if I may. For ACOG to say that is unconscionable. I'm going to say it's like the early 30s in Nazi Germany, when before the Nazis, and I'm Jewish, and I lost many relatives in my grandparents' generation to the Holocaust, so I don't see this lightly. But in the early 30s, the National Socialists enlisted professional doctors organizations to lead the charge to kind of validate Nazi ideology and to create

a discourse of life worthy of life, life unworthy of life. And for ACOG to say that is hideous of that scale of crimes against humanity. Here's why. We'll see. We'll see. Well, let me give you my evidence, please. I mean, as a woman, this is really important. As a mother, it's so important.

The statement that it was safe and effective, as Dr. Victory noted, it wasn't based on any studies involving pregnant women. Pregnant women were excluded from the trials. The statement that it was safe and effective for pregnant women. Pregnant women were excluded from the trials. The statement that it was safe and effective for pregnant women was based on a study of 44 French rats followed for 42 days. The baby rats were sacrificed in utero. They weren't allowed to get born so that the scientists could assess if they were developing normally, eating, thriving. And the scientists and doctors concluded that the fetal rats were fine, those scientists and doctors were employees and shareholders of Pfizer. In the Pfizer documents, there's a section that shows that 270 women got pregnant nonetheless, even though they were excluded from the trials.

Pfizer lost the records of 232 of them. Of the 38 women whose records Pfizer followed to conclusion, which they're supposed to do for all of them by law, 28 of those mothers lost their babies. 28 of 32 of them lost their babies. We now know the mechanism. As I mentioned, Dr. Robert Chandler broke down the biodistribution, which confirms what Dr. Victory referenced, a Japanese Pfizer biodistribution study of over a year ago that shows indeed that the materials don't stay in the injection site, though all the spokesmodels swear that they did. But in fact, they travel throughout the body within 15 minutes and concentrate especially in the liver, the adrenals, the spleen, and the ovaries. But what Dr. Chandler found is that in the 48 hours of that this experiment lasted,

and why did they cut it off at 48 hours, right? Why didn't they go on for a week or two weeks or three weeks? In the ovaries, the lipid nanoparticles and the spike protein and the mRNA just accumulate and accumulate and accumulate like 1,800 times in the ovaries. And what I want to say is lipid nanoparticles are designed to cross every membrane in the human body. They were designed to cross the blood-brain barrier and bring medicine to tumors of people with brain tumors. But, you know, healthy women who are pregnant were assured that this material could not affect their baby. But in fact, a 2018

study out of China, and China shows up a lot in alliance with this, with Pfizer's manufacturing and distribution, they knew that lipid nanoparticles accumulate in the ovaries, accumulate in the testes, and affect reproduction. So what you're getting is some lipid nanoparticles and spike protein with the first injection, more in the second injection, more in the booster, more in the second booster, and we don't see any mechanism whereby this material leaves the ovaries. And now let me quickly say one more thing that's been discovered by my team. As I mentioned, lipid nanoparticles traverse every membrane in the human body. They're getting into the epididymis. They're

getting into the testes. They're affecting, you know, andrology showed they drop sperm count, they drop sperm motility. But what they're doing to women is that they traverse the placenta. They traverse the placenta. And right before I got on this podcast, Dr. Jim Thorpe, who's a gynecologist, obstetrician, showed what he's seeing over and over and over these days, which is images of placentas riddled with calcifications, riddled with calcifications. And so these placentas are compromised. And again, I'm an English major, but if you've got lipid nanoparticles traversing the

placenta, it's getting into the amniotic fluid, it's getting into the fetal environment, and you are compromising the environment of the baby. And the last thing I'm going to say is that anecdotally, nurses are saying that they're inducing labor these days because it's too unsafe for vaccinated moms to give birth naturally because they're having placental problems, placental rupture. The placenta is not intact. And if you're going to send a product through the body that, by the way, is covered in polyethylene glycol, which is a petroleum byproduct. And it's getting into breast milk, which I can talk about if you like, poisoning babies of vaccinated moms.

But if you're going to send lipid nanoparticles through the body, you're compromising the placenta, which is the most important membrane that God created to protect the baby. So now we've got a baby die off. You know, infant mortality, neonatal mortality is up 200% in Scotland, up 34% in a hospital in Haifa. It's up to 86 neonatal deaths in Ontario, where usually they have five or six. And birth rates around the world now have dropped in many countries 20%. So that is my wrap up of, in spite of the rush,

what was done to mothers and babies is a massive crime. Let me interject here. Naomi Drew and I actually did an entire show, really, which had been, I guess, four weeks ago or so now, about lipid nanoparticles and my significant concerns about lipid nanoparticles specifically my significant concerns about lipid nanoparticles specifically because they have known for decades, well over a decade, if you look back at the studies on the damage that can be done by the lipid nanoparticle itself. This is independent, by the way, of any damage from the mRNA, from the spike protein and on and on the lipid nanoparticles themselves are toxic to tissues and

clearly interrupt uh hormone levels and as you said cross the the blood brain barrier they cross across the central barrier and they get into places where they can be very very damaging um secondly again i always get back to my risk benefit analysis. And again, my pushback to Drew, regardless of their fervor to get this thing out there, is the reality is young, healthy women of childbearing age are at an extraordinarily low risk from a bad outcome from COVID. So we aren't talking about smallpox people. We're talking about COVID. We're talking about something that profoundly impacted the elderly and the infirm, but not

young, healthy people. So could a pregnant woman get COVID? Sure. She can get a cold as well. She can get influenza as well. So I would say that there was no huge rush to get vaccines into the arms of young, healthy women of childbearing age. And then lastly, and correct me if I'm wrong, Naomi, but that study, pathetic as it was with the rats that were looked at for a total of 42 days gestation, they found subsequent to that that those rat fetuses actually had anomalies of the ribs.

They actually had bony deformities. I just read this study that showed bone deformities and they failed to report that. When in the history of medicine have we done a study on a therapeutic, on a drug, and thought that a bone deformity of the developing fetus was not something worthy of reporting? It's gotten very, very little press. And I personally just read the study myself within the past week or so, but really concerning. So the question is this, you know, where do we go with this? You have been censored. You've been, you know, shut down on this. You're not, you know, people have questioned your actual data over and over again. They want to split hairs on whether it was 28 out of 32,

or was it 17 out of 32. And I would submit that, not that it doesn't matter because I am probably the most data-driven person you ever meet. I'm not saying that it doesn't matter. What I'm saying is the larger point is clearly there is something going on. We know, and I reported on it previously, that the birth rates around the globe are down. Some places, like Taiwan, down something like 23%. These are alarming numbers. So it deserves a deep dive analysis. Where are we taking this? Where is your work going from here?

Before Naomi answers that, let me give a little good-natured pushback here because we're having a very good, lively conversation on Twitter. There's some professionals coming in, pulling up papers for us that have a different point of view. Dr. Gonzalez has been very vocal here as an internist, ER guy. Dr. Gonzalez, the paper you presented here from the New England Journal of Medicine, obviously, I can't read these things carefully, but that's not a research paper that's an opinion it's an opinion piece um yeah yep hold on and then i have a phd in there who's going to pull up a bunch of resources for me that are uh supposedly going to give us there she is uh yeah this is that new england

journal again uh let me read this again. It's Preliminary Findings on Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Women. I read this some time ago. This was from October 2021, and it was not that great a study, but let me look at it again. And it's really just a letter to the editor, my dear. It's not even a study. This is the thing. You need the studies. This is Catherine Wallace, PhD.

That is a letter to the editor. That is not a medical research study. So if you guys could pull up the actual studies, not opinion pieces, not letters to the editor, I'm happy to bring them into the conversation here. But Naomi, I will have you, go ahead. I'm not sure what she's referencing. Yeah, I'm not sure if she's referencing what I was talking about or what Dr. Victory was talking about, but I'm referencing the Pfizer documents and I know I understand. I understand. But what,

what I'm getting on Twitter, what we're getting is there's other sources of literature than the Pfizer documents, which everyone understands that it's true. That is been sort of real time literature that's coming out as this vaccine has been rolled out. Most of what I've seen has been kind of confusing and weak, but you have to give me the actual research, not opinion pieces

or letters of the editor. But Naomi, where do we go from here on you? Oh, well, that's easy. I mean, these experts have written over 30 reports and they are all on dailycloud.io, and all of the citations to the primary source documents are in the reports. So I believe in evidence and I believe in documentation. I do wanna acknowledge that one of our volunteers did make an error about a week ago, and she did count, as you referenced Dr. Victory, she counted 44% of the miscarriages in that section of the Pfizer documents,

and she had miscounted. And other people looking at that section of the Pfizer documents have seen 12 out of 58, 12, 11 out of 60, 11 out of 88, depending on how you slice that very opaque document. But, you know, acknowledging that, and we immediately corrected it, let me direct you to a report that we have up since May of 2022 that shows 78% of the babies, of the fetuses died, you know, in another section of the Pfizer documents.

And that was confirmed by Dr. Pierre Corey looking at the same section, and he reached over 80%. And again, let me just note as a woman, you know, Dr. Chandler's latest shows 75% of the adverse events in women of, of the adverse events. It's 16% defined by Pfizer as reproductive disorder. This is Pfizer's words. So I agree with these critics. You know, I go to the primary sources, don't take my word for it. Look at the primary sources, look at the Pfizer documents. I haven't even gotten to lactation, but in the pandemic with vaccinated mothers, lactation went from 34% of mothers to 14%. And in the Pfizer documents, it shows that polyethylene glycol is getting into breast milk because of course, breast milk is made up of lymph and

blood. It's supported by lymph and blood. And so the polyethylene glycol, which is in antifreeze, right? It's a petroleum by-product. An NIH study showed that there's polyethylene glycol in breast milk. And four of the women in Pfizer documents who are nursing mothers, their breast milk turned blue green. And it shows that at least one baby who was nursing from a vaccinated mother went into seizures and actually passed away. And there are other adverse events that have been reported in an NIH study for babies nursing from breast milk and also in the Pfizer documents. You can see the same adverse events, babies going into agitation, sleeplessness, failure to thrive, failure to gain weight. Understandable, their only food has a petroleum byproduct in it. So that's something I think deserves a huge amount more study because,

of course, children's immunities are laid down by colostrum and by, you know, nursing, ideally, from a healthy mother. And the last thing I'm going to say to say I am, you know, whatever, you know, whatever blowback there may be, I am not going to stop directing this team of experts to look for what's happening to mothers and babies because the signals are coming in from all over the world. And as a cultural critic, I just have to note that there was an article in, I think, the Huffington Post or the Daily Beast, just a pop culture article saying, what color is your menstrual cycle now? And it said, you know, dark red, red, brown, all of those are

normal colors for menstrual blood. It also said, if your menstrual blood is green or gray, see a doctor. And that is a new thing. You know, that is a new thing in this world. So there is something wrong. They're ruining mothers and babies. They're ruining reproduction. And we're seeing the impacts already. And here's where I would go with this for a second here, Drew, is because you can always count on me to say the edgier, the dicier thing here. Number one, Naomi, I feel your passion for this. It comes across loud and clear and I respect it. Pregnancy and the sanctity of pregnancy is an emotional topic for a lot of people, and I understand why. And I will just throw out there, with the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade

and the idea that the decision about the legality and availability of abortion is going to be thrown to the states rather than to the federal government. I promise you, if there is one woman who ends up coerced or ends up having a baby that she doesn't want because of her difficulty availing herself of a termination or an abortion, we will hear about it until the end of time. But if a thousand or a hundred or 12 women end up losing a baby that they did want, we're supposed to chalk that up to, well, it's just, you know, we were in the heat of the war, you know, it was the moment, it was the virus and we needed a vaccine. And all I'm suggesting is that people apply their outrage equivalently. If you respect pregnancy and you respect that that is a choice, that women's bodies are their own, then respect it going both ways and understand the enormity of what we are suggesting if these vaccines, in fact, do interrupt pregnancy, do cause someone to lose a child, or, you know, as importantly, be unable to conceive a child that they want.

Well, good. What do we do with the, hang on a second. I wanted to ask about the MMWR report that they have by their summary, 40,000, over 40,000 pregnant women vaccinated during pregnancy, not associated with preterm birth or small for gestational age at birth stratified by trimester of vaccination etc uh what we're you know there's a lot of data coming in

what do you make of that i'd like to see that study um i'd love to see it send it to me uh what i can tell you is that the only other major study i've seen of pregnancy is the v-safe study i'm not sure if you're talking about the same study. And they claimed initially a number like that. But if you follow it all the way through, which I did very carefully, you find that they lost about 3,000 women. And that actually V-safe, which is run by the CDC, was a phone app. And women were disproportionately healthcare workers. So they were disproportionately white and educated about health, educated about pregnancy and affluent were compared to, you know,

the average woman and that, okay, thank you very much. We'll take a look at that, but that the V-safe study made led you to self-report to like a, not to a doctor or a clinic, but to like a call center. You were supposed to call them if you had a spontaneous abortion. You were supposed to enter it on your app if you had a miscarriage and lost your baby. Unsurprisingly, thousands of women dropped out of this. And I think they ended with less than a thousand women out of the you know multiple multiple thousands who had had started the process so that's not a study in my view that is that is not a study and even so they ended up with a slightly higher a miscarriage rate than than a standard so

I'll take a look at that but I guess what I would like to say you know, what criteria and also what I'd like to say as a woman is leaving, you know, leaving that question open, because I don't think we've concluded. I mean, these different data sets are showing very different outcomes. Right. And this the Pfizer documents are a raw data set. They never thought they would see the light of day. But leaving all of that aside, look at Dr. Chandler's report of over 20 new categories of horrible things that happen to women regarding their menses. Horrible things. Like one whole separate category is two periods in one 30-day cycle. I've never even heard of that before, right? Painful periods. Wait, wait, wait. That's just irregular. That's just irregular. It happens all the time. That's just irregular. You can get, no, no, no. That's actually normal.

But can't we all agree at this point in the pandemic or the event or whatever you want to call it right now, in August of 2022, that we no longer need to be in, in that panic state, uh, that perhaps people were in two years ago, that we can step back now and do the studies that should have been done from the beginning. As I've said many times, there's a reason the average vaccine takes six to eight years to come to market. Why are we still encouraging giving vaccines to pregnant women, lactating women, women of childbearing age when these questions remain? Let's call a moratorium on it. Let's take the 24, 36, 48 months that it will require to do these studies. What is the panic now? We aren't in March of 2020. So I would say, okay, maybe we don't have the data, but let's put it on ice right now,

step back and do the studies. In my mind, the idea that Dr. Fauci is out there as of today and yesterday still saying, the problem is you haven't been vaccinated and you haven't embraced vaccination and you haven't been willing to roll up your sleeve. I don't see how that is justifiable given where we are right now with the current variants, the very, very mild symptoms that they cause, and the fact that the vast majority of people, probably 90% of people have already had and recovered from COVID and therefore have some level at least of natural immunity. I'm trying to read some of these studies in real time that people are bringing in. They're all very convoluted. The data they look at is very kind of...

Are you still on Twitter, Drew? We lost our Twitter Spaces feed. Oh, we did. Yeah, so I'm trying to send everybody to watch on the live stream. But Naomi, why don't we just tee up the studies, the scientific studies that should be done to actually evaluate whether or not each component of these vaccines, whether it's the nanoparticle component, whether it's what I brought up before that it has related to that synctin-1 protein, whether it's the mRNA itself, whether it's the polyethylene glycol, lots of things to parse out there. What is it that people are so afraid of? We aren't in a panic any longer. Right. You know, I hear you. I guess what I would say is a lot of those studies have been done. I

showed that lipid nanoparticles negatively affect male and female reproduction. That's done. They knew that. Pharma knew that. I guess the other thing I would say is that I'm in touch with a lot of doctors. I mean, I love the hopefulness and faith in science and medicine of what you're proposing. Of course, it should happen. It shouldn't be difficult. Here's a cohort of unvaccinated women. Here's a cohort of vaccinated women. How are their babies doing? How are their pregnancies? You know, double blind. I mean, this is the classic kind of study that should be done. However, I am in touch with so many obstetricians who talk to me in whispers. I mean, you know, some of the obstetricians on our team and gynecologists won't even publish under their own names because they've been threatened by

licensing boards if they even tell their patients to wait or that they even try to, as one told me, even if I give parents informed consent, I got fired from my hospital. I hear that constantly, or I'll lose my license, I'll be delicensed. And it's really happening. And in fact, there's a bill in California to, I think, charge or bring some sort of punishment against doctors for not adhering to the party line about vaccines. So I love your faith in our public health and medical establishment, but they've been thoroughly, thoroughly corrupted because right now everyone- No, I think, yes, I- You know, ACOG should call a halt, of course.

No, and I think you just, yes, I think you've misunderstood what I said. I have zero faith in the system. I have absolutely zero faith in the system. I think it is corrupt as all get out. We should disband the FDA in the system. I think it is corrupt as all get out. We should disband the FDA and the CDC. They are participant in this absolute debacle and they have blood on their hands. I'm saying that the right thing to do, if these were true scientists, would be to stop these

right now, given that we are out of the fog of war, as Drew likes to call it, and do the proper studies. They won't. I agree with you. I brought, as I said, to this very program, the information about lipid nanoparticles. It's been well known. This is not new information. There are studies going back well more than a decade. The polyethylene glycol issue was a concern again from the very beginning. It's a very, very common allergen. Many people have a flat out allergy to polyethylene glycol, let alone the fact that it crosses all of these different protective barriers. So don't get me wrong. I have huge concerns about this and someone needs to answer the question, why are birth rates down really across the globe and more so in heavily vaccinated populations? Is it global warming?

Was it the stress of being home with your kids for two and a half years? I don't know. But generally, when people are locked at home and unable to do other activities, birth rates go up. Turns out in bad winters, when people are locked inside, the birth rates go up normally. So I would love a credible explanation for why it is that birth rates around the country are down. So yeah, this is not faith on my part. I have zero faith in the system. I understand. Thank you for clarifying and I think you brought the same page with that. Yeah. I got to say, I'm a fan of the CDC. I'm not a fan of the way they presented their material during this pandemic. I think they were adulterated in some way, and I'm sorry to have seen that, but I do not want them disbanded,

nor do I have any quarrel with the FDA, except for the fact that they don't seem to be doing their science quite the way they've always done it. They too have been sort of affected by these extraordinary circumstances. So I'd like to see everyone return to the mean of where they were functioning the way they always have. And all of a sudden, things were not the way they've always been. And personally, I am not as concerned about the nanoparticles because literally billions of people have received this vaccine. And the only signal I see other than menstrual irregularities is POTS syndrome and cardiac

pathology. And these things worry me greatly, but I think that's more related to the spike protein. But go ahead, Naomi. I mean, yeah, I just want to jump in. I mean, I will gladly send you the 30 plus reports that will worry you. And I guess what I also want to say, again, very strongly as a woman, as the mother of a daughter, stepmother of a stepdaughter, is that the menstrual dysregulation isn't just about menstruation. It's about your whole hormonal equilibrium,

which affects your endocrine system. It affects your mood, it affects mental health, anxiety, heart palpitations, blood sugar levels. And again, Dr. Fleet just did a presentation on this right before I came on board. And I've been waiting to see that because I know that, you know, if your menstrual cycle is dysregulated or you're passing giant blood clots or you're in agony, and I've heard these stories from hundreds and hundreds of women by now, right? That's not the only thing that's happening to you. Also, your mood is affected. Your libido is affected. Your sense of hope and wellbeing is affected. So just as a woman, I'm trying to kind of, and I, this will be the end of what I will, you know, emote about, but

we are not disparate systems, even though disparate kinds of doctors treat us. We are one system. And I found this very deeply when I looked at my book, you know, the research for my book on female sexuality. If you disrupt women's menses to this degree, you're disrupting every other aspect of their lives, anxiety, depression, mood, energy, appetite, weight gain. And why ruin women like this? Why experiment on women like this? Pharma has brought us, you know, estrogen levels that are too high, silicone breast implants that are dangerous, vaginal mesh, you know, the Tuskegee experiments. I mean, we know what pharmaceuticals have done in the past to women. It is not always benign. Pardon me, thalidomide. So now, you know, where are the feminists who care about women's health, except for Dr. Victory, which I'm, you

know, God bless her and a handful of other women and doctors who are saying when you hurt women's menses, when you hurt their gestation, when you hurt their babies, you're hurting women as a whole, as human beings. I was just, you read my mind, Naomi. I was just, I was just about to bring up thalidomide mostly because to push back on the idea that it takes time, unfortunately, to uncover and understand some of these negative events. If we had studied tobacco use for 12 months or 18 months or 36 months, we would never understand the connection between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. It takes sometimes many, many years, decades to make those connections. Thalidomide, very much, this was, you know, thalidomide was rolled out to women, not out of malfeasance,

but it ended up causing devastating impact to fetuses. These things take time. There's a reason, as I said, that the average vaccine takes six to eight years to come to market. If it ever makes it at all, many of them don't ever cross the finish line, or they don't for certain groups of people because the data are not compelling enough with regard to safety and efficacy. And when you do that risk benefit analysis, it just doesn't fall on the side of using something not yet proven on a group of people who are not at risk. Furthermore, let's talk a little bit about, we're talking about current pregnancies.

We're talking about women's reproductive systems being disrupted right now, in the moment, current menstrual cycles or pregnancies that are in utero currently. Let's talk a little bit about your thoughts on downstream reproductive impact. You've got a 13-year-old girl, a nine-year-old girl, whatever it is, boys too. We know that the testes are also impacted. What is your research leading you to believe, if anything, with regard to future reproductive health in kids, for example, who are receiving the vaccines? Yeah. So such an important question, Dr. Victory, and really bad things. I mean, one thing I want people to bear in mind is that every woman and every little girl and every, you know, female fetus only has so many eggs, you know, only so many ova in, you know, that she's born with. And, and unlike males, you know, we don't make more

and more and more ova. So if lipid nanoparticles are, you know, gumming up or impairing, you know, as well as the spike protein in the mRNA, different doctors are worried. I mean, the dissident doctors are worried about different things. Most, I happen to lie awake nights worrying about lipid nanoparticles as you do, it seems. But, you know, if, if, if those are gumming up the ovaries, which are an egg factory and a hormone factory, um, that that's that right. And you might have a healthy baby the first time around, but after three or four boosters with that accumulation, your ovaries, you might have a healthy baby the first time around, but after three or four boosters, with that accumulation in your ovaries, you might not be able to conceive, or your baby might not be okay,

or your eggs might be damaged. I guess the other thing I would say is that Dr. Chandler and Amy Kelly, who's the project director, Amy Kelly has a new report up about where these materials go, based on the Pfizer documents documents in the testes. And this is why I believe that pharma going after little baby boys over six months old, little boys and teenage boys is so criminal because she's found that these materials, of course, lipid nanoparticles turn the human body kind of into a sponge, right? It makes the

human body kind of permeable as we've been discussing. And so they get into the testes, but they don't just get into the testes. And andrology, as I mentioned earlier, showed, you know, sperm motility and sperm count depressed, that's established, but they do worse things for little boys and baby boys. They get into the epididymis and they get into the cells that create basically masculinity itself. So we don't know if those little boys are going to be able to grow up into men with normal male secondary sex characteristics. It's a massive experiment on the gendering of males, as well as a massive experiment on the reproductive capacity of females. And I'll just say, again, that, well, my research found, and this is a really important finding, I think, and you can read about it on my

sub stack, in an essay called Facing beast that bioentech partnered with fosun pharmaceuticals in shanghai which is run by the ccp fosun pharma owns a major chunk of um of the chinese communist party state pharmaceutical company sinopharm fosun pharma created a billion injections where did they go? Because China isn't using these particular injections. Well, I wasn't surprised to find that in 2021, Fosun Pharma USA launched with a manufacturing facility in Boston, Mass., and another one in Princeton, New Jersey. So now in 2022, when you get a Pfizer injection, you're actually getting an injection whose manufacturing and distribution is overseen by our existential adversary, the Chinese Communist Party.

And they've been, these scientists overseen by the Chinese Communist Party back to 2018, 2019, have been looking at the negative impacts on human reproduction of these materials. And the last thing I'll say is in the Pfizer documents, I mentioned this, the vast majority of adverse events are in the United States. Second largest group are in Western Europe. All the other 56 countries combined add up to a small tranche. So this is my conclusion that this is aimed not at our generation, Dr. Victory, not at grownups, people who've already reproduced. It's aimed at our daughter's generation and it's aimed at our grandchildren's generation. And there's going to be permanent harm to sterility in North America and Western Europe as a result of these injections based on the evidence.

Now you've given me something else to keep up with. Yeah, you've given me something else to in North America and Western Europe as a result of these injections based on the evidence. I hope that's not true. Now you've given me something else to keep up with. Yeah, you've given me something else to worry about at night. The idea that these things could create increased gender issues or foment gender dysphoria or whatever else. Look, you need to go no further than what we know about plastics and what that's doing to male biology. There's a book called Estrogen Nation, if you want to freak yourself out. Guy is a well-established scientist. Estrogen Nation talks about how that's affecting, you know, sperm production is down, testosterone levels are down in this country.

They just are. And whether it's this or estrogen, that is true. But let me, I want to put two things in context. It's really important to contextual down in this country. They just are. And whether it's this or Vestrin, that is true. But let me, I want to put two things in context. It's really important to contextualize all this stuff. Lipid nanoparticles, I understand these are constructed, engineered lipid nanoparticles, but lipid nanoparticles are a normal part of cellular physiology.

Cells create lipid nanoparticles. That's what cells do. That's how they send things out into the bloodstream. That's how they, I mean, in a way, you know, LDL is a lipid nanoparticle in sort of a way. But these things are constructed in normal physiology. The other thing, just a quick look up of abnormal menses. The NIH has it as 14 to 25% of women routinely have abnormal menses, two a month, no problem. That's normal for those women. And half of women who exercise, hang on, that's normal for them. And half of women who exercise vigorously have menstrual irregularities. So it's really easy to induce menstrual irregularities, my point. And many women live with non-routinely cycling. That's just so common. I mean, I've seen it more times than I can count. And that's just how that woman's body works.

Well, as you and I have talked about this, Drew, in the past, that the incidence of some of these things is out there. I mean, there's no question somewhere in the range probably of 18% to 20% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous miscarriage. True. Many times women really even know they're pregnant. So I'm not suggesting that every single miscarriage in a particular study or that Naomi may have looked at is related to the vaccines. The issue is really the inconsistency with which we apply our concern and our outrage about things. I mean, you can't get a package of peanuts on an airplane now because some kid might have anaphylaxis if, you know,

if somebody eight rows up ate a peanut, you know, but we can give vaccines to women who are pregnant or of childbearing age. And then if a couple of them end up having a miscarriage, we're supposed to believe that's no big deal. I see an inconsistency about it that I find very, very troubling. And it begs the question of what's the motivation behind the people who are driving this? And I think that's really what we got to get down to is what's the motivation? What's the hurry to keep injecting pregnant women or young children, prepubescent children with these vaccines that have not been adequately tested? Naomi, your turn. Are you asking me, Dr. Victory, what I think the motivation is? I'm giving you a chance.

Or what you think about that. What is the motivation? Well, in the SEC filing for BioNTech for 2021, there's 100% accomplished tech transfer to China. It doesn't say to a Chinese individual. It doesn't say to a Chinese company. It says to China. 100% tech transfer. So BioNTech makes these injections, as I mentioned, for Pfizer. I'm a tech CEO.

I understand that language. 100% tech transfer could mean IP. So the ingredients, which, by the way, are really hard to find. You still can't open a package insert and see what you're getting injected into you or into your pregnant self. It could mean a manufacturing process. It could mean data that's being harvested through the process. It could mean something of which we're not aware. But I can't stress enough, and I know you guys are doctors,

and I'm not a medical doctor. I come from the world of geopolitics. I advised a presidential campaign, and I advised a vice president. I was married to a White House speechwriter. I'm now married to a former special operator who spent 12 years in military intelligence. So I see things geopolitically. The motivation is that our enemies want our land and want our water and don't want our population. And China has made no secret of its uh interest in being the world's superpower by 2049 which is the 100th anniversary of the chinese communist revolution and the way

they're going to do it according to their own white papers is by hegemonizing meaning becoming the the sole kind of arbiter of the world's health. And they anticipate a world in which people are struggling with their health. And they wrote that white paper before the pandemic. So I see that we are at war and or war has been waged against us. China, the Chinese Communist Party talks about unrestricted warfare, which they think is superior to kinetic war, meaning dropping bombs or invading with armies. And unrestricted warfare means subverting a nation without them being aware that they're

subverted, disrupting their food supplies, disrupting baby formula supplies, disrupting energy grids, disrupting, you know, fuel lines and fuel supplies, subverting cultural institutions, buying off elected officials, you know, all the way down to the local level. So I believe that these injections are systematic. Other things we haven't talked about is how easy it is to kill people or hurt them based on things as simple as room temperature or dilution. And it's extremely scary to me that the boosters we're being told we'll have to, except in the fall, have 60 micrograms, which is double the adult Pfizer dose of active ingredients, double. Pfizer's own documents show that Moderna's 100 micrograms had to be abandoned internally due

to its reactogenicity, and that's Pfizer's own words. It was too toxic. People who took Moderna, like my mom, who had heart damage, were not told, oh, you've had 100 micrograms. That's way too high. As we've discovered, that's more than three times Pfizer's micrograms. So don't have any boosters. They weren't told that. So I think that we're at war. And I think that these injections are a super stealthy way to hurt um americans and and hurt the west and just because it hasn't happened before like not it didn't happen before a little more about what you mean what they have what that white paper said about struggling with health that they specify what that meant um i would have to check it and i'm happy to do that and send it to you for the chat.

But basically, China, and this is why things like the partnership with the Wuhan lab are so important or in Facing the Beast, I linked to a study out of Hong Kong, I believe it's from 2017 in which, I'm sorry, it's 2021, so it's in the middle of a pandemic, in which rats are being injected twice with the mRNA, the lipid nanoparticles, the spike protein. The first time they're injured, and the second time they're catastrophically injured. And the second time their heart's enlarged, you can see visible white spots on their heart, their livers are damaged, and they have cytokine storms. So this is overseen by the Chinese Communist Party. All science in Hong Kong and in Chinese territories is run under the CCP. And to me, as a political consultant, this is clearly a presentation of a way to kill or damage a population without fingerprints. Well, I can tell you, I can say, you know, truly, and we've talked about it quite a few times that

the, you know, the VAERS system, like it or not, the VAERS system was put in place by the CDC 24 years ago now as an early warning sign. It was supposed to be the proverbial canary in the coal mine. It was the way the CDC said that individuals, practitioners can report something that might be an adverse event related to a vaccine so that they would have a heads up as early as possible that something might be going awry and that they should put a halt on or change their dosing or frequency or the people on whom these things were given. Yet they, for some reason with these vaccines have turned a complete blind eye to that data. They not only haven't investigated it, they have ignored it. If you go back to 1976 with the swine flu vaccine, that vaccine was pulled from the market

after 25 deaths were attributed or potentially attributed to it. 25. We have tens of thousands of deaths that are potentially attributed to this, plus the leagues of adverse events. Drew is very interested, and as am I, in the cardiac events. It's certainly the study that came out of Taiwan, just, excuse me, Thailand, is what I meant, Thailand, just recently showing 30% cardiac events in children between 13 and 18 following the vaccines. They are ignoring these things. And the data that you are presenting, Naomi, whether somebody, as I said, wants to parse the actual numbers and quibble with how they were calculated, I haven't gotten into the weeds on those studies as you have,

but I appreciate you bringing it out because it deserves deep analysis. It deserves that really deep dive. And again, when you're talking about a group of people whose risk is so low, I just cannot see any justification for continuing to suggest vaccination for these particular people. Right, right. I completely agree. And that's where I'm getting concerned and i and and now oh my dog is uh somebody's home um it's a ups man at my house yeah it's hard annoying but but naomi is you know pushing out some very challenging uh sort of propositions and this is what we're looking for on this program we want we want to be challenged we want to we want to think about these things we want to you know naomi could be

right as likely as i could be right there's no doubt in my mind that this is still a very fluid situation it's interesting to me that um by the way people on twitter were very good naturally putting out good articles both uh supporting what naomi was saying and also taking issue with it. I tried to read quickly through some of the ones that I'd seen them before and read them very, very quickly, but they're not great studies. There's not a lot of good study out there. As you said, there's no double-blind, crossover, randomized control study. There's nothing like that. There's just a lot of observational studies with lots of people being lost to follow up. It's in Norway and it's hard to even understand how they're doing the analysis it's all it's kind of weirdly

convoluted but in any event yeah uh um they're in the new york times i guess i'm gonna quote something for you guys that they came out with an article just recently i guess that was suggesting that there were adverse events uh in pregnancy that's from the New York Times. This is largest study to date shows how COVID vaccines affect period. That's New York Times. Also, New York Times. No, Technocracy News. UK miscarriages rise 366% after the vaccine. And then VAERS, we've already talked about that.

But listen. I had reported, Drew, just one more piece. after the vaccine and then uh vers is we've already talked about that but listen um i had reported drew just one more piece one more piece of data i reported before the the dmed the defense military epidemiology database that we talked about they saw a significant increase in female fertility issues and miscarriage when they looked at the 2021 data compared to the average at five years previous, 2016 through 2020. They reported the same thing, a significant increase in miscarriages and female infertility in 2021. We went way down the road of data, but I want to again emphasize that one of the things i enjoyed about your book was your story your story and we didn't really talk about it very much about you know your mom to come back your mom's fear your you know what happens you know when you

talked about how you were slowly drummed out of your uh peer group and it really was a chilling story. And it really highlighted, it was not fun, but it also highlighted how crazy things were. And that's what I really appreciated in reading this is sort of when you go back over what we've been through in sort of a real-time account, you shake your head. You go, yeah, I remember that. Oh, my God. And I do think that today specifically we will be able to be more critical of the vaccine because they're going to hang it on the Trump administration. I think that's, as you said, Naomi, that's predictable. Well then, now we can talk about it. But now we can talk about it.

And so I don't care as long as we can talk about it. But I'm also hearing during the show, I was getting a lot of tweets and texting and things. So I'm sorry if I was looking down a lot. Somebody was texting me that California is on the verge of voting in the misinformation legislation. Have you seen that? Yes. That's troubling to us. That may happen. Have you seen that? Yes. Yes. That's troubling to us. Yeah.

That may happen, in which case we can't have, we're not allowed to talk amongst ourselves as peers at all, period. Which by itself should be the big red flag. That should make your hackles go up. You know, robust, vigorous, respectful debate is the cornerstone of science. It's a cornerstone of healthcare. Um, a medicine is predicated on it. There are lots of questions in science for which we don't have answers. We better not have answers that can't be questioned. You're so right.

Naomi, as always, thank you. Yep. Finish that thought, please. No, I was just going to say you're, you're so right. If you look back at medical consensus around not washing your hands between providing services to childbearing women or medical consensus around smallpox or polio or any of it, medical consensus around eugenics, it changes. And it changes because people can debate. So I just appreciate both of you for being open to a rigorous discussion. I really do. And I really appreciate having new friends like you guys.

It's a weird time. It's a weird time. And again, to even point at something more recent in our history, the opioid prescribing epidemic. I was a lone voice against the establishment in that one, too, and was threatened and threatened and threatened all kinds of ways for daring to be opiophobic, everybody. That went on for 15 years. It was a horrible, horrible pandemic brought to you by this profession. So if you don't think we can do nasty shit uh we're still dealing

with it look out on your streets that's who's out there we created most of that and we were with naomi all the way along from the beginning she was writing the book while we were interviewing her along the years and drew you got an acknowledgement oh thank you naomi thank you for that and i do yes oh what how about that there There you go. Thank you. We appreciate it. We love free speech. We want to hear your ideas. Like we've said a million times before, Drew may not agree with everything, but he's willing to listen. I feel like I've got to represent a certain…

I agree with you a lot more than anybody. A lot of people do. Trust me. I'm watching the restream and the and the rumble rants they they are they are appreciative of of this of the the ability to bring this uh forward we'll see we will see i i mean i you've you've made me um the hair stand up in the back of my neck with some of the stuff on china i'm not a doctor i'm a historian so it just makes it gives me goosebumps because it makes sense you know from a historical perspective right i hope you're wrong i hope you study wars that's what i did but um yeah i i want

to hope that you're wrong because it's scary but i hope i'm wrong but sadly i'll i'll send you the links showing i'm right but you know the good news is uh i believe in america and i believe in our ability to turn turn this great ship around again. Guys, I have a chocolate cake that I should defrost with my steps. Go do it. Go. Go do it. Thank you all so much.

Bye-bye. Take care. Good to see you. Thanks for being here. Let's keep Kelly. Yes. Thank you so much. Let's keep Kelly in here.

God bless her. That was a lot. She has to defrost the cake. Yes. It was a lot. Frost it, notrost a cake. It wasn't a lot. Frost it, not defrost it. Frost it, yeah. She's such a good mom. Yeah, that was a lot. Instinctively, I can't co-sign a lot of it. She may be right. I don't want to say it's wrong, but I don't see those signals clinically quite to the degree that she's ringing the alarm. I just, because I'm in the vaccine world. I'm giving it all the time.

I see it all the time. I see who's getting it. I'm just out there in the sort of clinical world. And it doesn't look, I mean, I have concerns, don't get me wrong. And I do think we rolled it out. Just all your stuff I think is spot on. But I don't know. The signals are not that strong. Maybe it will end up that way. I don't know. What do you say? I can't speak authoritatively about the numbers because I haven't gotten into the weeds on

these studies on how many pregnancies ended up in a miscarriage or how many did X, Y, or Z, how many women have menstrual irregularities. I can say, you know, I've been concerned all along. I never believe that it's wise to be giving a therapeutic to a group of people on whom it hasn't been tested. There's a reason we don't do that because many times it takes years, decades for you to find out of the problem. So just that the very nature of having done that. And I've said

from the beginning, it's one thing to have suggested, okay, we've never tested these vaccines on people in their eighties, you know, but they were in such a high risk category that you could make the argument. We haven't tested it, but these people get COVID, they're going to end up, you know, in a bad way, They're going to die. That's very different. Exactly. So my real concern was with the lack of testing. So I can't speak authoritatively on the number she's giving. I do have, and you know, I had predicted, not because I have a crystal ball or because I'm prescient, I had raised the concern about this synctin protein interaction a year and a half ago, simply because I understand the science of it.

I said, it just seems to me that somebody might want to look even at a Petri dish when you launch these antibodies on the spike protein. Incidentally, do they also attack the same protein on a placenta? Just a thought. Maybe somebody will look at that. They didn't. That's concerning to me. And it's always concerning to me, Drew, when people in power want to shut down the discussion. That by itself, as I said, if you're not hiding something, why do you need to kick me off Twitter? If you're not hiding something, why does Naomi need to get slandered and pilloried and on and on? So it's that behavior that is very concerning to me.

Yeah, it's what sort of instinctively leads me to want to hear from the people who are being silenced. I want to hear what are they saying? Maybe there's something there. I don't know. The other thing is what I was hoping to do in my pushing back with Naomi is, you know how this is, Kelly. When we read broadly in medical literature, we have broad experiences in medicine. And so we can contextualize some of these things, such as Naomi's great concern with the menstrual regularities

not medically not such a big deal don't disagree with what she was saying about you don't want it and it's you know but but medically you see one with menstrual regularities you're not going to send them to the hospital you're going to go here take the birth control pill for a while get you back on cycling we'll check you for endometriosis and ovarian cysts and try to figure out exactly why this is happening you've had it your whole life okay you're probably going to have it your whole life that's just the way it goes right and so uh and you know it could be polycystic ovarian you get a lot of stuff so it's not i'm not saying it's diagnostically null i'm just saying these are common things and common things happen commonly and you and i know that and so we have that

experience behind us and it's so as we the literature, it tempers some of our emotional response to it, I'd say. And that was just trying to bring that to the conversation today. No, and I think that your word emotion, that's what I was saying. I respect how passionate she is on this issue about childbirth and miscarriages and impacting women's bodies. But that emotionality can get in the way sometimes if people perceive you as being an alarmist. You remember early on during the vaccines being launched, I would get questions about things like, oh, there's nanobots in there and nanochips, and it's a way for the Chinese government to follow you, and you're being tracked, and there's this and that. And I was constantly saying, no, I mean, truly, Susan, I was constantly saying, no, look, there are a lot of things to be worried about, about these vaccines,

but being nano-chipped isn't one of them. There was a lot of talk about this. Or becoming magnetic and all that stuff. Exactly. You know, this graphene oxide and other metal particles and on and on. And so I think sometimes you get lumped in to one big category of a vaccine freak or a vaccine whatever it is, who is concerned, anti-vax or whatever they want to call you. And so we need to parse out what are legitimate, medically-based, scientifically-based concerns. What are we doing in the way we've rolled these out that breaches our standard protocol, our standard scientific way of doing things? And so all I'm saying is we've never done this before.

Let's take a timeout. What's the hurry? We have adequate time to test it on many groups of people that haven't been tested on and find out. Maybe we'll come to the end of that and find out it's perfectly safe for pregnant women. I would love that. But the studies don't show that to date. Well, it's interesting to me that every, I'm going to bet that every single interview we do, we're going to end up in the same spot, which is more science, please.

Really, we don't have enough science. And that's the weird behind the eight ball situation we're in clinically because that's not usually how medications and treatments are rolled out. They're rolled out when you have the science, not give me the science, please, so I can just understand what we're doing here. So there you go. And think about it, Drew. I was stuck in bed for six months,

and I would have just stayed home and forgot about it because there's no way I would have taken that injection. Oh, interesting. Go ahead, Kelly. No way. Right? No way. I was going to say, let's think about it. There are medications and therapeutics, Drew, that actually make it through the entire FDA approval process.

By the way, these vaccines not being amongst them, but think about drugs like Celebrex, drugs that make it to market, Cipro, that we use for years. And then decades after using them, we find out, wow, there's really bad, you'd be hard pressed to find an indication to give somebody Ciprofloxacin right now because of the associated issues and problems with it, specifically with tendons and ligamentous injuries. Same thing with Celebrex. Many drugs and therapeutics that actually make it to full FDA approval end up over time being linked to really bad outcomes that make them get pulled from the market. So don't think for a minute that a vaccine that was rushed under good intentions,

perhaps to market, it was brought to market very quickly. Don't think for a minute that we might not find out down the road that there are wild devastating things, things that I haven't even thought about or that we haven't talked about. No, that's right. That happens. And by the same token, I'm still angry at them being well at least the court's doing this but excessively preoccupied with risk with certain medication like i i have patients that still not gotten over vioxx being taken off the market it was an exceptional anti anti-inflammatory medicine i have people suffering to this day because they took that away i should have been able to make a risk award analysis for somebody with a low risk of coronary artery rupture. I

should have been able to talk about the risk and do you want to take that risk and give the medication if I think that risk is low and worth it. But no, that was taken off the market because five people had a coronary event out of the many, many hundreds of thousands of prescriptions. And that is exactly my point. It's the inconsistency with the way we are approaching these things. It's the inconsistency with which we have our outrage about something. Somebody having one bad effect. Five people had a bad outcome from Vioxx, and so nobody can use it. Same thing.

We need to be more consistent in how we apply these things, you know, what, and so all I'm suggesting is that we go through really the rigorous, you know, you and I are both fundamentally scientists. We observe things, we observe anomalies, we observe patterns, and we are wedded to and obligated to follow a certain standard protocol with regard to our scientific methods. And I don't see that happening with these vaccines or, frankly, not just vaccines, with the therapeutics in general. This entire pandemic was unusual. That's the least I could say about it. It was unusual with regard to this overwhelming therapeutic nihilism, the fact that we were not allowed to talk about safe and effective and readily available drugs and could only wait to hide in the basement.

Yeah, hide in the basement, bathe in Purell and hope to heck you can get a vaccine. That was their prescription. Yeah, I just was thinking today, I was trying to get the footage of me begging Mayor Garcetti here in Los Angeles to stop saying shelter in place. Because back in the spring and summer, I was saying that he was saying mass deaths, no hope, shelter in place. That's what you say when a nuclear freaking warhead

is headed towards the city. And I just kept saying, you are going to harm people with that would you please stop that rhetoric um one last thing we should plug uh the book because we didn't do that when she left naomi's book yes there it is bodies of others recommend it most strongly again what got me you you heard that she reviews a lot of the data in the last third of the book but what what lit me up in this book was the chronicle of her dealing with this thing as it went down and her using that good head of hers going, what's

going on here? Why are we doing this? I don't understand. And she has a website too, right? For the book? No, like where you can find her. She has that web company that looks like- DailyClout.io.

CloutClout.io. DailyClout.io. DailyClout.io. web company that looks daily cloud cloud cloud daily cloud dot io and before we wrap this thing up kelly back to your psychology degree were you a cognitive psychologist or what kind of psychologist were you i don't know that's part of your life i was a clinical clinical psychologist and i and i actually were you in a certain field oh the well in the prison system. Well, yeah, I worked with adolescent deviants. I worked in a maximum security. Yeah. I was a liberal back then. No, I actually believed I was young and impressionable and believed that I really could make a difference

and change these sociopathic behaviors. And there's not a shred of evidence that we can change psychopathic or sociopathic behavior. And I've learned that. And I left immediately and became a trauma physician and said, I'm not going back. But I did 10 to 20 in eight-hour shifts for some years in the prison. We need to do a whole show on that. That's interesting. I didn't even know that about you. Well, we could.

I mean, between she and I, I mean, I spent 30 years working in a psych hospital, and I saw a lot of wild stuff. And I've got some strong opinions about things as a result of spending all that time there. Get James Fallon in here. Yeah, maybe. It's more, I don't know we let me think about how we could frame something um all right so get off the code next one next wednesday will be uh dig into kelly's brain equally concerning equally um uh intense i'm sure uh probably maybe more so than all dr malone is coming in uh i again i i brought up the coming in. Again, I brought up the psychology. He's got a lot of hair.

I brought up the psychology thing because I wanted to get into the mass formation psychosis with him and you, and maybe that'll be a chance to do that. Yeah. Because something like that definitely happened. And I'm actually trying to get Dr. What's his name? Mazet? Mazet? Something like that?

Who came up with this formulation. Matthias Desmet formulation Matthias Desmet Matthias Desmet yeah he's a Belgian I believe guy doctors can remember all these big words and names not so much anymore I can't do Boticarian or whatever that guy's name

we're going to get him too I really think Jay is going to be the poster child for how bad things got and how reasonable people were treated. He really is the most reasonable, professional scientist. If people don't know him, Ray Bhattacharya and Sunita Gupta and Martin Kulldorff were the three who penned, who authored the Great Barrington Declaration. These are all people, you know, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, with storied academic careers. And they were pilloried as, you know, quote, fringe physicians, fringe scientists.

And it was some kind of an anti-vaccine manifesto. And it was nothing of the sort. So I agree with you. Ray Botticella is one of the most tempered and measured people I've ever known. Smart, reasonable. Yes, smart and very reasonable. We'll get them all in here

and then sound them out and sort of do a little post-mortem, which again this should be something everyone's doing, is looking at what happened and trying to understand it and trying to get different opinions out. And that's how we do things. All right, Dr. Victory, thank you so much for being here with us. We'll see you next Wednesday at 3 o'clock.

And bye-bye. And tomorrow we are going to be doing calls only, so there will be a lot to talk about. And we will see you then, 3 o'clock tomorrow as well. Take care. Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Caleb Nation and Susan Pinsky. As a reminder, the discussions here are not a substitute for medical care, diagnosis, or treatment. This show is intended for educational and informational purposes only.

I am a licensed physician, but I am not a replacement for your personal doctor, and I am not practicing medicine here. Always remember that our understanding of medicine and science is constantly evolving. Though my opinion is based on the information that is available to me today, some of the contents of this show could be outdated in the future. Be sure to check with trusted resources in case any of the information has been updated since this was published. If you or someone you know is in immediate danger, don't call me, call 911. If you're feeling hopeless or suicidal, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255. You can find more of my recommended organizations and helpful

resources at drdrew.com slash help.