Ask Dr. Drew - Is Dr. Drew Anti-Vaccine? Dr. Dan Wilson (Debunk The Funk) on Pseudoscience & Misinfo – Ask Dr. Drew – Episode 155

Episode Date: December 29, 2022

Dr. Dan Wilson hosts Debunk The Funk, a show dedicated to battling pseudoscience, the anti-vaccine movement & COVID-19 misinformation. In a recent episode, Dr. Wilson analyzed our Robert F. Kennedy Jr. interview and asked "has Dr. Drew gone full anti-science?" Countless others have made similar statements & received invitations to debate Dr. Drew publicly, but Dr. Wilson is the first who is brave enough to accept the invite and defend his research on the safety of mRNA vaccines. 「  LINKS FROM EPISODE: https://drdrew.com/1282022  」 Dr. Wilson has a Ph.D. in molecular biology from Carnegie Mellon University and a B.S. in Biotechnology and Molecular Biology from Clarion University. Support Dr. Wilson's Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DrWilsonDebunks  Watch Dr. Wilson at https://www.youtube.com/@DebunktheFunkwithDrWilson/  「 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

Welcome everybody. Today we're going to do a slightly different sort of show. I have always been anxious to talk to my critics to expand my point of view. I've always told you I want to hear all sides and so if somebody takes issue with something I'm saying, I'm interested in getting into it with them. I have asked for referrals from my critics. They consistently either do not provide me with referrals for people whom they'd like to see me interview on this stream or they themselves will not come on. But Dr. Dan Wilson from Debunk the Funk agreed to do so. So we'll get right to it after this. Our laws as it pertained to substances are draconian and bizarre. A psychopath started this. He was an alcoholic because of social media and pornography,

PTSD, love addiction, fentanyanyl and heroin, ridiculous. I'm a doctor for f***'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 help stopping, I can help. I got a lot to say. I got a lot more 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. BetMGM, 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 for the season. Raise your game to the next level this year with BetMGM, a sportsbook worth a slam dunk, and 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. Hey, I'm Dr. Wilson. I'm a PhD molecular biologist. Welcome to another COVID demulking video. And boy, do I have a stinker for you this week. I'm going to be covering an episode of The Dr. Drew Show. His guest is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Oh my god. We developed all these things as we pushed it back over a couple of years and other antivirals came in. Oh, Dr. Drew is actually challenging

RFK Jr. here. This makes my soul happy. He's absolutely right here. AZT was a game changer in the treatment of HIV. But Robert is unfazed by this challenge. We absolutely do have randomized controlled trials of COVID vaccines in children under the age of five. We absolutely do have randomized controlled trials of mask wearing in communities. We absolutely do have evidence that Paxlovid is a highly effective antiviral drug against SARS-CoV-2. Of course, I've been very critical of Dr. Drew here, but I'm always open to talking to whoever I make a video about, and that remains true to this day. And that is why we bring Dr. Wilson in, and we appreciate that very, very much.

Here's my, I got to tell you where I start from. Where I start from is, can we all please restore collegiality? Can we not disagree collegially? And if we have disagreements, let's get together and talk about them. And that's what I am appreciating with your point of view. So do you agree with me on that? Sure. I think we can all be collegiate and cordial. Yeah. Yeah. Well, you don't have to be cordial to me, but I just think of the collegiality of exchange.

And I was saying something yesterday. I said the other day, I think it was yesterday, I said, you know, I've been used to outlying opinions and talking to and interviewing outlying opinions my entire career, both clinically and scientifically and publicly. And I always considered those outlying point of views just interesting. I didn't consider those bad people. I didn't consider them quacks or any of the things that people, these kind of ad hominem sort of attacks that people make on each other these days. It was just, I didn't agree. And I had my reasons for not agreeing. But it was always interesting to hear other people's point of view, which is really what started me down this path of talking to all these people with alternative points of view, with whom I disagree. I appreciate that you pointed that out with Robert Kennedy.

That particular point, I'm so glad you brought that particular point in the interview out because I was actually upset about that because I was there when the AZT boxes were open. I was the one, you know, one of the hundreds or maybe thousands of physicians on the front line who now had something to do for these patients. And it was such a dark period, such a horrible situation. And to sort of demean what we were doing is is really kind of offensive frankly so i i appreciated you pointing that out right right and i think that's uh one of the one more the thing that motivated me emotionally to want to make that video because i read robert f kennedy.'s book, The Real Anthony Fauci, and I did a review of it on my YouTube channel. I went chapter by chapter until I got to about

the middle of the book, and then I kind of just summarized the rest of it because it was honestly just really, really bad. And I expected him to say a lot of the normal anti-vaccine things that he says, a lot of the normal anti-COVID denial talking points that he says, he and others say, but I really didn't expect him to dive as deep as he did into HIV AIDS denial. And so when he brought that up on your show, I was hoping you would challenge him more because he has a huge audience. He is, as I say in my video, one of the most prolific anti-vaxxers to this day. And so for him to come onto your show and talk all that nonsense about how AZT is poison,

that's awful, but it doesn't even scratch the surface of how bad his book gets when it comes to this HIV AIDS topic. And so I guess I was just hoping that you would challenge him more than you did on that because I have some examples. I have a policy. Go ahead. I'll let you give me those examples in a second. But my policy though is, look, when somebody comes in here and I interview them, my policy is I'm going to treat you like a guest. And by treating people like a guest, I'm not here to have an argument. I'm not here to, you know, I may push back a little bit, but I'll hear you out. I got to tell you, the only thing I took away from him, I took away two things from him, and only two things that were, I thought were relevant. One was he, he shined a little bit of a light for me on some of the coziness of the relationships. I knew this, but I really hadn't

thought about it very much between regulators and pharmaceutical industry. I didn't, didn't really think about the implications of that that much. I was just assumed that's how things worked and it worked efficiently that way, but he's kind of got a point. The other thing that I took away from, he just reminded me of any attorney I've ever met who had a particular case to build and they just build their damn case and they don't consider anything else and they're like pit bulls.

They don't think about anything else. They won't consider anything else. They won't move off their dime. They're just attorneys. That's what attorneys do. And that's what he is. He reads a lot of science and he develops his attorney he uses his attorney head to to build his arguments and they are not you're not allowed to assail them on any way on any level and that's where he's at

and that's what i know i think about it's where he's always been that's why his thing goes so far back with vaccines because he believes he's building this case that it's all about these regulators and pharmaceutical companies colluding in such a way that people get hurt that i think is his fundamental argument would you agree i agree that that's his part of his argument but i will also say that i think that you know it's great that you want to have people on the show to talk with them and gain a broader point of view. I dive into conspiracy theories and that stuff all the time because I'm interested in it. I torture myself by watching terrible documentaries on YouTube and then I have to read the science to actually explain why they're wrong.

I think having someone like him on this kind of platform, it might have worked to legitimize him a little bit more than you might have intended. And you promoted his book on on the show and i think that you would i don't think that you support the things that he says about hiv aids in his in his i don't i don't support almost anything he says i i there's not as though i was right down the line agreeing with what he had to say. My intent, I had two issues in terms of having him on. One was people have been beating me up forever that I could not possibly know what I was talking about unless I'd first spoken to Robert Kennedy and blah, blah, blah.

Could I possibly know what I was talking about? So I finally went, okay, I'm going know invite all points of view and i'll have to talk to robert kennedy finally i didn't see how i could i watched his documentary and i didn't didn't agree with most of them not nearly all of it but i didn't see anything that i didn't see where i was going to change anybody's opinion by talking to him the other thing is there's a there's a problem that i don't know if you're aware of psychologically, which is if you do anything to people that have conspiratorial thinking, if you do anything to sort of obscure the messaging of people that they're sort of clinging to or want to hear from,

it increases their conspiratorial thinking and so to sort of push things into the sunlight a bit much like you and i are trying to do here right now that that that tends to improve things if you if you uh if you have a sort of a policy of silence or i won't talk to him or that's a bad person it only adds these people going into the fringes and circulating there and forming their own opinions i really believe strongly in bringing things out into the open whatever the opinions are i i can see that line of thinking for sure i just you know when i do that thing of talking about these ideas that are kind of out on the fringes, I do it because I'm also going

to explain why they're incorrect. And you challenged him initially on his claims about AZT basically being this poison that killed everybody who took it., I would have liked to see that go further. And so, you know, I just think that if we actually can do that now. Well, let's do it right now. Because if you noticed with him. I kind of agree with him, Drew. With Dan? Well, with you pushing back a little bit on stuff that you. Well, if you noticed what Kennedy did at the time, it was like I didn't speak.

He went right past what I said and went on, it was like I didn't speak. He went right past what I said and went on. It was not going to go anywhere, I guarantee you. But let's bring it even a deeper focus today, which is that not only did AZT finally give us something so every person that I sat down with with their first episode of Pneumocystis wasn't going to die in six months, which they always did. Suddenly they could go nine months or maybe they go 12 months. And in that intervening six months that we added to their life, we started thinking about adding a second antiviral. We developed the idea of sulfa as a preventative agent for the pneumocystis. And we had all kinds of – this thing was moving fast.

It was a train. That AZT made a huge difference. You know where we had the biggest problem from, Dan? Do you know what the biggest issue was? There were two big sources of trouble, and it wasn't Robert Kennedy. Do you know what it was? Go ahead. Dallas

Buyers Clubs. They were consistently promoting the notion that doctors were killing patients, that HIV was a product of the Gallo organization, that AZT was a poison that actually caused AIDS. Now, if you look at the movie about the Dallas Buyers Club, look, early on when we had nothing, people wanted to go to the Dallas Buyers Club and those kinds of organizations that had helped them feel better. By all means, please go because we had nothing to offer. And by the way, once we had AZT, even in the movie, what you saw was the, was it McConaughey? Who was the, not McConaughey.

Was it McConaughey playing the patient? Anyway, the actor took a massive overdose of AZT and had a toxic reaction because he took a massive overdose of AZT. But in normal dosing, it was quite well-tolerated. Yeah, we had to watch their blood counts and things, like any medication. But it was a well-tolerated medication by comparison to how it was portrayed. So, A, Dallas Buyers Club. That was our number one problem.

Number two, Spin Magazine. Do you remember Bob Guccione Jr.? He was pushing out so much propaganda, not giving people like robert kennedy a place to express themselves this was people saying this is a horrible product of the there was some the gallows the gallows laboratories or something and they had a whole story that they were and they were pushing it as fact not hey here are some outlying opinions, here are some interesting ideas. This was, and it was mainstream, and it killed thousands of people. Thousands of people became fearful of getting their AZT or the subsequent antivirals.

I mean, I was right there when it happened. I watched it. Again, not avoiding a vaccine for an illness with a 0.09% fatality rate, avoiding a treatment for a medication for an illness with a 100% fatality rate. Totally different situation in terms of the impact on the patients. And it was impossible to get them back once they got paranoid. We had no means like this to have public discussions. There was just the mainstream media and the main print outlets. And Spin Magazine at the time had this huge following,

and it was devastatingly destructive, as were the Dallas Buyers Club. And, you know, that's what happened. That was of the time. Yeah. So there, there was a lot of, um, misinformation going around back, back then too. And one of the big proponents of that misinformation is talked about extensively in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s book and talked about very favorably. Uh, and that's Peter Dewsburg. Who was that?

Uh, Peter Dewsburg. I don't, didn didn't hear his name didn't hear his name anywhere did he invent one of these stories or something no so he uh was a virologist at uh the time and so if uh i have an electronic copy of uh robert's book but oh there it is if you go to page 327 uh oh yes uh this is page yeah this is page 270 um yeah peter peter duisburg was uh a big proponent of the idea that hiv does not cause aids and that oh yeah azt is poison um right so that was that was a whole – his name never – I never heard his name. Again, I was really in the middle of all this. His name never came up. However, there was a big group, again, of people like him that were getting play in mainstream publications.

Like really just as – but they were presented as not hey here's an outlying opinion it was presented as this is what's going on watch out everybody which is a very different way of a media outlet to approach things sure yeah but i just want to add that um duuesberg was actually really important, um, or detrimental rather to the effort to fight HIV AIDS in Southern Africa. He actually played a big role in convincing the president at the time, Becky, uh, that AZT was poison. And because of that,

a lot of people in Southern Africa, um, did not get AZT for their treatment. They died essentially needlessly. And my, I have family from Eswatini. My dad grew up there, which is a tiny country in Southern Africa. And, you know, my granny, when she was alive, she owned a farm. She housed dozens, if not hundreds, of AIDS orphans over the years, fed them, sent them to school. And so she carried the suffering that misinformation in the US caused in South Africa around HIV AIDS. And I think it's absolutely egregious that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. spends actually several chapters portraying someone like Duesberg as a hero. And I think something

like that speaks to just how ill-informed the book is. And I think that's important to highlight here. Yeah, that's Peter Duesberg saying that. Let me just say, though. Yeah, there it is. Go ahead, say it. I was just going to say that, yeah, this quote is Duesberg saying that AZT is, well, he's explaining that essentially AZT is incompatible with life, which is false. AZT, its mechanism of action is that it targets the HIV reverse transcriptase. It does not target human DNA polymerase nearly as well as it targets that enzyme.

Of course. So the book is full of old mysteries however that kind of yeah i know but but the reality is for the first let me try to remember what this was like the first 18 months we used it um the patients all died they didn't live okay they may have lived a few months longer and we got to try new things but you know it would not have prevented the aids orphans that your grandmother ended up with i mean the fact is this illness was not yet nearly what it what they all died they died a little bit longer a little bit later so so when i say the failure to have adequate access to azt what i really meant is

antiretroviral therapy in general, because this from then on the South African president at the time, Becky, uh, was a little bit later, uh, than the initial outbreak in, uh, the U S. Um, so you can see on the screen there, just how effective antiretroviral therapy has been in preventing HIV AIDS deaths. Look, it's one of the great triumphs of medical science, my God. I mean, the people, you know, it's funny, at the time, people were going, why does it take so long to figure this? I was like, God, in the course of 10 years, we'd identified a new agent, worked out its epidemiology, figured out the causative agents, come out with therapeutic agents, treatments for the secondary infections and tumors and things. I mean, it was unprecedented and then turned it into a chronic illness, which was just, oh, my God, a breathtaking thing to be a part of.

Really a great triumph. Yeah, it was a huge triumph. And just to be clear, one of the main reasons patients on AZT alone would die was because AZT is just one antiretroviral, just clearing this up for the audience. And viruses are pretty good at, especially a chronic infection like HIV is really good at generating mutations to overcome a single target drug like that. But two or more targets really raises that energy barrier for the virus to be able to adapt in time before the medication actually kills the virus. So AZT wast was you know it gave people a lot of

hope and then opened the doors for future antiretrovirals that could let people live normal lives oh my god it's just phenomenal it's a but but you're but the the point is well taken all our retroviral are combination retrovirus virals now so so um question you can help me with uh i use a fair bit of paxlovid and i've seen uh a lot of recurrence which i think is well documented in the use of paxlovid but i've seen something i think it's a it's a little bit has not been reported and i'm wondering if you can make sense of it given your reading of the literature, which is that I've seen young people take Paxlovid not get a recurrence, not get a rebound, but get a reinfection within three months,

which from Omicron is very unusual. Most people get at least six months of really solid natural immunity. Is there something about Paxlovid that is impeding our ability to produce a full immune response to the infecting agent, do you think? It shouldn't, no. These kinds of experiments have been done with monoclonal antibodies.

The question essentially being asked is, do monoclonal antibodies inhibit the body's own primary immune response? There was speculation early on that maybe it does, but it turns out no. People who get their first infection of SARS-CoV-2 and get early monoclonal antibody treatment end up with just as good of a memory response as someone who did not get monoclonal antibodies. So it should be similar to Paxlovid, which is another drug that works early in the viral infection stage. And just to point out the so-called rebound,

the Paxlovid rebound that people sometimes talk about, that's really just the normal course of COVID. There's always been kind of two phases. No, no, no, no, no. Sorry. Sorry. I have people heading towards the hospital, getting severely ill. Stop it. It stops. They are well for about three to five days, and then va-voom, it all comes back. And it tends to be more protracted when it comes back, too, I've never seen anything like that in the routine course of COVID. Nothing like that.

I guarantee you. It's been documented. It's been documented a lot. Maybe I'm telling you. Even in the early stages of the pandemic, we've seen. There were recurrences. I understand there were recurrences. I understand there were recurrences.

It's not really were recurrence it's it what it is is it's just uh your body first encounters the virus and you feel sick that's the virus making you sick and then you get better again you start to feel better but then you get a second big wave of feeling crummy again and that's your immune response really making you feel no i understand what you're talking about yep i get it and that's the cytokine storm so to speak and the cytokine activation all this stuff that looks totally different i'm telling you that looks completely different than this it just is clinically a very very different syndrome this that is that is it just looks different and by the way have not really seen much of that you know that kind of biphasic thing in the mo in the elderly uh you

see more of that I've seen more of that in younger populations in my experience maybe just my experience may not be accurate um but the the rebound thing it's it's just has a totally different feel to it just a completely different feel uh it's just it's somebody who's really getting sick let's put it this way you're really getting sick I mean's really getting sick. Let's put it this way. You're really getting sick. I mean, you're getting sick. You're heading towards the hospital. In 12 hours after you start Paxlovid, you're a lot better. I mean, it's dramatic. With the usual course of these biphasic COVID, it's you get up and you kind of, you know, you get sick again.

You're not doing, you know, you're sick for three or five days. You're not better the next morning. And with Paxlovid, you are oftentimes, you are better the next morning like no dramatically better and then out of nowhere at the completion of the course of paxlovid suddenly you're starting to have the same symptoms again and the symptoms are very different they're they're usually um they're not inflammatory they're not they're not the things we would see with the cytokine activation they're very different so i don't know that's been my clinical experience. The literature will bear that out one day one way or the other.

What about the three months? There have been studies in the literature. Oh, sorry. He's saying no to that. He's saying that should not happen. Like, for instance, our daughter got sick three months after she had COVID. That seems to be serendipity. Maybe it was a different strand.

Maybe it was serendipity. Maybe one of those things. I mean, I've heard. i'm not quite sure what all the data say on that but um i've heard other stories that reinfection with omicron can happen pretty quickly um in some cases but um yeah i'm sure i've never rarely seen never really seen it. There is literature where people compared that rebound effect between patients who received Paxlovid and did not receive Paxlovid, and the rates of rebound were similar between the two groups. So I don't really think there's much to the Pxlovid rebound idea all right uh literature will continue to will continue usually in my experience i humbly in my experience when literature doesn't match my clinical experience usually the literature catches up eventually yeah that has been that has been my experience generally look no further than the uh's Health Initiative, which absolutely categorically flew in the face of all of our – we all went, what is – this doesn't fit at all.

We were all told we were witch doctors if we didn't comply with the thus saith the Lord finding of the Women's Health Initiative. That turned out to be completely flawed. So that was one of my sentinel experiences as a clinician where I thought, I'm going to listen to my clinical experience and give the literature some time to catch up. And that's now happened to be at least 10 times since, where things look a certain way, literature doesn't bear it out until it does. So I'm going to guess in this case, though, it's obviously both, right? We both know that what does happen is you can get the cytokine immune activation after the initial infection. There's no doubt about that. There's no doubt about it. I've seen that too. But that was,

again, my experience mostly in younger people, not in the old so much, though it certainly can happen there. And I will just point out once again that that sudden improvement to dramatic improvement over 12, 24 hours, that's not typical of COVID in any fashion. Particularly when people are getting sick. When they're getting really sick, they continue to get sick or they certainly stay sick for a week. They aren't better the next morning all of a sudden. Okay. I'm not disputing the dramatic improvement with paxlovid yeah yeah let let's um uh though though you know what's interesting in what you're saying you know what what makes

perfect sense to me is that maybe the mechanism is the same mechanism and maybe you're even saying this and maybe i didn't hear you which is that the mechanism of rebound is not actually rebound it is just the old immune activation syndrome in the setting of somebody who's as you said viral thing has been so it's really the same phenomenon it's just sort of in a different clinical yeah that makes sense to me that could be is that is that what your case you're making yeah it, that it's pretty much the same phenomenon. It felt different, though. It feels different. It's different.

But again, of course, the other thing, by the way, Dan, is that most of that biphasic stuff was in alpha and delta. I don't see that so much anymore in Omicron, which is interesting. Anyway, this is all the weeds. Go ahead. Okay. I was going to say well you might not see it as much of an omicron anymore because of uh vaccination and high level high levels of population immunity um which true would would dampen that initial viral phase and thus dampen the subsequent cytokine storm phase.

Okay. So here's what I want to do. I want to take a little break. And when we get back, I want you to help me understand some of the vaccine policies. I've really been looking for somebody to help me understand why we're doing some of the things we're doing. It seems I don't quite get some of the stuff. I know exactly what I'm doing after the age of 65. I definitely know what I'm doing after the age of 70, both with vaccines and with Paxlovid. As you get into younger populations, I get confused and maybe you can help me out with that. Okay. Okay. Sure. Sounds good. All right. Take a little break. Uh, Dan, Dr. Dan Wilson, is there a website you want to refer people to by the way? Um, my youtube channel is uh debunk the funk with dr wilson um okay that's all that's

all i really had to plug um all right we'll send people there great and uh those of you listening on the twitter spaces i will be taking calls in a few minutes too so hang in there we're going to finish our conversation i know uh dr dan's family is coming home soon and he's got to get out of here after that point. So let's 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 and all the dryness of our skin, right? And with Genucel's Immediate Effect 2 Eye Cream, you can see the results in as little as 12 hours, guaranteed or your money back. Susan loves Genucel'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 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. 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 GenuCell.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.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 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 Drew. Protect your savings with gold today.

Get some gold for my birthday, everybody. Oh my gosh. I'm going to surprise you. You'll get a gold for my birthday everybody oh oh my gosh i'm gonna surprise you she's let me know what she wants her back with dan wilson thank you so much about molecular biologist biochemist or molecular biologist phd correct that's correct yes i'm sure you had your share of biochemistry uh so um so here's my here's what I'm confused about. And I really have been trying to understand what I'm getting wrong. I think we're all aware of this sort of weird controversy in the sort of, let's say, 17 to 35-year-old males in terms of whether we should be spacing out the Moderna vaccine a little bit further to try to reduce some of these side effects we're seeing.

Is it worth the risk-benefit analysis, given that that population is so rarely hurt by COVID? I guess my first question would be, why is it anti-vax to just bring up that question and try to struggle with it to get it right. Well, I think that it's not anti-vaccine to ask the question of why are we doing this, but, you know, science has, plenty of researchers have been able to provide us good answers to that. You know, we do see that, yes, that age group is at reduced risk of COVID

relative especially to older populations, but they're not at no risk. And so when we look at what's actually happened, you know, COVID has killed a lot of people in that age group. It has been one of the top five leading causes of natural deaths in the US over the past two years for all age groups. And so the vaccine is really a way to not only prevent those deaths, but also prevent the hospitalizations. Because as we know, the outcome isn't only death from COVID. You can still be hospitalized, you can still suffer from it, and you can still get long COVID. And vaccines are shown to reduce all of those outcomes, reduce the likelihood of all of those outcomes. So it's just, it's the less, it's the road of less risk.

And so it just makes sense to do that because even in those younger age groups, COVID breaks through the population. Sorry, go ahead. So help me understand that the number that that's really the question is what the numbers so because I've seen I've seen zero in my clinical world and I mostly treat geriatrics I'm not dealing with a lot of young people so so to be fair it's it's a relatively relatively small um but i have seen one hospitalization zero deaths and lots of myocarditis and serious arrhythmias where people are having major major ablative therapies and anticoagulations and really serious cardiac

interventions necessary as well as unknown long-term consequences on the heart. That's why it's an area of concern to me. Again, it's my clinical experience that colors this. Why is on one hand I'm seeing nothing, and on the other I'm seeing, you know, not a lot, but enough to make me worried as compared to hospitalization and death from COVID. It's been way worse on these cardiac manifestations. Cardiac manifestations, are you saying from the

vaccine? Either hypothetically from the vaccine or clearly from the vaccine. Things I'd never seen before, all of a sudden we're seeing a lot of and it's always not always typically in proximity with vaccine therapy a couple weeks four weeks it's it's within range um and then documented myocardial inflammation and whatnot other things um and this a lot so i mean in my own in my own peer in my friend group my own patient group has been rather extraordinary um and concerning now i'm hoping it's all going to resolve without any consequence whatever i mean it hopefully will though some people are going to have to have ablations and be on anticoagulation for long periods of time and i wouldn't want to have to

do that and take uh amiodarone for long periods of time that's something i would look forward to at the age of 40 you know um right but there it is i mean that's been the experience and no and no deaths no one hospitalization for covid and no deaths same age group okay so you know we can look at the literature for these kinds of answers again it's okay to ask those questions but we have to be willing to look at the answers and you're not alone in asking the question scientists ask the question all the time and they look at the data in order to try and figure out what the answer is and by the way and i don't i and none of these you know are the and and this is the but there's a craziness in the middle of this the cardiologists are not reporting this as adverse vaccine reactions. They are literally afraid to.

And they have told me that in no uncertain terms. So we have that, we have this weird kind of silence going on. Now, hopefully the literature, the research is not hopefully finding a way to brush that all aside. The studies you're looking at, how are they being done? So it's broad. You look at a population and you have a baseline of how often these adverse events happen say pre-vaccine and then once the vaccine is introduced

you watch those adverse events in order to see if they increase not necessarily in relation to the vaccine, although several studies do do that, but just to see, do they increase? And across the board, really, no matter what country you look at, no matter what university you're looking at or research group, they're all finding pretty much the same thing. And it's that COVID vaccines are very, very safe. And that if they do cause myocarditis, which can happen in rare cases, that most often, especially in young people, they recover without incident. So that's what the data has shown.

I understand that's the, but these are, look, this recover without incidence is what I worry about, right? Because look, before all this myocarditis started coming down myocarditis was an exceedingly rare event and was a it was a dire medical emergency i mean i i that one whenever my kids when when my kids were growing up and they would get bad viral illnesses the one thing i would worry about is that they would get some sort of myocarditis as a complication because it's so dreaded. It's so dangerous. It's so awful. And the vaccine myocarditis is no exception. Now, the one thing we don't seem to be seeing is cardiomyopathy on the heels of it. We don't seem to be seeing that. But as I said, I'm still seeing

plenty of people stuck on amiodarone and eloquus because of arrhythmia concerns and some people not recovering their functional abilities it's not all that uncommon and again this is i i worry the literature needs to get caught up better with this we need better literature on this better reporting on this because it just doesn't fit what I'm seeing clinically. And whenever people take an illness like myocarditis and go, well, it looks like everybody's fine, that is a very irresponsible statement. That's like saying, well, we had lymphoma, we gave him chemo, it's cleared, he's done, it's over. Or what surgeons always say, we got it all, it's all done. No, that's not how medicine works. You have to really follow for years before you

know what you're dealing with here. So the, it gets better, everybody's fine. That I really, I really take issue with that particular sort of, a lot of the literature has that kind of language in it and it immediately bothers me when I see that kind of thing. Now it may be true. It may actually be true, which is great.

I love that. If it is true, I hope it's true. It's just very concerning that people, it just seems irresponsible and weird. When in medical literature, I've never seen those sorts of opinions issued about something with long-term horizons like myocarditis, like, well, it's just mild and it's over, and that's it, when we know for sure that's not how myocarditis works. That's not how it works. It's just we would at least hedge it and go they seem they seem improved you know we'll hope best for the future and hopefully it will continue this way as opposed to hey it was mild it's over it's done my goodness wow that's weird

so so two things i'd say to that um one is that not every myocarditis is equal um i would also be really worried if my kid got viral myocarditis because we know that myocarditis is equal. I would also be really worried if my kid got viral myocarditis because we know that myocarditis caused by pathogens, infectious disease is often very serious and can often reach that fulminant stage where there are long-term consequences. But we've seen vaccine-induced myocarditis before. It happens with flu vaccines. It happened with smallpox vaccines. It happens with flu vaccines. It happened with smallpox vaccines. It happens with lots of different vaccines. And I think that's where a lot of the literature is kind of pulling this knowledge from, where we've seen these kinds of

cases before where we have a vaccine-induced mild myocarditis that kind of resolves on its own or with some medication. And then these patients seem to be fine. And now it's perfectly possible that maybe we're missing something, but right now I don't think that the evidence is leaning that way. So I think that even in young age groups, I mean, my kid is 19 months old now. Wow. And we have two COVID vaccine doses because I want to make sure that my kid gets that robust immune memory as early as possible so that when down the road she encounters SARS-CoV-2 she will have that protection have that broad immunity that will be further expanded by a natural infection with reduced risk so that's that's what I think we should be doing for our children too, is giving them the path of least risk. All right. I want to get into that in a second, but you've helped me a lot with that

observation about previous vaccine myocarditis. I like that. And I've not seen that, I've not seen those horizons of where those end up. So if that is out there, that is a very valid observation, which is that if vaccine-induced myocarditis typically, historically doesn't go anywhere, I think that's valid. That's very helpful to me, actually. In terms of kids, so 85% of kids have been exposed, right? Let's not go all the way down to young infants yet

when they haven't been exposed. And all of our data on children is on pre-exposed kids getting the vaccine right so how do we know what we're doing with kids that already have natural immunity and then we give them a vaccine how can we be so sure of what that is especially since the the the boost may only last six months or who knows or we don't know oh well so when it comes to the clinical trials that were done for children aged um four months through five years sorry six months through five years um uh uh i'm going up no no to get me older if you're like can you go down down, go down quite that far

if you don't mind yet. I'm going to go there next. Give me the five to, you know, 15 or whatever. Oh, okay. Yeah. Five to like 17 or 12

or whatever. The group. Yeah. I think it was five to 12. Yeah. Was one group. But I'm going off memory now, but I believe the protocols

for recruitment did include screening for previous COVID infection. And if they couldn't find evidence of previous COVID infection, then they were included in the group. And that was done with N antibodies. That's my understanding. Yeah. That's my understanding. But my point is that now that that's no longer the population

that's getting vaccinated now we're vaccinating people that definitely have been exposed and how do we know what we're doing since the studies were done on you know virgin cases i see okay so yeah i think even then even now we're continuing to see kind of a gap between um uh people who got vaccinated or didn't get vaccinated a gap of risk where um sorry my dog is rubbing himself all over the bed um normally it's my dog he's just rolling around um sorry so there there seems to be a gap still between those who got vaccinated and those who didn't, regardless of infection history. So those who got vaccinated have a reduced risk of progression to severe illness, and those who didn't get vaccinated have a relatively greater risk of progression. and the protection that we want from the vaccines that doesn't go away within six months these vaccines are really meant to prevent a severe illness that progression to the hospital that

progression to the morgue that's that's the kind of protection we really want we're not looking to constantly stop infection and that's a that's a point that scientists over at This Week in Virology, as well as Paul Offit, whenever he goes on their show, talk about constantly where the goal is not to prevent infections forever. SARS-CoV-2 is with us. We're going to get infected. The goal is to reduce the risk of severe outcomes so that people aren't suffering. They're're going to get infected. The goal is to reduce the risk of severe outcomes so that people aren't suffering. They're not going to the hospital. We're not getting flu on top of SARS-CoV-2 every single year, flooding the hospital. I think, unfortunately, because of rhetorical excess at the beginning, where it was,

if you don't get vaccinated, you're going to infect your grandma. You're going to prevent the disease. You're going to prevent transmission. That rhetoric was pervasive. I understand now that that is absolutely not the goal. And there was some evidence that we might be able to stop infection. I get that. The early data looked kind of that way. But I think that's why people are having trouble with the change in the rhetoric. And I think that's a fair point. I think that, you know, science communicators at the beginning were, um, a lot of them, not all, but a lot of them were kind of not giving the messaging correctly that these vaccines, the main goal is to prevent severe illness. Now, you know, you do see that reduction in risk of infection for a few months after that dose.

And for an unknown amount of time after that, you do have a reduced viral shedding period if you do get infected. So there is a reduced risk of transmission there. However, it's not a one it's not a silver bullet it's not going to right it's not the only tool where we should be using to prevent infections the main purpose is to prevent that severe illness right we got it we got that yep so so let's go to the five and under i i mean the incidence of serious illness in five and under is remote You had mentioned that you wanted a robust immune response that was sustained. I assume you're talking about cellular immunity. Tell me more your reasoning in vaccinating the very young.

So we know that these COVID vaccines give a very robust cellular immune memory. So we know that we induce memory B and T cells from these vaccines that the germinal center response is really fantastic. And that indicates that these memory responses are likely to last a very long time. And we are seeing that them holding up for as long as we're looking. And again, the risk that SARS-CoV-2 poses to very young children is relatively small compared to other age groups, but again, it's not zero. The deaths are relatively low. It approaches zero. Well, it's low, but you still have a risk of, uh,

multi-system inflammatory, uh, syndrome in children. You still have that risk of hospitalization. I know, I know people who have had children who have been hospitalized, who are under five years old, uh,

from SARS, COVID too. Um, just normal, healthy, healthy kids. Yeah. Yeah. They were healthy for all I knew. Um,

but even so, uh, you know, children who have asthma might be at elevated risk and lots of children have asthma. They might even have an unknown underlying illness that you might not know about that could contribute to them having a more severe case. But no child deserves to experience multisystem inflammatory syndrome. No child deserves to be hospitalized or die from COVID. And so far in the past two years, you know, COVID has killed more children than every other vaccine preventable disease combined in the US. So I think it's worth protecting them from that risk. The pediatricians I speak to, I'm trying to find the incidence of multisystem inflammatory syndrome, because I believe it's one per million, it looks like.

It's not common. It's not common, but it does happen. It's extremely rare. Look, if a doctor tells you you have a 1% chance of something, if a doctor tells you you have a 1% chance of something, you're not going to get it. He or she is telling you, you don't have to worry about it. That was one of the most striking things for me about the risks of COVID. I had severe alpha or delta or something, and people asked me, were you scared?

I thought, was I scared? There's not even a 5% fatality rate in my age group. When a doctor says 95% chance of X, just forget it. Don't even, don't be afraid. So it worries me that we're taking sort of really significant medical interventions for things that are way remote, like really remote possibilities. Well, I guess I'll put it this way. I'm not a pediatrician. Yeah. I guess I'll put it this way. You know, I mean, you could make a similar argument for polio or for measles,

that those diseases have a very small rate of severe outcomes, including death. You know, for polio, out of all the infections that happen, it was really rare for someone to experience a paralytic case, right? That's why, for example, with the paralytic case in an unvaccinated person in New York City recently, that tells us that there are lots of other cases that are not causing paralytic cases. But when you have a virus sweep through a population of millions and millions of people, you're going to get a lot of those rare outcomes. And that's why we vaccinated against polio. That's why we vaccinate against measles. Because even though the risk is relatively small compared to elderly people who, elderly people have higher risk of most infectious diseases so it's so it's one percent paralytic polio one percent that's not

one in a million that's that's one in a hundred and one in a hundred i i get it i get that the people would get upset about that i think one percent i think refers to the older age groups. When it comes to young children, it's even rarer, but still, it's an outcome we don't want. It's an outcome we don't want. And I was trying to figure that out with measles. And like your comparison, I was trying to, I've been thinking lately, because I'm not a pediatrician so i don't have that kind of judgment um you know how many measles deaths were there pre-vaccine versus how many covet deaths would there be you know without a vaccine and the best i could find now this may maybe you can help me with this too because this is another area i was struggling with

approximately 6 000 measles deaths in the same group, approximately 500 COVID deaths. That's about the best comparison I could come up with. Is that about right for pediatrics? I don't, I can't confirm those numbers. I don't know the hard numbers for measles offhand. However, I do know that, for example, I mean, in two years, COVID has killed at least 1,000 kids, younger kids in the younger age groups. That's about 500 a year. Yeah, about 500 a year.

That's what I got. About 500 a year as opposed to about 6,000 a year for measles. And I was thinking, I don't know the risk tolerance for pediatrics. If that were adult medicine, we would go, oh, that's more than a tenth the risk. I'm not sure if we want to be vaccinating or not because of what, you know, until we have more data on the vaccine. You know, that's how adult medicine works. But in pediatrics, maybe that, you know, death as an outcome is obviously a much bigger deal in terms of years of life lost.

And so maybe there's less risk tolerance of that kind of a mortality rate than somebody who comes from adult medicine would be able to judge. You understand what I'm saying? I see what you're getting at, yeah. Yeah, and so it starts to make sense to me because i'm a big you know i'm a big measles vaccine advocate i'm you know there i've always

said there are not enough vaccines in the world for my kids i mean i was fighting for the hpv vaccine for years i i mean i was and it used to all the all the horrible attacks used to come from the right that i was you know encouraging a vaccine that encouraged people to have sex and all this weird shit um and obviously you know measles and mumps my kids all i have i had that reboosted recently myself uh so i i get six thousand deaths a year that are totally preventable like completely preventable no i have zero time that's i i cannot imagine anybody pushing back on that that that is that's weird to me um but right for some reason and this is meet my non-pediatric head when i think 500 deaths and a new vaccine and people are worried about some of this i

it's a harder putt it's a harder putt and maybe needing more vaccines and going to get the illness and going to get the illness anyway so we're going to get the illness and going to get the illness anyway. So we're going to get the risk of the illness with the risk of the vaccine now. That's where my head goes. Well, keep in mind that those numbers are referring to confirmed numbers. We also, the amount of children who have actually died from covet or covet complications is going to be uh slightly greater than that um but why is the hospitals are encouraged to give that diagnosis

they're paid for that diagnosis of course they're going to use it wherever they can how is it going to be more just in terms of post-mortem documentation or something outside the hospital well no so i mean hospitals aren't encouraged to give a COVID diagnosis or a COVID death certificate. I mean, while falsifying them would be fraud, doing them for money would be fraud. So I doubt that hospital systems all over the nation would be committing fraud like that. And I don't see any evidence that they are, but we almost always undercount these things. That's why for flu, for example, every year, we have a confirmed count of deaths, and then it takes about a year to estimate a more accurate

number of just how many people died from flu in that given year. So not only do we have that, but we also have, again, other severe outcomes other than death of children being hospitalized, getting MIS-C, and there's also the long COVID aspect that we are still understanding. So there's all that to think about. And also just the fact that underprivileged children are going to be more affected by this illness than the more privileged children who might have better access to better healthcare. So the vaccine is going to be even more important for underprivileged communities and their children. So I think that it's, again, the road of less risk. I think. That's the question, as that gets sorted out. Well, you've actually helped me quite a bit through a lot of this stuff, because these have all been question marks that I've had trouble

finding answers for. I've had to struggle with myself and no one has sort of come in here and help me get some... I'm still walking around with some question marks over my head. I'm still reading the literature on certain things, trying to get clarity. I still, again, I wouldn't worry so much about MIS-C. That's very rare. I don't know if you've ever seen it clinically. It's not that big a deal. And it's young. I see it mostly in teenagers. I've never seen it in really young. And long COVID, I had it myself. It goes away. It's like any other bad viral illness. It's a terrible illness. And it hits you hard. And that's from the vaccine. And I had a bad reaction to the vaccine. I had developed raccoon eye, which is the presenting manifestation of transverse sinus thrombosis, which is the consumptive coagulopathy of the J&J vaccine. I was going to be the first male

to report the J&J side effect, but it passed without significant clinical complication. The point is, there's still a lot of uncertainty., measles, I'm clear. That's easy. 65-year-old, you know, 75-year-old male, I'm clear. That's easy. Still is a little hard for me in the, particularly given some of the path specimens and things that people are starting to accumulate and we're starting to see, there's still kind of question marks i still feel like i i don't know why i have so much so much anxiety about that that young male age group maybe because i've seen so much of it uh and and i feel like i said that the literature is going to bear that out

more and then that and then that biases my feeling about early pediatric vaccinating, where my head immediately goes, well, if there's any risk of the vaccine to young people, and they're going to get COVID anyway, now we have added a risk of vaccine and the COVID. And I might be totally wrong on this. And thank God I'm not a pediatrician. As I said, I don't know how to judge 6,000 deaths versus 500 deaths in a pediatric. Let's say 6,000 and 1,000. I don't know how to make that judgment in the pediatric population. So go ahead. You fill in the blanks there. Yeah. I think what I'll say to that is something that a lot of people might not know is that when we get down to the youngest age groups, the six month to five year and the five to 11, we see almost no myocarditis in

those age groups. Dr. That's true. Dr. In fact, the clinical trials have reported, as far as I know, zero myocarditis in those age groups. It's only when you get to the 12 to 12 and up. Dr. Is there anything, are there any adverse events, any common adverse events, anything just other than sore arm sore arm that kind of thing nothing nothing other than the regular regular run-of-the-mill side effects from a vaccine that i know of in that young and then how often are you going to

vaccinate these kids well i think a full course of vaccination again we're not looking to prevent infection forever because we're going to get infected. But the goal is to reduce the risk once we get infected. So two doses is what's approved for I think the six months to five-year age group that could have changed. I might not be certain on that. I know that for my kid, they got Moderna and so she can only get two doses of that. But three doses is what we've seen in the literature. Three doses is what really helps expand your immune memory to encompass Omicron. So the maturation, well, so as long as we've looked, um, it's the immune memory that it's the immune memory that we, uh, that we're looking for there. How broad are those antibodies and how broad are those, uh, T cells? How much can I recognize? Right. I don't recognize Omicron with very well with two shots, but with three shots,

then that maturation gets to a point where they can, where it can encompass. I got to tell you, I hear you. And clinically, it's so weird making these recommendations without more understanding about how the future is going to play out. It's very weird. It's, I gotta tell you, it's, it's, it's very much of a, uh, reaching into the dark. So, so now you've talked to me, uh, at length and you've helped me a good deal and I appreciate it very much. I think you've

helped the audience also. Um, am I anti-vax? I mean, I wouldn't say so based on this conversation am i anti-science well as long as you disagree with rfk jr's stuff that he said on that episode um and no and and and i guess there's another sort of layer in here i'm a free speech absolutist i'm i guess have to apologize for that these days but but i i really am an advocate for for sunshine on everything um and just think about it we wouldn't be having this conversation had i not speaking spoken to robert and had you not spoken about ro Robert and now we can speak together about Robert, you know, and people, a lot of people that listen to my stuff, you know, they're, they're trying, they're also trying to get to reality. They're really trying. And the people that are honking down in conspiratorial holes will respond to some sunlight. Some of them won't for sure,

but, but a lot of them will. They're like you and me, just what we did here today. I mean, I think we're modeling. I don't know about you, but what I've always done as a clinician, to talk to my peers, hammer it out, make sure I'm trying to figure out where we agree and disagree and where I still have some questions. And then we come back again in six months and we go, now how's it look?

Let's talk about it now. Is it different? Is it, you know, as opposed to, Dan's a bad guy because he doesn't like me. It's like, how crazy is that? What's wrong with us? What is wrong with us? I spent a lot of my time walking around going,

what is wrong with us? Every time I get attacked on Twitter, you should know, you were the first one to agree to come on, which I just love. But I'll DM that. It's usually physicians that are after me, and I'll DM them and go, let's get on the phone. Let's see what our difference is. Let's actually talk about it. They won't come on the phone. And all the ones that did come on the phone,

lo and behold, we didn't have very much difference, lo and behold. Lo and behold, the differences are not that great. It's all of us are just trying to do best. Look, nobody's trying to hurt anybody. That is for sure. Everybody's trying to do best for people and patients. I don't think, I don't believe, I don't, maybe you know people that are actually, you think are, you know, have a nasty, you know, intent. I don't know those people. That's why I keep telling people that are worried about, like, so, you know, people that are worried about the connection between big pharma and our regulatory organizations like the FDA, I keep telling them, it's like, no, there's not like some dude with a bag of cash coming in at night and twirling his mustache and dropping it off at the FDA.

That's not the problem. The problem is, maybe, the problem I worry about is that the former head of the FDA is now a senior, uh, as a, you know, senior vice president over at Pfizer. And that's, Ooh, that's interesting. That's, that's gotta have some effect on how you think about the FDA and how the FDA thinks about Pfizer and, or whatever. I'm just using Pfizer as a, as a straw dog. Um, so that's all, that's the only thing I, I worry about. And I don't know if it was anything legitimate in that concern. So, um, I'll just talk about the first thing you said with, um, having these conversations. Um, you know, I, I invite people who I debunk on my channel to talk to me and almost all of them.

Never. I never hear from, um, but you know, my, my goal in doing that is to, um, my goal in doing that is to, like you say, bring it out into the light, have these ideas talked about, but also addressed properly. Um, and so if you get, if, if I can do nothing else here, I would just like to encourage you going forward because you have a large platform, lots of people watch it, to challenge guests like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. a little bit more. Because I'm someone who, you know, admittedly, I don't watch much of your show. I don't catch every episode. But I saw that episode with RFK Jr. I listened to the whole thing. And at the end of it, I was left wondering,

how much of this does Dr. Drew actually agree with? So if you don't challenge it in the moment, I'm going to be left to wonder. And maybe somebody who knows about RFK Jr., but not you, went and watched that episode, listened through and thought something similar to what I did, how much does he believe? It might get the impression that you agree with RFK Jr. on all those topics. So yeah, that's my encouraging sign-off statement, I guess, is to just- All right. I accept that criticism and I'm wide open to it. And it is an interesting navigation, having somebody come in as a guest, and what my role is exactly. I mean, that's why I do those kinds of guests with Kelly Victory, because she has a different opinion than I do, and so I can, I can distance myself a little bit from it. And, and I, in my recollection of that interview, I did come in a couple of times and say, I'm,

I worry about that. I'm not sure. I don't, not sure, but I did not confront, I did not sort of challenge him except on the AZT. And then I felt like I wasn't even speaking. He just, just dismissed me like, and I thought, well, this isn't going to go very well. I'm not going to get much out of this, which is why I didn't go further. I just thought, what's the point? And the other thing was, it was a little emotional for me about the AZT. And when I get emotional, when I am emotionally, that was a profound experience taking care of all these men that died. It was just terrible. People don't understand how dark that period of history was. And when I get emotional, I get shrill,

and I have to be careful. I'm not effective. And so I think I might have been thinking that too, like I'm going to start sounding wacky in a minute here because this is disturbing to me. But in any event, I appreciate you coming in, and I think we ought to have another conversation in a few months down the line just to see, you can give me further critiques, A, which I'm wide open to, and B, we can see if some of this literature has clarified itself. Okay? I'm open to that. Yeah. Sounds good. So Dr. Dan Wilson, I'm going to take some calls right now, but I thank you for being here. All right. Thank you. Have a great holiday. All right. You too. All right. Let me get to some of these calls here. Caleb, we still good on your end?

Oh, yes. Yeah. I just have, let's see. I just have a hard out in 15 to 20 minutes. Okay. Maybe we can do some of this then. I was going to blame Susan for my lack of assertiveness because the producer should be telling me what to do, but I will not throw her under the bus. I just keep telling people in the comments to be nice because this really is, we've had so many people that have criticized you and the show and the guests, and you always try to get them on the show, and they always say no.

This is the first guy that's actually said yes, he would be brave enough to come on the show. So you deserve some props for that. I knew I would get something out of it i i got something out of it i i'm it's it's like this you know trying to form a medical opinion when there's a um you know a lot of clinical experience going on and a moving body of medical literature that's changing and morphing and people with all kinds of outlying opinions it is not easy to to figure out what's going on you got to hear a lot of all kinds of outlying opinions, it is not easy to figure out what's going on. You got to hear a lot of different kinds of opinions. Now, it seems like the... Go ahead.

Diane Sawyer, she interviewed Charles Manson. That doesn't make her a serial killer. So you speaking with these people does not mean that you agree with them. You're interviewing and you're asking questions. And I get Dan's concerns. I get it. Those are my concerns too, right? I mean, you've heard for how long did I resist talking about this? From the start. From the start. Yeah, it took a long time before we got there.

But I actually felt good that when it was done, I got something out of it that I got, oh, this guy's an attorney and he's got his point of view. And then I thought, and I am kind of more concerned now about this cozy relationship between my regulators and the drug companies. I was really not of that mindset before talking to him. I really was just sort of like, that's just how it works. It's okay. Everyone's got everyone's best interest in mind.

And he convinced me that that was not the case. And that's a shit. So I learned something from talking to him. It wasn't like it was all bad. And to be fair, you know, I just thought of another criticism people could have of me. It's like, it's not my private conversation with Robert Kennedy. Everyone's getting exposed to it. But I would go back to that issue of sunlight, bringing things back into the sunlight, which I think is, as you know, you've said is so important too. You want to address that real quickly before I talk to Chrissy? Oh, no, go ahead and talk to Chrissy. But I also, if you'd like, I compiled just a few clips of

you from the beginning to recent of the pandemic. Look, just take a look at this. I was just digging through some clips. Watch this. Listen to the CDC, listen to Anthony Fauci, take his direction, do what they tell you. And we're all going to be fine. Follow Dr. Fauci's advice. Follow the CDC's advice. We will be fine. Stop listening to the press. Listen to the CDC.

Listen to Dr. Fauci. And although the vaccines aren't specific for Omicron, it gives us that cellular immunity that does reduce the risk of severe illness. You want my position? Pro-vaccine. Listen to the CDC. Let Dr. Fauci be your North Star. I said that a thousand times. Wow, it was April 21. I did say that a thousand times.

You've never been anti-vaccine. I'm not so sure I can defend him now. I've never been anti-vaccine. I've never been anti-Fauci, though recent time I've been a little bit concerned about some of his choices. But Omicron's different. It's not like the vaccine now is the booster and, you know, then we really needed to get ahead of this choices. It becomes different. It's not like the vaccine now is the booster and then we really needed to get ahead of this thing. It's complicated, guys. If you just think you understand it all, just think again. I don't understand it all. I just don't like the fact that people are dropping

dead and having myocarditis. They need to make a better vaccine. Let's get it. No, we need better data. Dr. Dan gave me a bunch of good data that helped me kind of calm down a little bit, but I still feel it didn't fit my clinical experience. So now I'm worried there's something about that data that's not right. And let me just refine, also, I've been less enthusiastic about Dr. Fauci lately. And do you know why? Do you know why

primarily? Because I discovered through talking to some of the people that Dr. Kelly has brought in here and has been now borne out in his deposition, he was using fear as government policy. And I find that to be reprehensible. That is my main issue with Dr. Fauci. He has been a extremely important figurehead in my career. Back when we were giving the AZT, and the reason I got on the radio was Fauci. Back when we were giving the AZT, and the reason I got on the radio was Fauci. Back when we were giving the AZT, he was there. He was a spearhead of all this. But I will tell you what, using fear is, I don't know, God only knows how many people they hurt using fear as their primary modality. By the way, it also pushed aside all the other things they should have been doing at the time, which was educating, for instance, about what to do when you get sick. Use the monoclonal antibodies.

Know what your O2 saturation is. When to go back to the hospital. Public health should have been educating about all of that. They did nothing. They scared the shit out of people. And that, I think, was a little bit reprehensible. So I regret some of that enthusiasm, even though as it all started, I really thought that was all we needed to do. And listening to the press is, maybe he got adulterated by the press. Maybe that's why. They conveniently forget all of it.

I found those clips all in the space of, I had 30 minutes to find just any clips of you to put that together. So I didn't even do very much digging. So it's for them, people to act like you're anti-medicine, anti-science, anti-vaccine, that was never where you came from. Anti-CDC, anti-Fauci and all this. Yeah, I know. But now that you've put that, now I'm going to be Fauci's lap child. I'm going to be pro-pharmaceutical. I'm going to be a paid shill of the pharmaceutical company or whatever. We were wearing masks at the beginning too.

Yeah, I was wearing masks at the beginning. Cloth ones, because we couldn't get the paper ones. Yeah, it is. Somebody's asking if I got my second booster. I have not got my second booster. I had too bad a reaction to the initial vaccine. But I had Omicron, I had Delta Omicron, then was exposed to Omicron because Susan,

where I was stuck in a room with her for three days, I got nothing. So my immunity is pretty good. But if you have never had the vaccine and you had to do it just because, say, you wanted to do it, would you have the one for the Delta or the Omicron? Oh, somebody asked me this the other day. So that is a really interesting question that no one is addressing. And then this guy would have been able to tell us whether or not when the spike protein comes out of your body? No. I sort of walked down towards that a little bit. He didn't seem to. Yeah, I don't think he said. And again, that's another area I want to understand more about is what is Ryan Cole seeing? How frequent is that? Where is that coming from? Was that a syndrome that nobody has? Rarely? I don't know. Okay, so tell me what would you take? So you are not supposed to take the bivalent booster as a primary series. You still have to

get a primary series. And if I had all options available to me right now, I would take Covaxin. If I were virgin, I had no vaccine, I would take Covaxin as my initial affection, and then I would take the bivalent booster as my booster. But you can't get Covaxin in this country because the manufacturing in India apparently is problematic. So what would my next choice be? You know what? Well, J&J is not available anymore.

No. I know. It's weird because you don't want to take the vaccine for the Delta if it's not the Delta. No, you have to take. but the reason you take it. The Pfizer maybe. The Pfizer, yeah. The reason is because of the cellular immunity.

And Dr. Wilson made a pretty good point about that. So I think that's why. I mean, I'm not suggesting you have to go out and do it. I'm just curious if it was like you had to do it. If it was like you had to do it? If you had to have a vaccine in order to yeah i would i would if i had to and i had covaxin available i would take that right away and if i would then just going to get a booster i would get the bivalent booster but it is a booster by the bivalent the

omicron which because it's not but that's like pfizer too right it's both and it's not a booster it is a um it's not a primary series that's a booster okay you got it you didn't get me i did but i just i don't know i just it seems like omicron is so so much less but you know attacking people it's not killing people like the first one yeah uh chrissy you unmute your mic there and have at it? Sorry to keep you waiting. Chrissy. Okay. Thanks, Dr. Drew. I just want to, I just want to ask something, please. Um, I'm in Australia. Never would have guessed.

Yeah. And I just want to say that using fear does not work, you know, where, uh, people have been put in a fear situation and, you know, they were put in fear at the beginning of all these lockdowns and some of them had to get the vets in order to work and in order to live and sustain a living and pay their rent and everything like that. But what I want to mention is when I go into the office and I'm well, and I am well before I go into the office, Dr. Drew,

but after I've been in the office, what I notice is that night I end up being ill and I end up with a really sore throat. Sometimes it subsides and sometimes I'm stuck with it. At the moment, I'm very, you know, I'm stuck with it at the moment, Dr. Drew. But what else I want to say is that I've noticed with the medical profession here in Australia is that we've had respiratory clinics being set up in medical centers. Now, we never had respiratory clinics. All of a sudden, we have respiratory clinics popping up. And I find that a bit unusual.

Now, so why the increase in respiratory problems? Probably, well, two reasons, maybe more. One is, I don't know what sort of environmental antigens you're being exposed to, but it could be allergic reaction on one level. But the other is we're seeing a boost up in all kinds of viruses. And I think most people are aware influenza A and respiratory syncytial virus are way up. And those are respiratory to some extent, particularly as RSV is. And so because two things, the theory goes,

because we've been isolating so much, we've not been exposed to much of these viruses for the last couple of years, and there's a theory about competitive inhibition, I should have asked Dan about that, where the COVID literally out-competed all the other viruses, and now they're coming back in. And as such, we're not having any immunity. So we're developing infections to all these things that in the past we might have had some immunity to, and the infections are somewhat worse because

we have, again, been not challenging our immune system and not exposed to these things. This is Charles, I believe. But thanks, Chrissy. Let's see what Charles is up to. Charles? Yeah, hello. Why do you think the doctors in Thailand did their study? And what were the results?

Which study? The cardiomyopathy study. Why do I think they did it? Why do I think they did that? Yeah, why do you think they did it? Because they were seeing myocarditis in young men. They were seeing it. Yes. There's a question about cardiomyopathy.

Correct. Not cardiomyopathy, myocarditis. Myocarditis. Charles, you broke up. Unfortunately. Do you think that's me, Caleb, or is that Charles? No, that's on his end. All right, Charles, I have to remove you from speaking

because we couldn't hear a damn thing you said, so I apologize, but do raise your hand again if you want to come up and sound like you had a good question and i'm uh ready to take it uh let's see toby let's see if toby has a question here and go ahead and unmute yourself toby hey toby am i having am i doing something wrong caleb no it says it says she's connecting this seems Hey, Toby. Am I doing something wrong, Caleb? No, it says she's connecting.

This seems like it might be an issue over on the Twitter spaces side. I know they're making a lot of changes, so it seems like it could be that. It says she's connecting right now, though. Okay. Toby, can you hear me? Hmm. Let me look at the restream while we're waiting for Toby someone said Charles the malfunctioning robot somebody's Nancy's appreciating that dr. Wilson came on let's see what else you guys are saying seven friends in bed with influenza a negative covid

very common right now the influenzas are the ones ending up in the hospital right now not the covid okay no she's already she already dropped off here uh let's try katherine hi Catherine hi doctor thanks for taking my call um back to your guest and RFK I read his book I thought I learned a lot love him or hate him um and one of the things that came out of it is he is a lawyer and he did very um he did tell us why they're trying so hard to get this vaccine on the childhood schedule. Yes, you're right. That was another thing. It's a theory, but it made sense, and it's another thing I learned from him. Actually, I'd heard it before, but it sort of crystallized in my head because of him.

So the theory is that the emergency use authorization gives them freedom from liability, and they will sustain that freedom from liability if they can get on the recommended vaccine schedule for childhood. Exactly. So he did sound like he agreed with the great Jay Bhattacharya, who Fauci called a fringe epidemiologist, for letting us know, screaming really, that this was age-stratified. It was an illness of the elderly.

And now, up until yesterday, we all understood there were childhood diseases and adult illnesses. Yes. I don't recall ever any pediatrician of mine telling me, your children need a pneumococcal vaccine. Right, or how about a shingles vaccine? Yes. Yeah. So why are we unlearning this?

Because he's in essence agreeing with the age stratification. Yes, Catherine, you're— Now people die all over the place of all kinds of things. Yes, you're getting at what I was trying to talk to him about, which was that because I'm not a pediatrician, I don't know what kind of risk tolerance the pediatric community has. The best data I can find is there are about 500 COVID deaths in children, and there were about 6,000 measles deaths before the vaccine. Clearly, eliminating those 6,000 deaths was a vaccine that is permanent. It's a one-time thing I'm fully in favor of. Now, why then wouldn't I be in favor of a vaccine that saves

500 children from dying and some hospitalizations, let's say 5,000 hospitalizations or something, just for the sake of argument? Because I don't understand what we're doing. I don't understand the risk. Because the risk for the children is so much higher. It really outweighs the benefit. I would have said yes to you. Now I'm wondering. I don't know. I worry. The children, you know, the myocarditis and all the things we're seeing with the spike protein and whatnot seem to be in the young males almost exclusively, right?

I haven't seen any women or females with myocarditis. I haven't seen that. No, but my immediate family, I have three nieces that have had upset menstrual periods for a long time. We have seen that. That's another area that needs to be understood. It's not fully understood. And the question is, again,

you know, what's the, these issues of relative risk, you know, what's the risk of COVID versus the risk of the vaccine? And then that I was trying to push this point with Dr. Dan a little bit. What's the risk of the vaccine plus COVID, which is what everybody's going to be because everyone's going to get COVID? So your point is well taken. I'm still struggling. I'm not there yet. I don't know the answers to all these things. As I said, I know what I'm doing after the age of 65. I understand that.

After that, I'm not sure what I'm doing. All right? All right. Thank you. Thanks, Catherine. I'm a fluid sort of position on these things. And I'm glad I talked to Dan. It helped me.

It helped me. Robin, we're going to get her in here. Susan, you're still good? Yeah, I'm fine. All right. Okay. If I take some calls. I blamed you earlier for me not being harder on Robert Kennedy. You should have coached me to do it as the producer. Well, I know you didn't want to do the interview for like six months. It was more than that, I think.

And then we somehow slipped him in under the radar. But know i think kelly wanted to talk to you oh no kelly really wanted it and and we like you know i i like talking to i i don't know where the truth lies yet i don't know how people think that our platform is like you know so big it validates people like i don't know how that could be but so so if it's just a dumb little streaming show that came up like that. Oh, goodness. Robin, you have to unmute yourself. Your hand's up, I know, but you've got to unmute yourself.

Lower left-hand corner, there's a microphone. Just click on that. There you are. Hey, what's going on? Yeah, so I'd just like to say, you know, being a mom in 1986 in not having no family around and being you know i was like you know i had her in july and i was like oh i had her wrapped in blankets i was like you know so scared that she would get sick and then then a older lady that I knew said to me, why?

Why you got her wrapped up like that? And I said, well, because she's a baby. She said, her body temperature is the same as yours. And, you know, like, take those blankets off. Like, it's like plus 29 here today. And, you know, I listened to her. And, yeah, and I realized, i realized like yeah because that's where natural immunity comes in and that's how the body's justice so but in the meantime my sister-in-law

and you know thousands of miles of what i knew uh she was like doing that to her son and you know what he was like in and out of the hospital all the time with colds and flu. And she was spilling in his natural immunity. Whereas my daughter never, after that, never, ever went to the hospital anywhere. And when it comes to COVID vaccine, my smart choice was, which I don't know, I don't understand it but i did see a survey come out of israel saying that out of the 60 000 people that they went and uh tested or whatever uh that there was a majority of them was women my age that had blood clots and that was early in the vaccine so i was like no i'm not i'm not i'm not taking it and you know what i am not taking it and they went and because i had to go to hospital because oh by the way if you get a cold there or

to the doctor and you want to go get some antibiotics because you know oh well they got to stick that up you don't listen oh you got covid oh what i got covid oh so i got a steam freaking cold that i normally get a lot of times every winter. And I come home and I drink chicken soup, but facts. That's mostly in your age group. What you, what you will be doing with COVID mostly you'll be doing is just taking, you know, TLC and that's about it. Thank you, Rob, for that call. This is Slay. Slay, give you a chance to come in here. Got lots of hands up here today. Slay. Slay, give you a chance to come in here. Got lots of hands up here today.

Slay. What's up? Hey, Drew. Hey. You know what? We hear a lot about the myocarditis, right? But I guess what I'm wondering is what, if any other, severe adverse reactions, side effects should we be looking for from vaccines? Right. So that's what's lurking in the back of my mind when I worry about these vaccines of

the very young. Now, Dr. Wilson said we've seen zero side effects. And so, okay, I'll take his word for that. The question, the lingering question is that there is increased all-cause mortality. It appears. Again, that is a statistical sort of observation, and so it appears that there is a maybe 10% above normal statistical aberration where we should be seeing a drop in all-cause mortality. After a pandemic, there's typically a drop in all-cause mortality

because the older people and whatnot are the ones that die that would have died in the subsequent year. That did not happen in this case. So the question is, what is causing that all-cause mortality to go up? Why that isn't an urgent matter is scandalous to me. If you watch Dr. John Campbell at all, he has raised the same issue and said the same thing, and he does it with his extraordinary sardonic British ironic humor and just sort of shakes his head. You would think that would be something that we're worth looking into. But I believe Britain is starting to look into it. I'm going to talk to Dr. Asim Mulhatra very shortly.

He's very concerned about the cardiac manifestations overall, not just the immediate post-vaccinated period. He's worried that there's something going on in the endothelium, much like Dr. Ryan Cole is. I don't know if that's true or not. I share a concern that I'm concerned. I just don't know if it's true or not. There are also people that are worried that it's having some sort of effect on your immune system, such that cancer is maybe more common or more aggressive or something. That all doesn't make sense to me, but I'm looking, I'm waiting to see what the literature tells us. I don't know if you noticed with poor Kirstie Alley's death, she apparently presented with a stage four cancer and everyone went, ah, see, she must've been vaccinated. That's why. Well, I don't know that that's true at all.

What have you heard, Slay? Oh, well, not much, actually. You know, this kind of thing, it all feels like it's suppressed to where we're not even allowed to talk about it. So, I mean, that's why I asked you. I do look up to you, Drew, and I appreciate everything you do out here for us. Any answer you can dig up on that would be really helpful for the public. Yes, yes. We need to know what to look for. Yes. Listen, man, I hear you.

And that has been our goal since starting was just to make sense of things. You've heard me say this recently a little more as we've looked back in the last couple of years. When we started, we felt like we were the French underground, sort of clandestine broadcast with information about the underground, just trying to help people make sense. The rational revolution. The rational revolution, my friend. The rational revolution. There it is. So thank you, Saeed. I appreciate it very, very much. We'll just continue to, you know, keep an eye on it. Try to come to try to figure this out. Let's get Toby up here. Toby, I tried to get you a minute ago and you have to unmute yourself. Let's see if it works this time. There you are. Is it working? Hi, Drew. Thank you. It's working now. You bet. You know, I haven't heard

much. You brought up the J&J shot earlier or the vaccine vaccine earlier. I haven't heard much. You brought up the J&J shot earlier or the vaccine earlier. I haven't heard much. I didn't even know it was off the market as far as an option for vaccination. Was there a major side effect other than those first reported blood clots? Do we have any further information? There was a sort of a tendency to develop consumptive coagulopathies that had some really, I mean, look, it's not clear that the incidence is different than the incidence of myocarditis in the male young age group. However, the conditions that were being triggered by the J&J were more serious, it appears, than the myocarditis seems

to be in the young males. These consumptive coagulopathies were very dangerous. The one dreaded complication they were causing was a clot in the transverse sinus in the skull that usually triggers a little brainstem stroke in addition. And I thought that's what I was getting when I had my reaction. I'm coming in a little bit late, but did you watch the, it was something, I'm trying to think of what the new documentary is. Died Suddenly? Yeah. I did not watch it. I'm actively resisting because I spoke to Dr. Ryan Cole personally. If you want to know really what his point of view is, we get into in quite a bit of detail in that interview from last, was it last week or two weeks ago?

I'll look for it. Yeah, I'll look for it. He really lays it all out there. And I don't know what we're looking at there or how often it happens. We're just trying to make sense of these things we're seeing. Documentaries I worry about

because they always have a real significant point of view and you don't get to hear alternative opinions uh that's you know one of the reasons i brought dr dan in today that you know to to sort of flush out the alternative point of view and it was it was useful it was very useful i i'm not fully in you know all the way in with clarity yet i don't have the kind of clarity i think i because it's not fitting my clinical experience what his sort of reading of the literature was so we'll see we'll see i i i i guess i'm feeling more comfortable with the vaccine having brought everyone into the light heard what everybody has to say i don't know that may be just today. We'll see. Susan, you're very, very much affected

by some of the stuff we've been hearing about, right? Yeah. I mean, I feel like we've learned so much over the last three years and I'm just, I don't know. I've seen changes in my body and I think, you know, I'm lucky that I have good genes and I've gone through very little. But I don't know. I just think it's a very strange thing to just vaccinate everybody and just continue to do it over and over again before we really have the numbers. Right. Before we really understand what we're doing. Like let your natural immunity come through.

Like get the Z-Stack and, you know, take some vitamins. Remember at the beginning we were taking all these vitamins, everybody's kind of healthy. We weren't healthy because we were stuck in our houses. Get your immune system going and be more worried about your daily life nutrition and vitamins. Yeah, your point is well taken. Omicron is quite a bit milder. Most of us have had a primary series. We have robust cellular immunity.

Or we've had COVID. series we have robust cellular immunity and we've also had covid so the the the idea of revaccinating and the you know whatever risk that incurs it's it's yeah before covid i don't think i was sick for like five years i don't think i got sick and then you know but i have a really good immune system because i raised triplets i was sick every month when they were kids. And that's who's supposed to get sick. Kids are supposed to go out and get sick. And taking pills and vaccinations to protect yourself, it kind of goes against my belief.

Although I do get a flu shot every year since the kids were getting me sick all the time. I wish I had better judgment about pediatric syndromes and vaccination because to me, to obviate- I like holistic stuff. To obviate 500 deaths and a few thousand hospitalizations, I'm not sure if that's worth the potential risk. I think Dr. Kelly is the one that convinced me.

Just her way of looking at it from the beginning just always seemed right. And Dr. Zelenko. I'm a big fan of his. So I don't know. I just like more of the holistic health approach to things. Caleb, what about you? Before we wrap this up, I know you have to go.

You're keeping me awake in bed time. No, I honestly, I never questioned any of this stuff before. And now I question everything because I feel like I was lied to. And I feel like a lot of people feel like they were lied to. I feel like they, we were told, all right, you have to wear these masks and it's going to keep you safe. That turned out to not be true. They said, well, this is safe and effective. That turned out to not be true. And now what they're doing is they're just saying, everyone who comes forward, who says, look, my child is suffering from this. I got the vaccine. I got

the mRNA and I got a booster. My wife did as well. But they can't sit here and deny that there are people, friends that we know, very pro-vaccine people who have had significant side effects to it. But everyone wants to act as if that never happens or if they're making it up or these people aren't real. And you can't blame the victim that way. You have to listen to them. It doesn't make us anti-vaxxers. I've seen some really nasty reactions. I just want to understand what we're doing and that the risk is worth the reward.

That's it. That's all I want to know. I have question marks over my head for a number of age groups. Well, you didn't want your sons to get it. I didn't want Douglas to get it. didn't want uh douglas to get it well jordan just did it he wanted he was afraid he wouldn't be able to travel because he wanted he got it fine that's up to him but our other son had a terrible reaction to the vaccine

and i it scared me he had such a bad reaction they both had worse reactions than i did i've had three vaccines and i haven't had any problems but i just, I do have a weird infection on my tooth, which I think is odd. I've never had anything like that before, but I don't know. I just, I'd like us to be able to analyze it and make a better tomorrow, you know, and not just, I keep getting notifications for New York, go out, get your vaccine.

Now they say, get out and get your flu shot and your vaccine, your COVID vaccine. Get your flu shot flu shot yeah but they put it together in one text it's like people are so dumb they go out and get both at the same time which you shouldn't do no you can do that i mean it's not dumb i mean i guess if you live in a tight spaces like new york or shanghai or whatever yeah uh it's it's a little bit scarier, but I don't know. Mandating it for every person. I want my immune system to take care. Like it's, everybody is unique.

That's what gets me is that maybe it's like one out of every, you know, one out of every 50 of our friends that had something. If you remember my original position, the real pushback was against mandate. Remember? Absolutely. That was what bothered me. It's always been that. Mandate, that was my most troubled, that was my starting point.

Like, hey, whoa, you're going to mandate? What's going on here? Why are we mandating this for everybody? That doesn't make sense to me. So that's still where my head's at. Well, I think we all need to have better medical professionals in our lives. Like, I've been really lucky because i've drew around all the time but i do have a primary care physician and he was really great during this so like what my advice would be is get a get a doctor

in your corner you know even if you have to pay a little bit more money and you have to take care of your health get a physical every year go in and ask them all the questions that's their job and listen to them and let them decide with you not for you um if you don't want to do it tell me don't want to do it and then let them help you work through that as well and guys didn't we have ron johnson on this podcast is that not yet possibly not yet who do we have susan who was that we interviewed we had a guy on dose of dr drew it was that was that ron johnson and um is ron johnson a physician anybody tell me that he's no i can't remember his name but it was he was from wisconsin yeah or minnesota or something earthly geo maybe i am still in denial that's certainly a possibility um again i'm trying and i think a lot of our followers are very pro health you know on their

own terms and you know not not you know i i mean i see a lot of people saying you shouldn't get the vaccine and then i see people that say i'm not the vaccine so we're not saying you're wrong either way but i do i do feel like we should all be able to take care of our own bodies with professional help. Go get a doctor. Don't go to the emergency room every time you get a sniffly nose. You're just going to catch something else. And remember how appealing I thought the French youth were for pushing back the way they did. I thought that was totally appropriate.

And the history has been good to that. That was definitely the right. Some of them took it, some of them didn't, but they were against the mandate. That was a year and a half ago, Susan, is that right? Yeah. Like a year and a half. We got to go back.

All right, everybody. I've taken enough of everyone's time. I think it's been kind of interesting. I know. I think Caleb had to leave early I know I'm abusing him oh boy Tom Cigars wants me to do another hour

we love you Tom Cigars I'm not catching some of our usuals on the stream today everybody showed up it was nice of you to get that guy on and let him. I thought that was good. Yeah. Well, I think everybody,

there is that line of thought that is still out there that we have to respect, I guess. No, he had some interesting points and he had his reading of the literature. And I'm glad, this is how it works. We're sharing information. This is how it works.

We're trying to ascend to the truth and it's an ascension. Right. We all have to come together and figure this out. It's not a declaration. It's not a gestalt. It's an ascension.

You have to ascend to it in these unclear very complicated situations so again appreciate you being here we appreciate Dr. Dan for coming in Susan thank you for producing this Caleb thank you for sticking around in spite of your obligations and I do as little as possible coming up

Lieutenant Colonel Teresa Long coming in here that is next Wednesday is that correct yes and on Monday guys are we going to do a little something something? I don't know. Yes. Caleb, can you do something? Yes, I'm here for Monday.

You can do a caller show. So you'll have to turn on that. Fine. I'll set everything up in advance, and then you can just turn it on. We will do call-ins on Monday. I've got to get my carpet cleaned in Laguna for my renters. On Tuesday, I have to do a David Weissman coming in on December 14th. And then we have Dr. Rahm and Dr. Bruce on Thursday.

Thursday of next week? Yeah. And who do we have on Wednesday? COVIDlonghaulers.com. Weissman next week. And I'm going to be doing a press day regarding the special forces thing we did out in the Jordanian desert.

We can't play the clip, though, because we're worried the music will ding us on YouTube and Facebook. We can play it on Rumble, though. Oh, Megyn Kelly coming up, too, on January 3rd. Yeah. That should be fun. That's a great post. We ought to put that on Instagram.

All right, everybody. Thank you much for being here. And we will see you on Monday at 3 o'clock Pacific time. 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.