Ask Dr. Drew - Dr. Ryan Cole, Vaccine Needle Aspiration, COVID Surge, mRNA Studies & More Calls – Ask Dr. Drew

Episode Date: January 2, 2023

This episode is dedicated to YOUR questions! Callers on Twitter Spaces ask Dr. Drew anything about COVID-19, vaccines, addiction, health, and current events. Dr. Ryan Cole also calls in to the show with an update. BROADCAST ON 12/20/2022 「 SPONSORED BY 」 • BIRCH GOLD - Don’t let your savings lose value. You can own physical gold and silver in a tax-sheltered retirement account, and Birch Gold will help you do it. Claim your free, no obligation info kit from Birch Gold at https://birchgold.com/drew • 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 「 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 uncommon. Dr. Drew is a board-certified physician and Dr. Kelly Victory is a board-certified emergency specialist. Portions of this program will examine countervailing views on important medical issues. You should always consult your personal physician before making any decisions about your health.  「 ABOUT the SHOW 」 Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Kaleb Nation (https://kalebnation.com) and Susan Pinsky (https://twitter.com/firstladyoflove). This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. 「 GEAR PROVIDED BY 」 • BLUE MICS - Find your best sound at https://drdrew.com/blue • ELGATO - See how Elgato's lights transformed Dr. Drew's set: https://drdrew.com/sponsors/elgato/ 「 ABOUT DR. DREW 」 For over 30 years, Dr. Drew has answered questions and offered guidance to millions through popular shows like Celebrity Rehab (VH1), Dr. Drew On Call (HLN), Teen Mom OG (MTV), and the iconic radio show Loveline. Now, Dr. Drew is opening his phone lines to the world by streaming LIVE from his home studio. Watch all of Dr. Drew's latest shows at https://drdrew.tv Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today, it is about you. I want to hear your calls. I want to hear what you're interested in. I want to just chat and answer questions. I see already the Twitter spaces is filling up and people's hands are up, but all you got to do is raise your hand there and I will bring you up to the platform. And in doing so, you'll be streaming out on multiple platforms, wherever we go, which is Rumble, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, wherever.

But the Christmas is approaching. There's a lot of craziness out there. I just really am interested in what's on your mind. You know, last time we did a strictly call-in show, I did a recap of sort of where I was at with some of the COVID material. I think we've sort of covered that territory, but if you need any further clarification, again, people seem confused about so much, and indeed they would be, because there's still a lot of questions to be answered. And that's been one of our questions, is why go so hard on the mandates or so hard on certain recommendations when there still are so

many questions. But we'll get into that and more. Let's get right to it. Our laws as it pertained to substances are draconian and bizarre. The psychopath started this. He was an alcoholic because of social media and pornography, PTSD, love addiction, fentanyl and heroin. Ridiculous. I'm a doctor for f*** 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.

FedMGM, authorized gaming partner of the NBA, has your back all season long. We'll be right back. 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. Whether you own a bustling hair salon or a hot new bakery, you need business insurance that can

keep up with your evolving needs with flexible coverage options from td insurance you only pay for what you need td ready for you hey everybody i'm just watching at the restream uh merry christmas with chris i understand chris was at the uh rams green bay last night, and it was a little bit cold, a little bit cold. I heard the wind chill was like 40 below or something. Trying to play football on that is super crazy. Again, I'll be watching the restream. And of course, we're over in the Rumble Rants as well.

And perhaps over there, I see you. Did I see Gene Simmons pushing the vaccine? I did not. Look, I have no problem with people pushing vaccine. I have no problem with people being concerned about the vaccine because there's still some questions. My lingering question, as people know, I think, that I have my elderly patients vaccinated and boosted and we're getting lots of boosts. I do have a question of how much boosting we're going to do, particularly since most of them have now had COVID also. And in the day of Paxlovid, it's been quite easy to prevent the COVID from becoming a very serious problem.

I've seen some serious stuff with people that were not vaccinated and not able to get access to the Paxlovid. This was earlier on, and that wasn't so pretty. But now that we have treatment options, it's not as big a deal as it was certainly. So A, how many times are we going to boost? Is it going to be a yearly thing? And if so, at what risk? I think there's a couple of questions that need to be answered. I'll address that in a second. And the other issue is what to do with the younger population. If you remember, I spoke to Debunk the Funk the other day, and he was saying that myocarditis in vaccinated cases is less severe than viral myocarditis. Article came out yesterday, suggests that's not true, that it's

just the same as viral myocarditis. So again, these things are going back and forth. There needs to be a consensus yet reached. Same question on say 17 to 27 year old, even 35 year olds. What are we doing there? How much risk are we exposing them to? And I think I mentioned the other day, the difference between taking a healthy person and giving them a medical intervention and making them sick versus somebody getting sick because of the natural history of infectious disease, those are ethically two different circumstances. And when the natural history of the infection itself is so mild, what is it we're doing?

Now, we also have questions about the endotheliitis. If you remember with Dr. Ryan Cole, we talked about endotheliitis, particularly in coronary arteries, but it appears to be in large vessels as well. You heard the story of the young 35-year-old journalist at the Qatar World Cup games dying suddenly of a ruptured aortic aneurysm. That is unheard of in a young person without something called Takeosu's arteritis, which is a chronic inflammatory disease or can be acute as well. But why was he getting tachyosteus arteritis? And could that have been related to the vaccine? And is there other things related to the vaccine in terms of endothelial inflammation that

we should be worried about? We've had a caller. I don't know if she's here today. I'm going to look for her. Christine, who's a biotech researcher who was alerting us to the idea that, oh, Dr. Cole is here somewhere. So maybe Dr. Cole in. Was alerting us to the idea, well, this is actually a question I have for Dr. Cole. I do see you there, Christine. Dr. Cole, do me a favor and put your hand up because I have a very specific question for you. And it is, Christine, I'm glad you're listening because

you were actually the one that suggested i do ask dr cole this question which i was already planning to do caleb i don't see him in the audience there is that where i'm gonna find him unless he dropped off since i noticed him i see him he's that i'm on my skin shoot about four people down it's just uh um that would be a shame because i have a really specific question for him uh and the question is, if he's still listening, I see Dr. My Infectious Disease Friend is here as well. Maybe I'll bring him up. If I don't find Dr. Cole, I may do that.

Okay, I'm going to ask you to be a speaker here. There you go. And I'm going to do one more. Oh, there's Ryan Cole right here. I'm going to ask him to be a speaker. There we are. Ryan, Dr. Cole. Are you there? I hear you. Oh, you're muted again. There you are. I'm sorry about that. I'm just learning this Twitter space stuff. So here you are. Thank you for joining us. I really

appreciate it. Yeah. Happy to answer any questions you have. So speaking to you the other day, the thing that I came away with that was most impressive to me was the physiology of endotheliitis being so prominent in what you were seeing in these vaccine reactions, okay? I took that. That's accurate, correct? Absolutely. And I think that's one of the primary harms. Okay. Is it as I took that? That's accurate, correct? Absolutely. And I think that's one of the primary harms. Okay. So there's a biotech researcher on the line here with us as well, who I know is listening.

And she alerted me to the fact that when they were doing research on the spikes, they found that not only were three different, four different spikes, and maybe even some enantiomeric spikes beyond that being produced that have unknown immunological sort of response. Although the Pfizer apparently is on the record saying it just broadens the immunological response rather than specifying exactly what that immunological response is. So there's something nonspecific about the spike proteins that are being presented. But she alerted me to the fact that not only are these different subunits assembled in different ways, but there are actually fragments, fragmentation, and abnormal folding. And so my question to you was, can you distinguish the different types of spike protein in the endothelial lining and or distinguish the types

from the fragments? Technically, yes. In the vaccine, it's a pre-fusion lock with two prolines, so it's slightly different than you're going to see in the infection itself. But when we go to the tissues and stain it, you know, looking for the presence thereof, there's one stain we use that will bind just receptor binding domain. There's another stain we can use that will look just at the S1 subunit. Then there's another one we can use that'll look at the full S1, S2 together. So we can tease those out under the microscope. The majority of the autopsy studies have been done so far have been looking just at the S1 and the receptor binding domain. But to see it deposited within these vessel linings, and it is, I mean, it's massively

abundant, which is what's so concerning. But yeah, we can tease those out. We can, you know, it's kind of, maybe we'll go over it on next show on how you actually make antibodies using different mammal models so you can stain just about any protein you're looking for. Right. See, that would be interesting to me. But it does bring up sort of two, you know, what I'm trying to solve in my own mind is why some people get severe reactions and some people don't. Maybe there's more for everybody. Go ahead. I think part of it to me is it's receptor distribution. And interestingly, different populations have more ACE2 receptors genetically, just plain

and simple. You had said that. And so because of that, I think some individuals are more susceptible to an adverse reaction genetically than others are per se. And, and again, we're all such unique individuals biologically that, you know, I think that's the question for the ages. Why have so many people done just fine and yet so many people not? And I think, I think we'll tease that out over many years, unfortunately. Right. And what, what of course is disturbing to me that just to ask that question somehow, you're anti-vaccine.

It's like, no, no, no, no, no, no. We want to know more. We want to use it properly. We want to make sure we understand what the risks and benefits are so we can inform our patients. That's all. That's all. Genetics matter. Genetics absolutely matter.

I mean, if you even go to chemotherapy for certain types of leukemia, you'll absolutely destroy certain patients with leukemia if you don't check their genetics first in terms of, do they have the enzyme to process that chemo? So, I mean, in medicine, there's so many things where we absolutely have to know, are you predisposed to an adverse reaction to this medication? Because, yeah, anyway. And my other question was, is this all strictly in the endothelium, or does it get into other layers, into the media or anything? No, that's a very important question. So, yes, it's in the endothelium, but then it also will involve, especially in the large vessels. And I've seen multiple ruptured aortas now, and unfortunately, most patients haven't made it. I have one patient, a triathlete out of Australia.

I have her tissue. She miraculously survived. But know that it will transmigrate, actually, that spike protein. And it will be in the media of the wall of the thicker vessels. And then the pericytes that surround vessels, it can get into the pericytes as well. So it's not like it's stuck just on the endothelial lining, but it can actually work its way and bind all the way across the thickness of a vessel. And I'm guessing that's where we get the more catastrophic. And I guess the question is, in the stuff you're seeing, is it equally distributed amongst coronary arteries, renal arteries, aortas?

Is there sort of an anatomical sort of distribution to it? Just about everywhere. I mean, that's the alarming aspect. Yeah, I mean, it's in venules, it's in arterioles, it's in arteries. And again, it's just that replete binding domain that exists within our vascular linings. So of all the tissues I've looked at so far, the ones I've reviewed with my colleagues in Germany, it really does have a predilection to bind two vessels, be they big, be they small. Yeah, I was thinking about when you were talking about the idiosyncratic reactions to chemotherapy,

and one of the reasons the PD-L1 medications are sort of not being more widely used is because occasionally they cause catastrophes, and we can't figure out in whom those catastrophes are going to be. Exactly right. And by the way, I was telling a group, I do a lot of work with prostate cancer research, and I was telling this group, I said, you know, even it's one thing when it, you know, a chemo, you try a chemo, it doesn't work. Oh, sorry, it was, you made you sick, but sorry, that's not the way it is with these meds. It didn't work and it caused a catastrophe. So it's, this is why we are so

worried about this. This is the way this vaccine kind of looks. Now, the other big question I had, and this will be the last one I bother you with, is how are we going to distinguish between what is happening from the illness versus what is happening from the vaccine? And this goes back to looking for the presence or absence of whole virus. So obviously, in the tissues, I'm looking for whole virus and or spike protein presence. And in the absence of nucleocapsid and the absence of membrane and the absence of envelope proteins and only the presence of spike protein, it's pretty easy to tease out presence of virus or presence of just spike protein. But I think what I'm getting at is I don't feel like the data is being properly accumulated.

I get that we can distinguish between the two. No, I agree. I understand the question. Yeah, I just don't feel like I understand yet. For instance, and by the way,

what might even be caused by both? Right? Oh, yeah. Because everybody's sort of both now. Well, that's the unfortunate aspect is we see so many papers now that discuss, oh, you know, long haul or vaccine injury or not injury, but they leave out the vaccination status of the individuals in these studies. And I think that's so critically important. Is it, youhaul COVID-caused and or is it vaccinal? And I think

to leave that factoid out of the studies really is, it's disingenuous because it doesn't give us that bigger picture. And it's unfortunate because we really do want to know, okay, if it's vaccinal, obviously, then we need to be very careful with what we're doing with the program. If it's, you know, viral, well, then we need more antivirals and we need more therapies. So that's a great question. And we should be teasing that out. We have to, we can't really, nothing else matters right now, except these kinds of questions. And it's just, just awe inspiring to me that, that it's sort of some sort of violation to even ask the question a little ago after answering them, which I trust eventually we will. Then in my own heart, I think, why are they going at the

recommendation so hard in the face of these questions? That's my concern. Thankfully, most of my patients these days are elderly, and I'm clear what I'm doing, and I'm clear what the risks are. But boy, if it was a 25-year-old, I'd be very confused and I'd have difficulty even giving them informed consent. Well, risk-benefit ratio in everything in life, absolutely. Yeah. Here's somebody who's asking here, are the reactions involving blood vessels, heart, cardiovascular system unique to the mRNA or is it applied to all vaccine modalities? I'm going to answer and say it is unique to these new mRNA vaccines that produce such high quantities of spike protein.

Would that be correct? I agree a thousand percent. Yeah. Yes. Well, that's cool. Listen, as always, we really appreciate talking to you. And we're going to bring you back, what, in about three weeks? We're going to have you back on the show.

All right. February 1st. So I've given you some, I want more slides on these issues when you come back okay all right all right i'll do my homework thanks buddy thank you all the best you bet that uh ryan cole who's extraordinary and um there's been one of the more clear voices in in the the soup that is the controversy around vaccines and whatnot um i'm gonna ask ask Siobhan to get up here with me. I know you're, I see you. There you are.

Welcome back. Thank you, Dr. Drew. It's a pleasure to be back on. So what do you think of that little conversation I just had with Dr. Cole? I was absolutely fascinated. I put my hand up a couple of times only to realize that Ryan was literally reading my mind. Well, are you seeing this or you're infectious disease doctors just so people know. Yeah.

And, and you're, you kind of, I think your head's in exactly the same space mine is, which is, yeah, there are things that I understand things I know where I kind of know what I'm doing.

And there are things where it's, there's a lot too many questions, too many questions that these aren't, these questions aren't being urgently addressed. I mean, I, I'm constantly fascinated by the level of my ignorance and by the level of other people's overconfidence. And I, I've been in that place for the last two years and I'm like, am I on the right or the left side of the Dunning-Kruger equation? Well, you know, usually after you're highly, highly trained, you end up on the imposter side, right? You, you end up on the right side of the equation. Well, you know, usually after you're highly, highly trained, you end up on the imposter side, right? You end up on the right side of the equation. And I, you know, humility, I think,

is very important in the face of a situation like this. So don't you agree with me, though, it's odd, the rigor with which the sort of, there aren't really mandates right now, but the recommendations are being pursued with such rigor that it's kind of hard to understand given the things that the questions have not been answered. Is that, would that be accurate? Yeah, absolutely. And I think I'm more astounded again, you know, with the confidence with which statements are being made at a point where we have the capability to start looking at things in the rearview mirror. It's no longer sufficient to say, oh, we didn't know. And if at this point we keep saying and making statements like, well, you know, we should be doing more of the same and asking any questions to the contrary is an act of heresy, then something has gone horribly wrong.

As I've said repeatedly the last couple of weeks, like I'm just down to start to reflect back onto the sort of pre-COVID days when, you know, my colleagues would, some of them would have some real outlying opinions about something that I disagreed with. And I would find that interesting. The idea of misinformation almost is anathema to biology. Because biology is for people that I've never studied biology. Biology is like trying to predict the behavior of clouds or the weather or something. It's very probabilistic.

That's why medicine has always been considered an art. And we have, you know, what are the, algorithmized it, you know, so much these days that people are sort of losing track of that fact. And the emphasis on evidence-based has been so profound that it's almost gotten to the point where something that's not evidence-based is somehow witch doctoring. And that's just not true. It's not true. Our clinical experience is valid and our judgment is actually the reason that people come to us. Not for us to follow an algorithm or to have an evidence-based everything we do, but to apply our judgment given the evidence basis. No, and the additional sort of logical extension of what you just said is that public health is a population-based medicine. The job

of your doctor is to take that and reinterpret it for the individual. If you're still treating the individual as the population, you remiss in your job. be talking about the recommendations that have been promulgated by CDC or whatever agency you like to listen to. But in the end, each and every individual situation is unique. And as you and I have spoken, the risk-benefit ratio of a 22-year-old athlete who's asking about their second or first booster is totally different than a COPD-er who's 82 and on home oxygen. And by the way, what I will often do is I will say, well, here's the evidence base as I understand it, but my clinical experience has been different. Now, we can do its evidence base, but I would recommend the following. That is informed consent, right?

And by the way, if the patient pushed back and said, you know, doc, I've read about this. I'm convinced by that data. And I think we ought to do that. I'd say, well, okay, let's give it a shot. And I'll keep an eye on it to make sure that my judgment on this issue, maybe I would watch you more carefully because I'm concerned about it. Something like that. The point is that it is our judgment that is the key ingredient that has been completely sidelined lately. Anyway, my friend, I'm going to keep lots of hands up. So I thank you so much for being here. Thank you.

You bet. And Justin Hart is visiting us, so I'm going to get him up here. Again, I'm seeing all the other hands. I'll get you guys. Yes. Thank you so much for those of you who do have your hands up. My goodness, a lot of hands up here. Justin. Dr. Drew, great to be with you. Can you hear me okay? Loud and clear. Well, great to be with you. Look, it's not an envious position that you're in in the healthcare industry. I mean, these last three years have been kind of

the pinnacle of some real ruptures between the public and their health care providers. But, you know, it was kind of headed on that trajectory from 25 years ago when the first patient printed out the first WebMD page and brought it to you. I wouldn't say it was heading that way, but that did change things a little bit. And unfortunately, I had to educate a lot of my patients up on this, that as, as, uh, my peers started, this is going to be the shorthand version of this as my peers started doing, they started putting a plaque up behind their front desk that said, uh, please do not confuse your Google search with my medical training. Right.

Right. Well, and that's a difficult thing too, because because because this became so entwined as we we spoken about on your show with politics right it was difficult to separate sort of propaganda for the purposes of furthering a policy versus good medicine and things that are catching up right and uh it's it's it's a difficult challenge altogether as you see this whole thing come unraveling. I'm sighing because it's been such an extraordinary overreach by public health and bureaucracy. problem in the actual you know patient care aspects of the medical system is how doctors froze at the beginning and send people home and told them to come back when they're sick which i thought was reprehensible from the beginning i've never never heard of such a thing you know come back when you're short of breath like what in what world do we do that that was the one move

and that was because they were all employees everyone's all employed up now afraid to lose their job and they're responding to the algorithms set up by their employee and afraid to run afoul of that. I did not know that before this pandemic. And here we are. That's great to know. I had Dr. Cole and Dr. Bocciari on a panel about two weekends ago in Miami. I was the moderator. And I asked them about that very question. Did you guys know that everything was so fragile and political at the top there? And I don't think Dr. J has never made a motion into politics in his entire life until he was kind of forced to take a side. And I think they were really kind of just blindsided by us, by many of us.

Shocked. Shocked. Oh, look, there's a mug. Caleb just put a mug up there. Is that going to be our mug, Caleb? Ored, shocked. Oh, look, there's a mug. Caleb just put a mug up there. Is that going to be our mug, Caleb? Or is that somebody else put that out? Someone already made that, yeah. Brilliant, brilliant.

I like that coffee mug. All right, Justin. I have a question for you. I have a quick question for you on the vaccine though. So I look at this from not a healthcare perspective, but from sort of a business funnel perspective, right? And when we talk about business funnels, we talk about someone comes to the website, someone clicks on a link,

they've now left us their email address, they've now become a customer, right? That's kind of our funnel. In terms of healthcare, you do the same sort of thing. So many people get sick, so many people are tested for influenza, so many people are hospitalized, so many people die, right?

The burdens that the CDC puts out. But my question is on the vaccine, there are a couple other failure points that are really interesting to me, because you made the point to Dr. True, like, what, sorry, to Dr. Cole, what it was like, why do some people are they so successful, right, bearing with it versus others. And if I think about other failure points, one of them would be like the qa uh corners that were cut right we know from certain tests that certain vials they were put in uh more of the concoction than others right than the solution and then we know also that you know there could be some implications as to where in the arm you get it right if this hits the capillary if this gets into your bloodstream

i don't tell me your thoughts on that those other sort of non-MRA gauge. It's not about the vaccine, it's about the process. We have, I'm going to have to double check her name again, Teresa Long coming in tomorrow, and I heard her talking about those things. Actually, I think I heard Peter McCullough talking about it too. You know, having given somewhere around a hundred thousand intramuscular injections in my life, um, to patients, I do not see that's coming up tomorrow. I do have not seen really, unless you hit a major vein, which just, you protect against that by pulling back on the plunger. It just does not happen.

So the idea that some sort of capillary bed is going to absorb extraordinary amount, not my experience. So I worry about that one. In terms of the admixture and whether something has more or less, I just haven't seen that data. So I need to get more informed about that. I would imagine a bigger load would have some difference, but I'm guessing the regulators have a range that they were allowed to be within. And within that range, some more, some less. But I'm guessing that range, you know, we all know this was rushed to market, so maybe they didn't do enough testing on the effects of that range. I don't know.

I just haven't seen the data. That's fine. Thanks for those details and uh thanks for having us the other week great boost on the book sales and i appreciate that all the love you're giving to this covid venture here what a crazy time what a crazy time keeping your head above water thanks justin appreciate it very very much uh now i'm going to bring christine up who is a done biotech research and she is the one that alerted me to the fragmentation of the spike protein. Christine, you heard some of that conversation. Do you want to add anything to this?

I do. Two things. And Dr. Cole, if you're still listening, I'm a huge fan. Thanks for everything and all the work you're doing in helping people. I don't know if he's still here. But, yeah, there's two things i wanted to add um when you said there's uh something i wanted to bring up before you even said it so we must have been on the same wave yeah you talked about medicine predicting the

behavior of clouds when when i worked and you know and recently in biotech we would take mrna and we would transfect a cell with it. We would encase it in a lipid nanoparticle and it would make its way through the phospholipid bilayer into the cell. When we did a project, we would always start with at least two different types of cells, but we would use a small amount. We would do what was called a small-scale run because we had a phrase we always used. Biology is going to do what biology is going to do. Yes. Even in a controlled lab setting with all the variables constant, you could have temperature and all the chemicals involved.

And we would see variances. We could repeat a project, and it would turn out a bit differently using the exact same cell line. So we would start with a small amount to do maybe one milligram, just like one liter of material before we would jump to higher amounts because it would start to vary really wildly. And I had sent, I think you, there was an article regarding a question you'd asked if different people expressed different proteins differently, because that's what's happening with mRNA vaccine. And I think we're reading that, yes, different people are genetically predisposed, even with their own proteins, not even the mRNA vaccine. We're just talking about their own proteins.

Different people express different proteins in different ways. Yep. Yep. And that might be at the core of these adverse reactions, right? Possible. We just don't know. We don't know. That's right.

Could be the fragments. It could be the expression of protein. It could be, God knows. I mean, we're not doing the research. But I want to go back to your point about behavior of clouds. I mean, even the data you sent me had a scatter. I mean, there was certainly a spike within that scatter that was the predominant response. But we used to do, when I was training as a biologist, we used to do the old least squares analysis on everything

because everything was just a scatter. And you were just sort of estimating what you thought was going on. Particularly back in those days, we didn't have the same kind of experimental instrumentation. And it's just to think in terms of biology having X input and Y outcome is anathema. It doesn't work like that. That's not how biology works. You put X in and you might get mostly Y, but you're going to get Z and F and Q and R as well, for sure. And you have to understand what's happening with all that in case there's something in advantageous going on. Agreed? Exactly. Exactly. Justin was asking about attenuated vaccines that are weakened virus getting injected and the reaction in the cap by virtue of the delivery into some sort of rich venous system or a specific large venous vessel and i'm just telling you that that just

really doesn't doesn't fit my i'm not gonna say never right we're biologists but it doesn't fit my clinical experience at all as somebody that is doing im administrations all the time. So I was going to add, I, the company I worked for recently, we also made vaccines and we would use a different, different viruses too to when we were just doing things in the lab. But you know, this, the mRNA makes the body express a protein in cells where the LNP is coming in contact with. So when you've got a virus that's coming in that's attenuated, it's just by pure biology, like thinking, I haven't given people vaccines, although I've received them.

I got a Tdap recently, so I'm not against them. But it's not going to express the protein like what it's doing now. It's a different thing. Right, it's a different thing. It's a different mechanism. Dr. Wiseman sort of impressed upon us that when there is this kind of commandeering of the protein manufacturing apparatus, that the CDC defines that as gene therapy. I've not looked that up since he said that. Do you understand that to be true? I'm not a fan of the phrase gene therapy. Yeah, me neither. I don't worry about that. Because I know someone else is listening and

I don't know if he has his hand up and I didn't want to name him. And I sent you a little message on YouTube that there's been talks if it gets into the genome and the tests that have been done. I know Dr. Malone really spoke about the very specific conditions of that test that was done to see if it was reverse transcription word. I don't think that's been replicated to say that it's actually gene therapy. So I do have, there was a project that I worked on and worked with the scientists with that are in stage, it's in stage three clinical trial right now using mRNA to help kids with a devastating disease that I can't say the specifics

due to NDA, but that is gene therapy because it was targeting, you know, specific a gene and doing knockout what's called where you homologous repair of a, you know, something that was defective and changing itself. that would be my definition of gene right well that's what i always think of as gene therapy is this crisper and that kind of thing yeah that that's great that's a totally different thing yeah we're going with guide mrna it's called it's almost like uh instructions you would give a missile for a bad analogy but if you take the crisper and then you take guide mrna and you direct it to where it's going to go but then you've got off-target effects right but like they think they uh oh my gosh like

they did tests with animals where they were adding in a gene from a squid or yeah i mean this is the this is the future the future of health care we always said it was going to be stuff like this, but we're a little over our skis maybe right now. But Christy, I think I see I've got the gentleman that you recommended to come on up here, so I'm going to get him up, okay? Tyler. All right, Tyler, here he comes. I'm going to bring Tyler up right now. So, Tyler, there you are. Got to unmute that mic in the left corner there you are. Got to unmute that left,

that mic in the left corner there, Tyler. Hey, Dr. Drew. Tyler. So you heard that little conversation. You heard what we talked about so far.

Now it's your turn. Me and Christy have been talking a bit about fragmentation. Um, as you know, she has some files from the Australian government where they showed the HPLC analysis, um, from the Pfizer,

uh, injection. and it clearly comes out fragmented. But I had a question. So early on when they released these and they had people coming in for repeated boosters, this was after the first two doses, and then people had multiple boosters in a year. I was curious, what do you think the consequence of reintroducing, um, a pathogen over and over? Um, I'm thinking in terms of,

uh, the mechanism of self-tolerance, the reason your body doesn't attack your cells. I know early on that topic came up a lot more than it has been discussed lately. Uh, so I don't have an opinion. And remember, this is not – I'd be worried more about that with a vaccine like Covaxin, which is an attenuated virus, a whole virus, or a killed virus.

And this is a totally different thing. This is just causing the protein machinery to activate. So you're wondering whether, and presumably we're sending different antigens in slightly every time. So I don't know. I just don't know. What do you think? I'm not sure. I remember Dr. Malone shared a publication a little while back, and there was clear data kind of buried in it showing that the mRNA, the spike protein synthesized from the mRNA actually remained in the tissues much longer,

almost as far out as six months compared to someone who actually got COVID. That was cleared within a much shorter time. So. We are seeing more infection, this Dr. Wiseman's data, within the weeks after vaccine, which is odd also, right? That they're more likely to get infected or manifest clinical manifestations of an infection

in the short term, whatever that's doing. Again, lots of questions, right? And are you aware of any of these things being addressed or attempt to answer these questions? No, I haven't. As a matter of fact, I was actually wondering, I haven't seen for myself, has there even been validation of the intended protein product in the correct folding and correct confirmation? My understanding is in the bivalent, they have documented the correct folding of four subtypes. Okay? Two omicron and two, because there's three different, two and one in every S protein, right? There's three different subunits.

Two of one type, one of the other. And so the way it assembles, there are four different. But I said, you know, what about the chimeric changes? What about enantiomers? And apparently there can be enantiomers also and that's also not been studied right that's that's very interesting so that these these types of things would be like required for peer review but yes they'd be required this this is the thing that i think flips out some of us that have been around a while it's like, in the usual course of medical research and bringing something to market, all this stuff had to have been answered.

And all of a sudden, not only was it not answered, it's considered some sort of sin to ask the question about it. That's the part that I find astonishing. Just us asking the questions of the normal course of medical research, as it has been done throughout modern history of biology all of a sudden is problematic it's like that's i can't even believe i'm saying that but it's true would you agree yeah absolutely so there you go all right well

thanks tyler for coming i appreciate it very much i need to i see a lot of your hands up i see you i'm going to try to get to as many as i possibly can. We have to take a little break. We'll be right back. Want to give the gift that keeps on giving? GenuCell Skin Care keeps everyone on your holiday list looking young and refreshed. And who doesn't need that type of luxury, especially over the holiday season? GenuCell has so many products that Susan and I love. GenuCell's X-Fee Moisturizer locks in moisturizer on top of the serums, making dry spots a thing of the past, especially great with the colder climate making dry spots a thing of the past, especially great with the colder climate and all the dryness of our skin, right? And with GenuCell's Immediate Effect 2 Eye Cream, you can see the results in as little as 12 hours,

guaranteed or your money back. Susan loves GenuCell's DFS Vitamin C Serum, the new deep firming serum, as well as the hyaluronic with C and lactic acid, which hydrates your skin and makes fine lines a thing of the past while hopefully preventing future wrinkles from forming. I am a snob when it comes to using products on my face. The dermatologist makes a ton of money from me. But when I was introduced to Genucel, 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. Take advantage of amazing holiday savings by going

to GenuCell.com, and you will get 60% off with a special holiday stocking stuffer. When you subscribe to My Favorites Package at Genucel.com slash Drew, and all orders are upgraded to free shipping for the rest of the holiday season, we will get it there quickly. Use code Drew at checkout for an extra 10% off your entire order. That is Genucel.com slash Drew. G-E-N-U-C-E-L dot com slash Drew. Economic turmoil has a lot of people wondering what our government will do next. Will it be more wasteful spending, higher taxes?

How do you protect your hard-earned savings? The answer could be gold. Gold is the world's oldest, most proven form of currency. It's there when inflation soars and when other assets go sideways. And that's why Birch Gold is thrilled to introduce a new product that reimagines gold as currency, the Goldback. This month, you'll get a free Goldback for every $5,000 purchased when you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a precious metals IRA with Birch Gold by December 22nd, Susan's birthday, incidentally. Birch Gold will help you own gold and silver in a tax-sheltered account.

Visit birchgold.com slash drew to claim your free info kit on gold, and then talk to one of their precious metals specialists. Reminder, I do not give financial advice. This is not financial advice, but you can go to Birch Gold, and with every purchase you make before December 22nd, you'll get a free gold back. This is a stocking stuffer just in time for Christmas. Once again, visit birchgold.com slash droob.

Protect your savings with gold today. Okay, I want to get to more of your calls, so let's just get right to it. We've had our little biological conversation. Let me see if I can get more of you up here. This is Missy, and I know you've had your head up for quite a while, Missy. So here you go. Do unmute that mic, everybody, on the lower left-hand corner, the little red circle, blue circle, red circle, whatever it is. And you should be able to speak.

Me? I'm up. There you are. What's going on? Okay, excellent. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions. I know that you've dealt in your past with a lot of addictions, a lot of celebrities that have dealt with addictions. And what I see happening on the left feels to me, especially when it comes to these vaccines, like some sort of addiction. They're addicted to the vaccines. They're addicted to the blow they get, the attention they get from getting these vaccines.

So at what point, the vaccines that are supposed to make people healthy, at what point do they become a drug? And at what point do they become an addiction? I always get worried about the excessive use of the model of addiction. I mean, for something to be addiction, it has to, in my mind, have extra physiological effects on a very specific region of the brain called medial forebrain bundle. And while you can activate that part of the brain easily and you can respond excessively sometimes if it's particularly arousing, it's not really addiction so much as more like a compulsion. And even though that too has a little bit of a different quality to it.

But in any event, I would refrain from calling that an addiction per se. And I've always been thinking much more about the tribal qualities that people have been manifesting lately. And I don't like them. I don't like to be a part of it. It makes me sad that we are being so tribal. But the only thing I've noticed is when you try to have conversations with people on either side, again, there are excesses on both sides. What you find is you trigger cognitive dissonance and you end up getting ad hominem attacks. So whenever somebody comes after you and says, you know, you're fill in the blank, you know, bad person, whatever, you know, you've sort of fumbled onto cognitive dissonance.

And when people say things that don't make sense or they're word salads, or I know you are, but what am I? These are the sorts of things. Let's see. What do we got here? I know it's hard, Dolores, but it is the only way to wake the ones that are starting to search questions. Some take longer than others. It's just humans. That's from Core Physics.

Okay. I'm not quite sure what that is all about. Here's one. I participated in a crazy experiment. My husband and I combined our DNA to create human life. Thank you, Chris. I'm not sure that was, is that an experiment? It seems like that's already been proven that that'll work. So let's keep going here if I possibly can. Alex, I think this is, or Alexi. Hey there.

Hello. Hi there. Hey, hey there, Drew. I was the molecular biologist I called in last time. Yes. So I took a very deep kind of hard objective look at this reverse transcription paper. Yes. As far as I can tell. Yes.

It's actually, it is the only one. The only other paper related is a comment on the paper itself. Okay. Oh, it's so, I'm so glad you called because while, while Christine was talking about it,

I was like, where did I hear about this? Where were we talking about this? It was you. So thank you for doing that. It's much appreciated. So it's an in vitro study, right? It's in the- Yeah, in vitro study,

and they do it in a liver- Liver cell, right. Liver cancer cell line, and that's actually a very important caveat. So we do have an endogenous reverse transcriptase, which I completely forgot about in my grad school days. We do. Yeah. So it's called the long interspersed nuclear element retrotransposon system.

So it's kind of part of that vestigial viral parts of our genome, like with the transposons and neurotransposons, make a huge part of our genome. Okay. So in this paper, they do show that there is reverse transcription of the mRNA, but they don't prove that it's integrated into the genome. Yep. And the other caveat is...

Cancer. Cancer, exactly. So cancer cells are, you know, have been shown to have huge up-regulation of these type of- So let me just explain for people. When cancer is a gigantic genetic mess, the first development of a cancer cell

is because of a genetic error where the cell divides and changes its relationship with other cells in certain ways that it wouldn't normally do if the genes were working right. And as the tumor progresses, the genetics change in massive ways, massive change. And one of the things can be upregulation of all sorts of primitive left behind what would have been considered nonsense in the genome but actually gets activated into some sort of biological process would that be a way to say this yeah 100 yeah and and honestly i mean i don't want to say that the data here is kind of artifactual uh what they show is real but it's in a very kind of artificial system that, you know,

worth studying, you know, in an animal model, other cell lines, there is a mechanism there possibly for reverse transcription. We don't know if it's integrated. I'm going to declare this a sleeper. Put this one to sleep. Yeah. Because it's too much going on. The genetics,

if you understand the genetics of cancer, you understand just how wide open the possibility is of something like this happening and how unlikely therefore it is to happen in a normally functioning cell. So, so I'm going to, I'm going to say thank you because I didn't know these were in cancer cells. And by the way,

when things happen in a Petri dish in vitro, they don't necessarily happen in vivo, which was the original problem with this study. But now when you say this is in cancer cells, it goes away for me. So very important. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Okay.

All right. So there you go. So Dr. Kelly believes reverse transcription is a possibility with the vaccine. I'm telling you the evidence was weak because it was an in vitro liver cell. Now we're finding out it was a liver cancer cell in vitro. That's enough to say this is not directly related to a healthy human genome functioning. All right. So I've got lots of people with their hands up here. I'm sorry. I'm going to try to get to as much as we can here. Oh, goodness. Sorry, guys. I'm scrolling through whom I can. People that have not put their hands up as long as

possible. This is, I'm not sure, what Anthony called thinking. Okay, that sounds interesting. Are you Anthony? These screen names are uh wild anthony got to unmute yourself don't forget to do that or if you are anthony what anthony called thinking uh you're not unmuting i'm not sure and you're gone uh let's talk to Answers for Sean, who's been up here. I think we've spoken before some time ago.

Answers for Sean, you've got to unmute your mic in the lower left-hand corner, the little microphone icon. There you are. Hi, Dr. Drew. How are you? Good evening. What's happening? My 17-year-old son had to have a vaccine to continue playing hockey. Right.

Which he did. Now, you and I have spoken before, right? Yes. Yes. Yeah. Okay. And it was very, I mean, we remember your call vividly because it was, I mean, it affected us all. It affected us all.

Yeah. He went to emergency four days after the shot. He had the same circles around his eyes that you did. And he was sent home with basically Advil. And he died 33 days later. It's terrible. And the cause of death, the cause of death is unascertained that's me that's my eye that's the thing i had around my eye and by the way it was interesting the um football coach or something or son of a football coach was found with that in his eye but then was declared uh

an alcohol related death which i thought well that was interesting but yeah this is uh this is a sign of the consumptive coagulopathy that we saw from the j and j vaccine and may have some relation to the mrna vaccine so it's it's very serious so what i wanted to ask you is when you went to emergency the doctor put his notes in the autopsy and it says at the bottom query vaccine reaction should he not have done a d-dimer test and a troponin test while sean was in the hospital because he didn't when when was that was that i mean if it was before it's pretty routine now you're right and you know it was four four days after his shot he went to emergency no. I mean, when in the history of the pandemic, because early on they were not doing that. Now it is routine, but early on that wasn't so common.

It certainly wouldn't have been common from the vaccine early on. There wasn't the kind of understanding of this potential. So if this emergency doctor would have done the tests, was there any chance it could have shaved, save Sean's life? I, you know, trying to, you know,

recreate a circumstance that I, where I wasn't there. I haven't seen the record. It's almost impossible, but, but what it would have done, let's say his D dimer was positive. I don't know what Sean really ultimately died of per se in terms of what the

physiology was it's very hard to talk about and so so i'm i'm sorry to talk about him like he's just biological but i'm going to do that for a second um it would have alerted the er doctor to the possibility of a pulmonary embolus or a venous thrombosis and the kinds of things that we now know happen certainly from covid and there's concern that it happens from the vaccine as well. Okay. Okay. It's just having a result of unascertained

is impossible to live with. I know. It really is. And look, you, you, you know, trying to make meaning of something horrible and seemingly meaningless like this is so hard. It's so hard. It is.

But I'm glad you're in there still fighting. And there might be other people, if indeed there are ways to understand who can get adverse effect from vaccines and who can't, you might be in there saving other people as well. So I say keep, stay in it, stay in it. And I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry. We're the last time we spoke to you. I, I, I, we were very emotional and reasonably very emotional and it's, it's affected us till this day. Okay. Um, let me see who else we have on the, on the line here. Uh, sorry here. because there's a lot of hands up and I'm just trying to get to people that I have not had a chance to speak before. Excuse me here while I

keep looking. This is Feds for Medical Freedom. I'm not quite sure what's going on there, but let's talk to Feds. Feds? Hello? You seem to be up and unmuted, but I'm not hearing you. Okay, Feds, while we wait on you here, I'm going to get Kevin in here. And Kevin, you just, there you are. I'm going to get Kevin in here. And Kevin, you just, there you are. What's up, Kevin? Oh, can you hear me okay?

I do. Dr. Drew, thank you for doing this. I commend you for having such an open mind on this topic that obviously can cost you dearly. So hats off to you for taking all these calls. Kevin, I don't understand why it would cost me dearly. It's much like Tyler and I were talking about a few minutes ago. This is the way we've always done things, is ask questions and try to answer things when there's concerns. And the way we did medical research was, of course, more thorough than the most recent rollouts because this was an emergency.

I get it. This was corners were cut all over the place. But then to call back and go, hmm, we better answer these questions, that that should have any kind of cost to it is, I almost, I just can't believe it. So I'll just go on doing things the way I always have, I guess. Well, good for you. Well, my background is on the genomic side, and a trend that I have noticed is that we have about 6.5 million of these SARS genomes public and in NCBI, and most of them sequenced a hundred to a thousand times redundancy so we can find variants. It's very difficult to find such data on the lots of the vaccines. So we don't have a good understanding of the transcriptional fidelity in the manufacturing process. So hold on. So you're just talking about the mRNA side,

like where there's any errors on the actual mRNA itself, right? Yes. And if you heard what Christine and I were talking about, we know for sure there are errors. There's fragmentation. Yeah, there's errors in the protein transcription. So that definitely does happen. Now, whether or not that's related to some mRNA peculiarity, I don't know. But we do know that the protein transcription. So that definitely does happen. Now, whether or not that's related to some mRNA peculiarity,

I don't know. But we do know that the fragments occur. Yeah, so it's not just fragments. I think there's probably a single nucleotide variant in every single one of the 40 trillion molecules in every shot. Would make sense, right? Would make sense. Yes.

The modified nucleotides they're using are very error-prone in transcription and in translation. And so this creates, this is really a pro-drug that does not have a well-QC'd or understood active drug, if you will. Well, I mean, we kind of know. I mean, it's just triggering immune response, right? It's the downstream para effects that we don't know yet. Other effects. Sure, it's triggering some antibody

response but that i'm not certain that's really a clinical proxy for success and and the immune response right we there's t-cell response and a variety of other forms of response so it's just i've not seen this in medical history where we have a pro drug like this where there is absolutely almost no qc on the final product that's uh the intended protein to be expressed and don't you but but we know why that happened right because there was a rush to bring it to almost no QC on the final product. That's the intended protein to be expressed. And don't you, but, but we know why that happened, right?

Because there was a rush to bring it to market, right? I mean, they were cutting corners. They've talked about cutting corners. What, what the part I have trouble understanding is why now when we look back and try to get a little more specific about this,

now that's a problem. You know what I mean? To try to, to try to call back and let's get let's get this better let's get this more right like that's a sinful thing to say that's that's the part i'm having trouble with not that we the fact that we rushed it all out and everything i i you know we did that it was it was done consciously uh but now that we're trying to get it a little more nailed down and that's being obfuscated, that's the part I have a

problem with. Yeah, it's an important part because they do plan to roll out many more of these LNP-based mRNAs for other diseases. I know, listen, and I hope they do their usual research on those, right? I mean, if they do, what's the concern? Yeah, I think we do need some vehicle controls here. I mean, one thing I've been disappointed in the trials is I've not seen data showing just the LNPs ejected alone without the mRNA. What do those do?

Good question. I'm going to, for the record, I could be wrong easily. I'm going to say, given that they are just so inert and so much of a replication of our own endogenous cellular membranes i can't imagine that it does anything but who knows you're right it needs to be tested right yeah indeed indeed kevin thank you i'll get some more calls but thank you i appreciate the challenging challenging input uh this is uh river uh river parish. Hi, you're there. Go right ahead. Hello.

Can you hear me? I hear you. Hey. Yeah, just wanted to quickly ask. May 18th of 2021, my mother-in-law, at my urging, got her second shot. And a few hours later, the sudden cardiac arrest she was 62 sorry I wasn't prepared to talk about this like I should have been um anyway so she had the second booster or the first booster no this was May 18th of 2021 so this was the second booster or the first booster? No, this was May 18th of 2021.

So this was the second shot of the mRNA sequence. So the completion of the two-shot series. Yes, sir. That's correct. And was it the normal duration between the two shots or had she waited longer than usual? No, no. It was the normal duration. Okay.

And, you know, and it was a shock to us um but the thing that was most shocking was this occurred in omaha nebraska and the it happened in front you know she lived with us for a while um at the time she was living with my um my sister-in-law and this happened in front of the family she was holding my knee happened it was a few hours after the shot uh she was in the midst of a fever at that point and um when we got to the hospital uh they they immediately dismissed uh everything uh you know the the temporal coincidence was completely ignored uh and then It was a shocking lack of curiosity. And what I was curious about was, was there, to your knowledge, a reason for that? Yes.

I'm going to say that, was she a smoker? No, not at all. I'm going to say that, was she a smoker? No, not at all. Did she have any risk factors for coronary disease? Was she family history, cholesterol? Well, that's weird. And actually, a team of cardiologists did examine her. She was on life support for a while.

And they determined that, they told us that there was no blockages. They recommended that it be entered into VAERS. And I work I'm a software engineer data guy. I work with data for a living. And months later, I decided to pull down VAERS to look for the entry for her, knowing that it's anonymous. But I looked for someone her age with her description in Nebraska, never found any data. There was no record for her. And they were the hospital told us they were going to give the VAERS number to us because I brought this up with them. I was pretty aggressive about it because they were

clearly trying to sweep down to the rug. And they told us they would give us a various number. And my sister-in-law was going to get it. She lives in Omaha. She never did get a number. And to my knowledge, they never put it into the system. It's not that, I don't know how to say this without sounding pejorative, but it's not necessarily the case that a suspected vaccine reaction is going to go into VAERS. That's a common story. My understanding, I talked to a physician here in Colorado where I live about this and was told that it's just the systems of pain in the ass to use. It takes half an hour. And whatever it is, it's not particularly a cardiologist is onto the next thing. It's hard for them to sit down and do something like that. And it's, you know, we're, we are strapped with so much bureaucratic paperwork already

that to add another, whatever to it, I see it's see it's not of life or death or getting people covered for their insurance and whatnot so they can get into the hospital. That stuff, I'm sure, gets priority over a VAERS entry. And that's how it gets lost, I'm sure. But I'm glad they were thinking that way. The fact that she had clean coronaries is shocking. Who knows what this was? And yes, they're going to have to think about it as a VAERS. I thought you were going to tell me that she had a rupture of a coronary artery and she's somebody with intrinsic disease.

And almost any stressor can precipitate something like that. And I would have said, well, yeah, well yeah maybe vaccine related but not vaccine caused but a a clean coronary wow that's crazy it makes me wonder if there's something else even like maybe you should have a big pull my whole thing is my view of it was as a signal um and i i didn't i honestly thought of it as a coincidence myself. I was kind of in denial. And what happened is I was in Nebraska for two weeks. I come home after being gone for two weeks and I go to pick up my packages from a neighbor. And when I go to do it, he asked me what happened. He points across the street to a guy that lives a block away from me. I go knock on the door. A 35-year-old male used to work at Google. Uh,

we actually had a lot in common shockingly, but, uh, this happened to him except he survived, um, you know, hours after, and that's when I started sort of, and, and the, the denial that they encountered in the ER, um, you know, him being 35 was a whole different story, uh, obviously, but they, they encountered denial in the ER here in a completely separate state. And eventually a team from Mayo Clinic did start researching his case, but they sort of dropped all the research and never got back to him. And so what's happening now is that enough of this weird stuff is happening that people can't deny it any longer. But what is interesting is that right now the

story is being promulgated that it's all COVID related. It's all post COVID. And in many of these vaccinated individuals, they'd had COVID, which is so maybe it's the two or maybe it's the one or how do we tease one from the other? And so it's getting very confusing. And this is the kind of territory that I'm really concerned about. I don't know why this isn't, somebody's not really aggressively trying to answer this. I saw something in Great Britain. There's an Australian physician that's getting a little more, who used to be one of the public officials there, who's getting a little more stringent on this topic. The UK health system is slowly moving in this direction to try to answer this question. Something is going on.

Something is going on. Is it vaccine? Is it both? Is it COVID? Is it one in one case? I don't know. It's confusing. But to say it's all COVID is disingenuous.

What's that? I really appreciate what you've been doing. And I know it's, it's been at a big cost to you, you know, look, you've got a YouTube channel and everything. I understand that this isn't a pleasant thing for advertisers and things. So I just wanted to, you know, thank you for your work on this and also for your neutral, your scientific approach as well. I really value that as well.

So thank you so much for giving me an opportunity to speak a little bit. What is your name? Well, you don't have to give it to anyone. I'll call you Parrish. It says River Parrish on here. Yeah, that's a student. Look, I had my real name on a Twitter account when this first happened. And I was, I was, it was, the account was nuked because I dared just describe the experience.

I didn't. Isn't that weird? Yeah. And, and look, I work in a industry where I'm a software developer. Right. And, you know, let me be clear. I didn't get much sympathy from the colleagues when this happened. Right. Cause they, they didn't like, they didn't like to talk about it. Right. Uh, so it's not something I enjoy. How bizarre that is.

I gotta tell you, I gotta tell you it was real. Well, I think, you know, my, my own father didn't like talking about it. My own father was, you know, a shut in until he got the vaccine. And then my theory on it is it was a, for him, a religious experience, right? He gets that injection. He has this extremely positive emotional association with that injection. And, and that, I don't care how intelligent you are, how logical you think you are. I think that that makes it really hard for somebody to have a neutral opinion on it after they personally go through that yeah right they feel liberated no and i would not blame his

feelings about the vaccine as much as i would blame how much they must have scared him about the illness like his fear of the illness must have been way exaggerated and profound. And therefore the vaccine is that much more beneficial, right? Yeah. And I think that that's it. And I think that, you know, honestly, people just get, I live outside of Boulder and it's not exactly a place where people welcome opinions that are associated in their minds with anyone right of center, right? And for whatever reason, just me talking about an experience where I suspect the vaccine was related and investigation on that topic was refused,

it just sort of, just them talking to me, I think they feel like they're associating with something that's dirty. And I hate that because that is completely that's the covidian covidius construct right where this is all have religious overtones to it bizarre bizarre yeah yes sir that's where am i where am i living what time is this the 11th century? What is going on? You know, I got to tell you, the weird thing for me about it is I was in Australia when it first hit for work a few weeks. And I got out. But what was funny is the Australian media in late February of 2020, they were actually fairly tempered on it at the time. And they were kind of what I just discovered was

when I got back to the States, I noticed that the news was being more honest in Australia, which even how events later played out, that's, that's weird. But at the time, late February of 2020, they were emphasizing it wasn't risky to children on Australian news. They were emphasizing that younger people weren't going, you know, they were talking about the difference in risk by age. And when I got back to the States, you know, they were just completely leaving that out, which I thought was, you know, an interesting, I don't understand why. I don't understand the motivations. I don't either, except the only thing I can see that happened and eventually infected Australia too was the adoption of the policies of the Chinese Communist Party.

They invented this. We decided it was the right thing to do. Italy did it, and then it infected the world. And if you want to see how their policy plays out, we saw it recently in, I forget which cities were on lockdown. And guess what? It doesn't work. That's why they gave it up. It doesn't work.

And they weren't willing to admit that at all at the time. And they were claiming complete success. And we fell for it. And we infected the world with this. And there should be some, not a reckoning so much, at least an analysis of this, an honest analysis. But Parrish, thank you so much. No, thank you. Appreciate it.

You got it. Christine, did you want to come back up? I have a question for you. I remember I said there was something I was trying to think of. I couldn't remember, and I did remember now. So glad you had your hand up again. Was there something else you wanted to say about the proteins? I actually wanted to jump off of what McKernan said when you talked about the products that are coming to market because I just hopped to the FDA website to get that answer and

it's scaring me a little bit right now. Okay, let's hear it. And I posted the link. So I went to the FDA website to look at the Orange Book Preface, which I posted the link down underneath the spaces on Twitter. And it talks about approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations. And when I scroll down, and I just know this from I wrote a paper on the FDA and direct to consumer advertising and how drugs are fast-tracked to market. For therapeutic equivalence-related terms and acceptance, the thing that scares me in this right now, if you go down to the page and I sent Caleb

the paragraph in here, the FDA classifies as therapeutic equivalent for those drug products that meet the following general criteria. They are approved as safe and effective. They are pharmaceutical equivalents that contain some of the same biological ingredients and outcomes. So when you were discussing the like the evaluations and everything getting rushed through, that was the first thing that came to my mind. So I went right to that FDA website. Again, I posted the link. Now, the big question is, are they even going to follow through with doing proper studies if it's already been approved? It seems like not. It seems like not. It seems like

not only not, you're not allowed to ask. You're not allowed to say, should we? Which is kind of extraordinary, isn't it? I always wonder if I'm missing something. Am I missing something here? What am I missing? It's shocking. But again, I sent the something. Am I missing something here? What am I missing? It's shocking. But again, I sent the link and then I posted it underneath the chat on Twitter. Okay, I will look at that. And the other question I had for you. Is that the document you're speaking about?

Yes. Yes. Okay, I'll upload that. Thank you. I'll add it to the website. So we're going to have Teresa Long in here. And I've heard her recently making an issue of polyethylene glycol and ethylene glycol. And I'm having trouble making anything of that. Do you have an opinion about that stuff?

No. Okay. Because I've seen ethylene glycol injected, and it causes necrosis. And polyethylene maybe is more inert or something. I don't know. I'm having trouble getting excited about that. Okay. Thanks, Christine.

Appreciate it very much. Thank you. Okay. Thanks, Dr. Drew. You much. Thank you. Thanks, Dr. Drew. Thanks, Caleb. This is John Bowden, I believe you pronounce your name that way. John, welcome.

Oh, hi. Thanks for having me on. Appreciate what you do. You probably haven't heard my name. I got the death certificates in massachusetts um 460 000 of them every detail i analyzed them starting back in march and what i found was a in the excess deaths there was an extreme shift 2020 the excess was mostly respiratory over 85 years old and uh definitely seasonal seasonal trigger you know i'm up in massachusetts so um you know harsh seasons and the seasonal triggers are absolute it goes like a sine wave so 2021 it shifts to circulatory and blood-related, 65 to 84, and no seasonality.

As if something came in, completely changed the symptom spectrum profile, the age spectrum profile, and the seasonality profile. Now, when I looked at individual records, and by the way, I have an Exhibit F in a federal court case. It's 123 pages it correlates bears to death certificates it has a number of people who had onset of symptoms within minutes to hours and death within days almost all of them are circulatory system and blood related and let's say seven-year-old girl gets injected within five minutes she's vomiting and uh vomits for eight to ten hours they wait three weeks and they give her another shot she gets stomach pain and she dies why did they give her the second shot is one of the questions i'm

going to ask you but let me move on why didn. Why didn't they consider, that's the way it was being administered back then. If somebody had a moderate reaction, you would assume, the wisdom at the time was they're just as likely to have less reaction or no reaction the next shot. Well, you know, she died. And you know what they wrote on the death certificate? They wrote COVID. They said she died and you know what they wrote on the death certificate they wrote covid they said she died of covid and then and then um moving on there's diane at 62 years old died in march of a of a stroke she had onset of symptoms right away brianna was 30 years old she had onset of symptoms right away they sent her home from the er with a headache she went back this you're you're you're informing me about something that I have not seen clinically so much. I have seen stuff weeks later, lots of stuff,

of all stripes, whether it's myocarditis or supraventricular arrhythmias or stroke, I'm seeing stuff weeks later. I have not seen the immediate reaction so much. Maybe that's because they don't get out into the clinical space. They're in the ER and that's that. Yeah, and they don't get coded right. So this is all through ICD-10 codes.

They're all D codes and I codes mostly. The only cancers that are showing up are bone and bone marrow C779 and C795. It'd be interesting if the cancerous stuff that people are kind of worried about now, if that starts to show up, I don't know how it would show up on death certificates because it would be sort of a... One of the theories presently is that cancer is presenting at a more advanced stage right now.

That's something about the immune response causing that. It'd be interesting to see if you could figure that one out. No, I agree with that. I did find B-cell lymphocytic leukemia was just way up, but that was only in 2022. So as you know, it's going to be a delay. Like the blood and blood-related, and I call it blood transport system,

circulatory system, heart being the center, that's all going to show almost immediately, but the cancers take several months. I can't figure out what the mechanism would be of this sudden death. It's so, so odd that it would. I can understand how you could get a deep venous thrombosis than a pulmonary embolus, but to have a stroke or a myocardial infarction is so weird.

Cocaine does that. Cocaine will, but it does it with multiple mechanisms. It increases platelet aggregation, it causes coronary artery spasm, and it increases oxygen demand of the heart, you know, by being a stimulant. And those three phenomenon can result in a sudden clot in a clean artery. That's the only thing I know of that does that. Well, what if you get a direct vein hit, which is, you know, some people argue it's one in 50,000 to 1 in 50. I can make an argument for the 1 in 50. You get that bolus injection,

it goes and it transfects certain cells in just one area, and in that one area, they call for T-cell attack and it scores the endothelium. But let's talk about what happens to a bunch of mRNA, let's say it's directed, let's put it right in the femoral vein.

It's directly in the femoral vein. Where does it go? It goes to the let's say it's directed. Let's put it right in the femoral vein. This is directly in the femoral vein. Where does it go? It goes to the lungs and it's caught there and it doesn't get back to the heart. That's how it works. The coronary arteries are on the left side of the heart after you get through the lungs and things don't get through the lungs. That's why this doesn't make sense. So I don't know. There's got to be a different mechanism. It's got to be something else. It's got to be something to do with platelet

function. I'll tell you, I'm just thinking back to my own reaction with the vaccine. I had something very strange when I got the vaccine. I had a full body chill and I thought, what a strange reaction from something that could not possibly have gone through my body that quickly it's just not possible and and I thought what an odd reaction and and then I got the platelet aggregation the next day so maybe there's something with platelets and the thelium macrophages yeah I'm not a doctor. I just know the data. Yeah, listen, John, I want to talk to you some more.

Do me a favor. Send your information to contact at drdrew.com, will you? I want to hear more about this. Okay? I'm sorry. What was it again? Contact at drdrew.com. Okay. Just so you know, Kirsch knows me. Um, okay. Well, I, you know,

Kirsch is up here on a Thursday. Maybe we'll pull you up here with him. Okay. All right. All right. Sounds good. Thank you. Yeah. It's these scary stories and it's easy to get scared by this stuff, but we've got to stand back and do the science. And, and, and again, I, I'm being accused by some people of going down a rabbit hole. Well, there's Steve Kirsch who's coming up on Thursday. And indeed, you can easily fall down the rabbit hole. It's very easy. You have to kind of temper yourself and go, no, okay, I'll listen to it, go down the hole, and then come back up and sort of think about it. And what I come out with is something's going on.

Something's going on. And we need to know more about what that something is. Is it COVID plus? Is it just vaccine? Is it vaccine? What is it? What's going on here? And I do think one of the, I should get Aaron Cariotti back here as a bioethicist to answer this question. The difference between, I brought it up early in today's program, taking a healthy person and making them sick with a

medical intervention versus allowing somebody to get sick with a natural agent, these are two ethical different situations and they're confusing to me. I feel as though when I do something interventionally that makes somebody sick, I violated an ethical principle of do no harm. Allowing somebody to get sick when I could have interfered with it, that's also ethically a problem. But if I don't understand the risk reward, it's hard. These are difficult questions. Listen, I know there's still hands up. I appreciate all of you with your hands up. I appreciate everybody that participated today. We are out of time. We are in here with Teresa Long and our good friend Kelly Victory tomorrow. Steve Kirsch and maybe John will be back in here as well on Thursday.

And next week, we are traveling a bit. So I do know we have Asim Malhatra coming in on Wednesday. He is going to blow your mind. He is a great, super interesting guy, very knowledgeable, very sincere cardiologist who has some grave, grave concerns. And he's someone also, his dad died of a heart attack very quickly after the vaccine. So something's up. Let's see if he has more information for us. As we said, Biram Bindal with Dr. Victory on January 4th, and then Ryan Cole returns with answering some of the questions that I brought up with

him today. That will be February 1. Again, those of you listening to us on these Twitter spaces, we do appreciate you stopping by and we'll always use Twitter spaces as a way of spreading, you know, increasing the conversation and getting our calls and hopefully giving people something interesting to listen to. Appreciate it very much. And we will see you tomorrow with Dr. Teresa Long, 3 o'clock Pacific.

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.