Ask Dr. Drew - Steve Kirsch: “Off The Charts” mRNA Reactions Reported in VAERS Indicate An “Unmitigated Disaster” For Pregnant Women w/ Dr. Kelly Victory – Ask Dr. Drew – Episode 244

Episode Date: July 25, 2023

Steve Kirsch reports on shocking VAERS data of mRNA adverse events that seem to be causing an “unmitigated disaster” for pregnant women. “It appears that the cure may have killed around twice as many people as the disease,” says Kirsch. “What I found should alarm everyone on the planet.” Steve Kirsch is the founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation. He is a Silicon Valley entrepreneur and philanthropist who retired at 64 after founding and selling multiple billion-dollar tech companies, including 1990’s search engine Infoseek and Frame Technology Group. He has a Master of Science in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from MIT and is an inventor of the first optical computer mouse. Kirsch is the author of one of the most widely-read Substacks in the world at https://KirschSubstack.com and can be followed at https://twitter.com/STkirsch 「 SPONSORED BY 」 Find out more about the companies that make this show possible and get special discounts on amazing products at https://drdrew.com/sponsors • PRIMAL LIFE - Dr. Drew recommends Primal Life's 100% natural dental products to improve your mouth. Get a sparkling smile by using natural teeth whitener without harsh chemicals. For a limited time, get 60% off at https://drdrew.com/primal • PALEOVALLEY - "Paleovalley has a wide variety of extraordinary products that are both healthful and delicious,” says Dr. Drew. "I am a huge fan of this brand and know you'll love it too!” Get 15% off your first order at https://drdrew.com/paleovalley • THE WELLNESS COMPANY - Counteract harmful spike proteins with TWC's Signature Series Spike Support Formula containing nattokinase and selenium. Learn more about TWC's supplements at https://twc.health/drew • 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 an extra discount 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. 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. 「 WITH DR. KELLY VICTORY 」 Dr. Kelly Victory MD is a board-certified trauma and emergency specialist with over 30 years of clinical experience. She served as CMO for Whole Health Management, delivering on-site healthcare services for Fortune 500 companies. She holds a BS from Duke University and her MD from the University of North Carolina. Follow her at https://earlycovidcare.org and https://twitter.com/DrKellyVictory. 「 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

And Steve Kirsch is kind enough to come back with us again today. His substack is kirsch, K-I-R-S-C-H, substack.com. Also Twitter is STKirsch, K-I-R-S-C-H. And I first encountered Steve when he published a study on the use of fluvoxamine in mild to moderate COVID, which was strongly positive. When he was marginalized for daring to publish that study, he became interested in what was going on in the scientific endeavor. And the more he looked into it, the more disturbed he became. He is, of course, a multi-entrepreneur of tech companies, Silicon Valley entrepreneur, MIT graduate, philanthropist.

His companies include the 1990 SIRT's Engine InfoSeq, Frame Technology Group. He has a Master of Science in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. He is the founder of Vaccine Safety Research Foundation. He will tell us about that. But he has been running amok through the world of biology and medicine and has some thoughts. So we'll bring you to him and Dr. Kelly Victory right after this. I'm just saying, you go to treatment before you kill people. I am a clinician. I observe things about these chemicals. Let's just deal with what's real. We used to get these calls on Loveline all the time.

Educate adolescents and to prevent and to treat. If you have trouble, you can't stop and you want to help stop it, I can help. I got a lot to say. I got a lot more to say. There are three steps to great-looking, glowing complexion in the summer. Of course, apply sunscreen, stay hydrated, and use the amazing skincare products from our friends at Genyacel. Most retinol creams are not recommended for sunlight, but Genyacel's Ultra Retinol uses a powerful plant extract retinol. It's an alternative called Bacuchiol, which helps the skin stay hydrated, smooths out fine lines without harsh side effects. And it is safe to use outside under your sunscreen.

Genyacel works so well. You can see the results in this unplanned live moment on our show when the Redness Repair Cream repaired my skin in just minutes right before your eyes. And Susan and I love GenuCell so much, we created our affordable bundles at up to 72% off of our favorite products at GenuCell.com slash Drew. And just for the summer, every subscription includes a customized summer spa gift box absolutely free. I know I'm a snob about the products I use on my face. Everybody knows it.

Every time I go to the dermatologist's office, they're just rows and rows of different creams. And then when I get to the counter, they're overpriced. All kinds of products that you can all find at Genucel.com. See what's in our bundles. Get ready to show off your summertime skin. Go to Genucel.com slash Drew. That's G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com slash D-R-E-W Genucel.com slash Drew.

And remember to use the code Drew at checkout for extra savings. I suspect you've seen Susan and I gushing over Paleo Valley products. We love the taste and how well they fit into a paleo-based nutrition regimen. They're delicious and we use them for travel all the time. But there is more. We are huge fans as well of Paleo Valley's grass-fed bone broth protein. It comes in three flavors, unflavored, vanilla, and chocolate. It's a powder you can add to really anything. We add it to coffee literally every day. Smoothies, baked dishes, just hot water

dissolves really easily. The bone broth protein is made with 100% grass-fed and finished bones that are free from pesticides or antibiotics and are slow simmered to extract as much collagen as possible. As we age, collagen breaks down. That's what wrinkles are. And research shows that there are significant benefits to adding a collagen source in your diet. I don't think it's too much to say. It's changed our lives. And Susan is now reporting that after drinking the bone broth for a few weeks, her hair is stronger and longer and nails are stronger too. Try it for yourself. You can order at drdrew.com slash paleovalley and use drdrew at checkout to save an additional 15%.

And we are back with you. I'm reading all the other inventions that Sieve's company have come up with, including the first optical computer mouse. He is the author of one of the most widely read substacks. Again, it is kirschsubstack.com. Please welcome Steve Kirsch. It's true. It's good to be here. It's good to see you.

Did I satisfactorily remember our history together? And is that kind of how you ended up where you are now? But that sort of was the entry point? Yeah, I think so. I think that's fair. A lot has happened since then, but yeah, that's fair. Yeah, yeah. And that's kind of what I wanted, before I bring Kelly in here, I want to tell that story. And by the way, I called Steve when this Annals of Internal Medicine was published in May 23, volume 176, number 5. This is the first journal that started showing alternative narratives in three years. And one of them was a very positive result from a fluvoxamine-budesonide study. I immediately called Steve.

And I would say that was one of the first confirmatory studies in a major journal. Would you say that's right? Well, the fluvoxamine studies had been published before. So JAMA published the original phase two study, and then there was a real-life study that was done at Racetrack. And that was – David Seftel was the author of that, and that was published in OFID so there are but but those were I misspoke that I but those were like two two years ago and they were roundly suppressed

any follow-on study you were condemned for daring to raise this issue right that's how I remember it being at the time was it not yeah Yeah. I basically looked at those and especially the real life study. And in the real life study, the people who took the fluvoxamine were the people who opted to take the fluvoxamine who were the people who were the sickest. And so it was worse than a randomized control trial because the fluvoxamine group was crippled by the fact that all the sick people were interested in taking the drug. And what happened was that nobody who took the drug got sick at all. Nobody went to the hospital and everybody wanted to work, go to back to work in three days in the fluvoxamine arm. In the arm where people said, I feel fine, there were,

it was like a 12% hospitalization rate and one death. And so there was no comparison between the groups. And so it was very obvious that this drug was effective. David Seftel, who ran the study, says he's never seen anything so significant in medicine in terms of night and day difference. And the FDA said, well, we're not convinced. You need more evidence. Right. And now we have a mechanism, right? So we now talk about COVID, or at least the spike protein, as an inflammatory mediator or inflammatory inciting agent and anti-inflammatories like a decadron of udesonide are shown to be strongly useful very positively useful and fluvoxamine is active through the sigma-1 receptor in the brain which is also anti-inflammatory and so we have a mechanism

we have strong studies we have now finally a journal that's willing to publish the follow-on studies in a major setting. And it was just such a little microcosmic study of how crazy things were during COVID. And before we get into your vaccine ideas, and I know Kelly is very much in your camp, so I want to let her sort of do a lot of this interview. I want to hear more what your thoughts are about sort of the state of science. I was in the shower this morning, and I'm constantly having to defend some of the people we interview as being either good or bad in their science, in their thinking, in their data collection, in their data analysis, and the actual operation of the studies. Are they good? Are they bad? But I started thinking that there is something vastly more important going on that has never happened before, which is a sociocultural political circumstance that makes the very, it obscures the science. I don't know where the science is because only one version is getting published

and anything other than that, which I'd like to see the negative studies that have alternative points of view, but you don't even get to see the negative studies, let alone something that might be somewhat positive. Am I seeing this correctly? They tend to be taken down very quickly in violation of what are called the COPE guidelines, if it's published, or in violation of sort of normal operating procedure, like Peter McCullough's recent paper, analyzing people who died after taking the vaccine. And they had a bunch of autopsies that have been published. And all they did is they said, hey, let's analyze each one of these deaths that have

been published, each one of these autopsies published in the peer-reviewed literature and assess whether or not these people might have died from the vaccine or not. Now, that should have gone out there and it should have been a way for people to say, hmm, you know, I agree with them on 80%, but on 20%, I have some differences. But, you know, so it should have been a conversation starter. And they took it down. The Lancet took it down. I mean, that is on it's unbelievable it's

censorship of data and and they shouldn't be censoring data like that i mean it's it's really really bad it where is that coming from it's such an odd thing to be subjected to i go ahead yeah i mean they they you know they i'd say that they don't want to, either they don't want to look bad, or they have people who are controlling interests who say, you know, we'd rather not have this stuff up because it's embarrassing to the governments, it's embarrassing to Congress, it's embarrassing to the mainstream media. It's embarrassing to the medical community for any adverse sort of paper to come out like this that would show to people that they've been lied to by the medical community. And so the medical community sort of, you know, it's like they circle the wagons whenever

they're attacked by something. And it's like medical consensus on autism where, oh, people will say, we can't debate that because the medical consensus is so clear that vaccines don't cause autism. And you can never have a medical consensus on the null hypothesis. In other words, you can't prove the negative. You can only say that, you know, as far as we know, we haven't seen a case where vaccines cause autism, even though we have 230 papers published in the peer reviewed literature showing the link, we just choose not to look at that. And so, you know, my main beef with science, and it's not a beef with science because science is basically saying, hey, look, you have observations and you'll have maybe two hypotheses, hypothesis A and hypothesis B.

And you take a look at the observations and all the observations have to come if the hypotheses are complementary, meaning it's either A or not A. You know, it's either causes autism or it doesn't cause autism. Okay. And so each piece of evidence then has to be go into one of the two buckets, but you see the, whether vaccines cause autism or not, that has to be a, they, the evidence has to pile into. Yes, it does. Or no, it doesn't. And the whole pieces of evidence have to be consistent with that. Now, maybe there's some vaccines, let's say it's the hep B vaccine that doesn't cause autism, and maybe that would always show up as a negative. But by and large, what's happened here is that we have acquired lots and lots of pieces of evidence

over 30 years about autism. And they all should be consistent. They all should line up with either bucket A or bucket B if you analyze the evidence correctly. But people don't want to go and analyze the evidence correctly. They want to say, oh, we need to do a randomized trial to find the answer because all of these observational studies and retrospective studies are all too confounded and they come up with conflicting results. And we are so inept that we can't figure out which is which. And the reality is, is that all the evidence was consistent the whole time

showing that vaccines cause autism. And if you looked at the trials that claim that there's no link, you can see how each of these studies is corrupted and that there was, in fact, a link. So the science is totally consistent, and yet the mainstream medical community will say there's no link. And that's my problem with science, the evidence-based medicine, you know, the evidence pyramid, and we should listen to the stuff at the top of the pyramid, we should ignore the stuff at the bottom. No, it's all the evidence should be consistent if you do it right. And let's talk about it.

And they won't talk about it. And this is a real problem because a real scientist is not afraid to be questioned. The part I'm struggling with is, and this has really come very deeply a concern through COVID, which is the risk-reward function. I don't mind there being some significant risk of vaccine. Everything I do has significant risk.

It's to try to prevent death and destruction. We've got really serious illnesses we're trying to fight here, and it's worth some risk. Back in Alpha and Delta, the risk-reward was like, okay, it looks a little more, we weren't really clear on things, this is a serious illness. But all the data they're presenting now, I just saw somebody responded to a tweet that you put out today with a huge, kind of confusing knot of data about pregnancy and the vaccine. And 100% of it was from Alpha and Delta. And they kind of slide that in periodically during the conversation. The question is, is there any risk of Omicron in pregnancy? And if the risk is tiny or zero, then any risk of the vaccine starts to disturb me. If on the other hand, it's

as bad as it was during alpha and delta, which looked pretty bad, well, now I'm willing to take a bunch of risk. And so my same question that applies, say, to measles, well, I'm starting to, just because this has been such an eye-opening experience for me, I'm really opening all data again. I'm like opening all data again. I'm like, I'm open to anything. Tell me what you're thinking. What's on your mind? I'll listen.

But what is the risk of death from measles? Is it 1%? Is it one in a million? I've realized that the risk and tolerance of pediatricians is non-existent. Now, maybe it should be that way because I'm not a pediatrician, but it's uncanny to me when you look at, you know, I was looking at the deaths of 20 to 29-year-olds from COVID. It's, you know, 0.000015% while 20% of unintended deaths are from opioids, 20% versus 0.000015. Several orders of magnitude difference.

And one, we are completely focused on getting those kids the vaccine. It's like, what are we doing and at what risk? I'm just so mortified and confused by these kinds of things. Whether or not safe or not is not what's bothering me. I'm sure there's some problems. Probably safe, given the billions of doses. But compared to what? That's what I'm worried there's some problems, probably safe given the billions of doses, but compared to what? That's what I'm worried about.

Yeah. Yeah. Well, you know, my philosophy on this, you know, in medicine, you take the Hippocratic oath. They do no harm, right? So you're supposed to be looking at any interventions. You're supposed to be looking at the risk reward benefit of these. And it should be very troubling to every physician in the entire world that the public health data isn't made public. They basically hide the data. Did you know that the CDC doesn't have the vaccination records

of anybody in the United States. I've been there. I talked to the head of media relations at the CDC, and I even recorded the conversation because it's a one-way state in Georgia. And so he's admitting that they don't have the vaccination records for any of the people. They just have the overall stats. So they can't do the proper cohort study, time series analysis to say whether the vaccines are safe and effective. And let's look at all-cause mortality caused by this, people who get the vaccine, do they die from measles? People who don't get the vaccine, do they die from measles? You know, like, where's the analysis?

You can't do this if you don't have the data. And they don't even ask for the data. They don't say, hey, states, please give me the data. They said, no, we're not entitled to it, so we don't ask. And the states won't publish it either. The states won't make it public. That's a different problem because that's the public health operation on the state level. And people don't realize how little the FDA and the CDC were involved with physician practice of medicine because it's in the headlines every day all through COVID. But the CDC, for me, was an organization that occasionally put out some data

and some warnings about infectious outbreaks here and there. They would set up bulletins and things and advise us. That's it. That's what they did. And the FDA, nothing, zero, nothing to do with us. It was all related to what the companies could do in relation to bringing drugs and devices to market. We could do in relation to bringing drugs and devices to market. We could do whatever we wanted.

That's the practice of medicine. We're not taking direction from the FDA. Now, the FDA might give us a little legal coverage and a little protection with some of our choices, but that's it. We don't think about it. When I'm teaching residents, I don't go, what's the FDA say about this? No, what's the literature say about this? No, what's the literature say? What's the medical literature? Show me the literature, find it, tell me, defend it. And the problem now is where do you find that literature? Steve, I want to get Kelly Victory

in here right now. We appreciate you being here again. It is SubstackSTKirsch on Twitter. And what is your Substack? Do you have it up? Do you want to say it, Steve? I don't have it out. Kirschsubstack.com. Kirschsubstack. Kirschsubstack.com. There you go. All right, we'll be right back after a little business and bring in Dr. Kelly Victory.

A lot of you have been asking for more information about how to counter the adverse effects of the spike protein from COVID infections and the COVID vaccine. The spike protein is not your friend, let's just say that. So I'm glad we have the wellness company Spike Support Formula as a sponsor, especially since renowned internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, who's also chief scientific officer of the wellness company, is one of its champions. There's some very

intriguing research around natokinase, which might be a way to take on the spike protein. Listen to this. So start, if you would, with talking about natokinase, might be a way to take on the spike protein listen to this so start if you would with talking about natokinase how you got to that and where you see its application so with the viral infection or the vaccines the spike protein stays within the body and it's found in the heart the brain the vital organs and it's causing problems the japanese have been using this for heart and vascular disease now for 20 years. It's safe. It is a form of a mild blood thinner that it dissolves the spike protein nearly completely. Spike Support Formula is the only product on the market containing nanokinase, dandelion root,

and a host of other antioxidants, all showing promise in helping you protect yourself and your family. To order this unique, specially formulated supplement, go to drdrew.com slash TWC. That is drdrew.com slash TWC. Use code Drew at checkout for 10% off today. President Trump recently issued a warning from his Mar-a-Lago home, quote, our currency is crashing and will soon no longer be the world standard, which will be our greatest defeat, frankly, in 200 years. There are three reasons the central banks are dumping the U.S. dollar. Inflation, deficit spending, and our insurmountable national debt. The fact is, there is one asset that has withstood famine, wars, political and economic upheaval, dating back to biblical times, gold. And you can own it in a tax shelter retirement

account with the help of Birchgold. That's right, Birchgold will help you convert an existing IRA or 401k, maybe from a previous employer, into an IRA in gold. And the best part, you don't pay a penny out of pocket. Just visit birchgold.com slash drew for your free info kit. They'll hold your hand through the entire process. Think about this.

When currencies fail, gold is a safe haven. How much more time does the dollar have? Birch Gold has an A-plus rating with Better Business Bureau and thousands of happy customers. I do not give financial advice and previous performance is no guarantee of future performance. Visit birchgold.com slash drew to get your free info kit on gold. That is B-I-R-C-H-D-O-L-D dot com slash D-R-E-W. I want to share with you a teeth whitening system that goes beyond merely enhancing your smile. Primal Life Organics Real White Teeth Whitening System

offers convenience and rapid results without harsh chemicals. Light. Blue light for whitening. Red light for gum and oral hygiene. And you can just do both if you wish. Works naturally, promoting gum healing, tooth remineralization, gives you a brighter and a healthier smile. Again, no peroxide involved.

Consistent usage yields remarkable results. Take this opportunity to transform your smile and at the same time, optimize your oral health. Aim for five times a week for the best outcomes. Discover more about this remarkable teeth whitening system and other products at drdrew.com slash primal today. That again is drdrew.com slash P-R-I-M-A-L. Be sure to use that link for 60% off. D-R-D-R-A-W dot com slash P-R-I-M-A-L. Do it today for 60% off. Some platforms have banned the discussion of controversial topics.

If this episode ends here, the rest of the show is available at drdrew.tv. There's nothing in medicine that doesn't boil down to a risk-benefit calculation. It is the mandate of public health to consider the impact of any particular mitigation scheme on the entire population. This is uncharted territory, Drew. Uncharted indeed, as we welcome Dr. Kelly Victory back. Dr. Victor, I give you Steve Kirsch. Hey, Steve, great to see you as always. Thanks for being here. When we start, you and Drew started the conversation today talking about censorship. And just before we came on, I was telling you that this morning I was listening

to a congressional hearing on censorship with Bobby Kennedy Jr. testifying. And in the middle of the hearing on censorship, Nancy Wasserman Schultz puts forth a motion to censor Bobby Kennedy in D Platform in the middle of a hearing on censorship. I mean, it was surreal. I feel like I'm living in an alternate universe. This has reached a fevered pitch, this idea of- Steve has been there. He sat in those rooms. What is that like? I wonder what it's like. What is it like, Steve? Well, I haven't had a motion to censor my testimony done in Congress before, and surprise but i think kennedy's kennedy's best line on this is that when you look back in history in every single case the people who were trying to do the censorship or who are doing the censorship were always the bad guys right so no i mean that

tells you everything you need to know yep and the very people that are doing the censoring is the one that have been they have pointed at mccarthy for their entire careers as the ultimate expression of bad guy and now they're using mccarthy s x mccarthy s tactics all over again yeah oh yeah it's yeah yeah. And I feel like they don't realize the universe. But I do. I want to get right into this. This is a big, big week for me. I is my third show this week with Drew. We had a doubt on on Tuesday exposing this really overwhelming data from the UK about the tremendous increase in the incidence of specific medical conditions. And they went body system by body system. Yesterday, we had Mike Yadin on, and I'm a real fan of his, and he had a very provocative conversation. And one of the things that he and I got into quite deeply was really crossing the Rubicon here by giving these particular vaccines to groups of people on whom they had never been tested at all, specifically, in this case, pregnant women.

That is a red line that we have never, ever crossed before. So I want to get directly into your recent exposure of data related to mRNA damage, mRNA adverse events in pregnant women, impacts on fertility, and those sorts of things. So it's hardly the only place where we've seen adverse events. As you know better than anyone, the data are overwhelming. But I am particularly appalled by the idea that these injections were given to pregnant women, that being a previously sacrosanct group of individuals. And so start with that and talk a little bit about what you've uncovered. Yeah, so I did a VAERS query that's relatively unusual for me.

I looked at the whole 33-year history of VAERS for all vaccines. And I basically plotted them all for the query for, I think it was spontaneous abortion, which is basically miscarriage. But you can't search for miscarriage. The proper terminology in VAERS is spontaneous abortion. And so I did that across all vaccines. And what I found was that there's only one vaccine, all vaccines combined on this graph. And there's only one vaccine that stands out. And that's the COVID vaccine, you know, for this particular query.

Now, for other queries, it stands out as well. The only thing, the only thing the COVID vaccine, the query of the queries I tested was metal poisoning, that you're not as likely to get metal poisoning from the COVID vaccine as from other vaccines. But for everything else, the COVID vaccines are pretty much off the charts, including miscarriages. And so what I found was that there's a peak on day zero in terms of the onset of symptoms. And there's a second peak at day 15, somewhere between 15 and 30 days, a second peak. And the second peak is almost as high as the first peak.

Now, you can always say, oh, that first peak, that's because everybody knows about the covid vaccines and people are being like really careful to report all of the injuries even though there it wasn't caused by the vaccine and so it's just coincidence but you see the way coincidence works is you're more likely to report it if it happened right after the vaccine than 15 days after, right? So if it's coincidence, then the curve just goes exponentially down, but it can't have a second peak. It can't have a peak that's 15 days out.

And so that is a safety signal. And the most troubling thing of all is that the safety signal was there. The CDC knows it's there and the CDC said nothing. And that you can't argue about. Now we can argue about how big the safety signal was and how many reports were made and what the underreporting factor is. But what you cannot argue about is that the CDC saw a significant safety signal and they turned the other way and didn't say a thing to the women of America to say that if you get this thing, this thing may cause you to have an abortion or stillbirth. That's what they did.

It's clear in the data. No, and I think one of the things people don't understand, people don't understand, Steve and I, so I take every opportunity to explain it. The VAERS system, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, has been in place now for 24 years. It is always designed by and is owned by the CDC and HHS. It's their system. So if it is flawed, it is their flawed system. They designed it as the proverbial canary in the coal mine. It's a pharmacovigilance system that they put in place to give them the early warning sign to say to doctors and practitioners

all over to say, if you start seeing a signal, something that concerns you, something we might not have picked up upon in our testing, however limited, report it. They asked us to do this for a quarter of a century. And all of a sudden, when it comes to the COVID vaccines, they have decided that the system's flawed, the data's flawed, it can't be trusted, there's no reason to look into it. What's your damn system? Okay? You are obligated, CDC, to look into this. And that's something that I think people, so you need to keep reminding people, this isn't some system that a bunch of anti-vaccine right-wing nut jobs came up with. They came up with it.

They own it. And therefore, they own all the damn data in it. Yeah. And it's not 25 years. It's been around since 1990. So it's been around for 33 years. And in 33 years, you can add up all the vaccines. And the COVID vaccines have more adverse events against them than all the vaccines in history. And for spontaneous abortion, it's like

you can add up all the adverse events for all the vaccines in history, multiply it by four, and it still doesn't hold the candle to the number of adverse events caused by spontaneous abortions caused by these vaccines. So this vaccine is clearly off the charts, and it's clearly not reporting bias. And the CDC is supposed to say, hey, we found a safety signal here. We're going to investigate this. And they do nothing. They have, you know, Kelly, there was a FOIA request to get the safety analysis done by the CDC. And in that FOIA request, the CDC identified that there were over 770 safety signals that were triggered for this vaccine. That is unprecedented. But the only way we knew that is because someone had to ask specifically

in a FOIA request. And then the CDC wasn't even asked about it. Like, hey, 770 safety signals, how come you didn't tell us about any of them? Yeah. Well, one of the things that's really interesting for me as a physician is that when I look over the massive increases, the reports to VAERS, as well as the massive increases in incidence of lots of different things, whether it's myocarditis or neurologic issues or whatever, issues with pregnancy, for me, is one of the easiest things to explain the pathophysiology of it. I can tell you exactly, because it's not just one mechanism with these vaccines. It's everything from the fact that we know that lipid nanoparticles concentrate in the ovaries and the testes in the reproductive organs. That was proven

by Pfizer's own biodistribution study. They showed it. They knew it before these were released. We know that the spike protein on COVID, that you are developing these antibodies too, is very, very similar to this human protein, Cytosine 1, which is critical for the formation and development of the placenta. We know that these things are thrombogenic, and therefore we're seeing clots and calcifications in the placenta. We had Dr. Ryan Cole who's shown these placentas very, very small for gestational age. We know that they are inflammatory. And so inflammation is a bad thing in pregnancy. You don't want a lot of inflammation, particularly during the development of the placenta and on and on. I can give you without even thinking five or six different reasons why these shots would be

particularly toxic to someone who is pregnant or trying to get pregnant. So the idea, I mean, this to me, I just find it absolutely appalling that it was done. What sort of feedback, what's the pushback you get? Tell me, what are the haters say? What is it that you supposedly are missing, you non-doctor idiot who is putting this information out there, Steve? What is it that the haters push back on? Oh, your data is inaccurate. Didn't you read the disclaimer on VAERS? So it'll be to try to discredit this or, oh, look, the absolute numbers are really small. Oh, we've given billions of vaccines and look, there are only a thousand reports and and and so forth and and so

it's it's it's all from the playbook and look there and there's no excuse but nobody even tries to to touch with a 10-foot pole like yeah yeah okay look the cdc admitted 770 safety signals and did nothing about that nobody even gets close to that issue. None of these people who are supporting the narrative will ever admit, okay, yeah, you were right. The CDC basically sat on 707 safety signals, which they should have notified the American public that they're looking into all 770 because that's what they're supposed to do when a safety signal triggers. There is nothing. It is silence from the other side. When you post something like

that, they just will not respond. And you cannot get into debate with them about it. You can't get into a debate, arguing any of this stuff. I mean, like Dr. Drew. I mean, like, I'd love to go on Dr. Drew and let's talk to an expert on autism and let's chat about it or let's chat about using these things in pregnancy. It's insane. You know, where's the risk benefit calculation, Kelly? Have you ever seen the risk benefit calculation for using this drug in pregnancy? That's my thing. Where is the data? No.

Well, as you know, I mean, that has been my premise from the very beginning. I am all about the risk benefit calculation. And we knew not only is pregnancy somewhat protective, it appears, against severe cases of COVID. Actually, well, if you listen to Jim Thorpe and others who deal with high-risk pregnancy, they actually saw decreased risk in their pregnant patients. But we knew that other classes of people were at such a de minimis risk from COVID, namely, for example, healthy people under the age of 30, that you just cannot pass the risk-benefit calculation. And by the way, before I forget to say it, Steve, for what it's worth, and I've said this many times and I truly mean it,

I believe that people like you, Ed Dowd, people who are specifically non-physicians, bring an air of credibility to all of this because what you are is an analyst. What you are is able to recognize patterns. You're good at statistics. You're good at numbers. You bring a dispassionate view to the actual data where people like myself and Drew maybe get hot and bothered because we put a particular patient face on it or a family that we're familiar with. And we see you are able to be dispassionate about it in a way because you're not a physician that I think brings a near of credibility to it. You're simply reporting the numbers as you see it. It's what the CDC was supposed to be doing.

They have been absolutely absent their mandate. Go ahead, Drew. You sounded like you were going to sound like you were yeah and the other thing of course yeah let me just say say one thing you know the the thing there are other people right who are dispassionate right who are sort of non-experts and weighing in on this but the thing that people should be aware of is that the folks challenging the narrative all would love to have a debate with the people who disagree with them. Every single one of us is open to challenge and we would love to be challenged. I mean, I even have on my pinned Twitter post, it says, here's how to challenge me. Here are the instructions you have to go to.

Here's how to register. Here's how to publicly do this. And there are no takers. Now, I wish someone on the other side would do exactly the same thing, saying, hey, I'm willing to be challenged on this by my scientific peers. And nobody on the other side who disagrees with me will say, hey, I am willing, I'm open to be published by my scientific peers. Take all comers. I don't care if you're rude to me, whatever.

I mean, I have a rule that, hey, if we get into a discussion, let's skip the ad hominem attacks. Those aren't going to be productive. Let's talk about the data. Let's talk about the data. Let's talk about the science. But I don't care if you've been blasting me, if you've been insulting me, if you've been giving me ad hominem attacks in the past. I will debate you. I have no problem. If you are scientifically qualified, I have no problem. problem right right now i've noticed a significant trend which is and and this you would encounter in your and again i think debate is the wrong word it's like you need to have parallel presentations

or something you know present your data present your data discussion and yeah discussion yeah so the debate is people are getting worried about if i'm wrong explain it yeah yeah yeah but there's but there is something if i'm wrong tell me yeah but there's a tell right now i i'm seeing this all over the place and i want you to zero in on this tell and both of you tell tell me whether this so-called tell is is accurate I'm seeing a lot of pushback on whether or not the vaccine is protective and decreases severe illness and decreases hospitalization. It's particularly alive in the pregnancy literature

right now, but it's consistently coming up. It's felt like for a while we were talking about safety, but all of a sudden, once again, I'm seeing a lot of literature conversation and public conversation about reducing ICU stays, reducing hospitalization, reducing death. 100% of those publications that are being trotted out, 100% of them are in reference to Alpha and Delta explicitly. It's a different illness. Omicron is a different illness. It does not do the same, does not run the same course, does not have the same risk. I can't find anybody talking about the current illness that we're vaccinating against, which is Omicron.

It's just not out there. Do you guys have any sense of this well there's a cleveland clinic study go ahead steve yeah there's a cleveland cleveland clinic study uh came out and and they found that hey if you got the real deal if you got the natural infection your body system actually works and it defends you against future attacks. And the more recently you got infected, the less likely you are to get reinfected. That's what they found.

But they also found that the opposite was true for vaccines. They showed that the more vaccines that you got, the more likely you were to be infected. And they even replicated that study. They basically didn't replicate the study, but they said, oh, this is an interesting figure, too. And this, you know, we drew the graph. Let's make sure that there are no confounders. So they did a second study to go and make sure there were no confounders. And there were no confounders, and there were no confounders. They said, yeah, we did the Cox analysis, and nothing was causing this.

This is real. This is real, folks. This is real, that the more times you get vaccinated, the more likely you are to be infected. And of course, we know in the phase three randomized trials, we know that there were more deaths in the group that got the drug. Not the plus, you know, it's supposed to be less deaths. And so when they say that there's a benefit, well, you know, there wasn't. Right. So. So, number one, they don't have any evidence.

That was a that was a big study. That was a huge study, that Cleveland Clinic study, first of all. And it clearly showed, as you said, replicated negative efficacy. The vaccine had negative efficacy. You had more likelihood of getting infected with COVID the more vaccinated you got. But to your point specifically, Drew, about Omicron, there's no question. Omicron is so mild in the vast, vast majority, including in the elderly. It is so mild in everybody that you are hard pressed, frankly, you cannot justify giving these stupid vaccines to anybody. Right. So there's absolutely, in my mind, absolutely unjustifiable to give this vaccination to anybody. But even if you go back to the

original Wuhan strain, the Delta strain, the more virulent strains, we still did not see significant risk in pregnant women. There's a reason women, and I would tell you, read the works of people like Jim Thorpe and other, Naomi Wolf has actually culled the data on it, we did not see increased risk at all in pregnancy if it was really based on the overall health and wellness of the mother independent of her pregnancy. So, you know, pregnant women by definition, you know, are under the age generally of 45. You know, They are not elderly people. So I would submit to you that there was never a reason to be vaccinating pregnant women. And the bottom line is you do not use a therapeutic or a drug in groups of people on whom it has not been tested.

Full stop. There is no caveat to that. There simply isn't because you don't know what they're doing. Yeah. And you know, they actually did a study on pregnant women, Kelly. You knew this, that they did a study on pregnant women and then they didn't publish it. Right. They never published the results of the study. Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute. If the results were really good and it showed it was beneficial, why aren't we seeing the results of the study published? And why isn't anyone asking about that? And why is the mainstream media asking about that?

This study was completed like a year ago and nobody is interested in the result or still why there are no results. I mean, it is insane. Plus the other thing, if you're, if you're pregnant, look, you don't want to get sick. You don't want to get sick with any virus when you're pregnant, but there are ways to treat the COVID that don't involve the vaccine, you know? So it should have been, Hey, well, you've got other ways to treat you. Let's not give you something that's experimental where we don't have the data. Let's wait for the clinical trial.

And not only, Steve, did they do a study on pregnant women after the vaccine was launched and then failed to to release the results? One can only guess why. But they did a very, very limited animal study, a mouse study prior to the vaccine being distributed on pregnant mice. They aborted the mice and they found nearly universal skeletal abnormalities in the aborted fetuses of those mice. They had rib abnormalities, almost universally. It was 80 some percent of them had skeletal abnormalities. That by itself, it should have told them it was teratogenic. It caused birth defects or at high risk of causing a birth defect. So again, they didn't publish that data. There's so much data that we haven't had. And the only reason we have our hands on a fraction of this stuff is because of very, very aggressive FOIA requests, because we are aggressively demanding that these people put out

the information, including, for example, the Pfizer study, the biodistribution study that was done well before the vaccines were rolled out to the public, showed they knew beforehand that 11% of the bioactive material, the mRNA lipid nanoparticle complex, 11% of it concentrated in the reproductive organs, specifically the ovaries and the testes. That is in Pfizer's own study, marked confidential. They tried to deep six it. They tried to keep it hidden from the public, but we now have it. And we know that they knew well before these were rolled out that this was a potential risk to fertility. Talk a little bit now, if you've looked into it, the fertility rates, because I've been reporting on this fertility rates around the world and people, again,

that people push back on this all the time. But it is my understanding of the data, my understanding of what I'm reading, is that they are down almost universally. In Western Europe, it's somewhere in the 6% to 9% range. Certain places like Taiwan, birth rates are down like 23%. In the United States, I think we're sitting somewhere at about a negative 7%, 6% or 7%. What are you seeing or what have your research shown you? Yeah, you know, I've seen numbers that align with what you just said. And it's troubling because nobody's talking about the health authorities are not saying, are not saying, Oh yeah, yeah. This is caused by, you know, cause I can't use the excuses that, well,

people were panicked because of the because of COVID and, and so forth. Those excuses don't make much sense. In fact, birth rates should have gone up during the pandemic because people weren't able to go to work and you know, what are they going to do with their free time? But, you know, for for rates to be going down, there's just like no way to explain that. But you can explain it when you look at the VAERS data. It's in black and white that these things are dangerous and especially, you know, heavy menstrual bleeding.

We did an analysis of all of the VAERS symptoms and the symptoms that made it to the top of the list were all women's reproductive organ issues. And so there are things like heavy menstrual bleeding, things like the period is late or something happened to the period or, you know, something was either turned on, like, you know, I started ovulating again. You know, it's all sorts of weird stuff happening to women. And it's almost like every other thing in like the top 50. It was almost like every other event was a women's reproductive organ event. You are the third guest this week who have said that in one form or another.

Ed Dowd said irrefutably that the data show that this is happening, that the adverse events are happening disproportionately to women. Mike Yadin actually went so far as to say that he believed it was purposeful because he believes that they knew that these shots would disproportionately target women and women's fertility in particular. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with that. I'm simply saying

what his viewpoint is. And then you are saying that you have seen the same. I think that we have three different sources to come into the same. You know, I think that we have three different sources to come into the same conclusion. I could tell you that clinically, that has been my sense is that women are more, have been more affected than men. But that's what the data seemed. So, Drew, from your perspective, you see, you know. You may forget. Yeah. I actually was dismissive of that data at the beginning. If you remember, I had to apologize to Naomi Wolf publicly because she was the first to report it. And I was like, no, you know, women's menstrual periods are affected by everything. Come on. It was a lot

going on then. Maybe it was COVID. And then the data kept coming. And she kept harping on it, and she was right. And I think it was actually when Ryan Cole showed us some of the mechanisms, or Thorpe or somebody, I was like, oh, boy, there's a good mechanism here as well. But, Steve, we promised to get you out of here at the top of the hour, and we're right up against it. Kelly and I can kind of keep going for a few minutes if you need to go. Is there any last... Hey, Caleb, I see you putting the... rolling the credits up there. We're not done yet.

I want to take a couple calls before I... I got to get on a plane too, but I want to take a couple calls and see what people's reaction are to this. But before I do, I want to know if Steve has anything he'd like to declare before he gets on his way. Yeah. Yeah, so I have to leave it at 4.05. So I've got another eight minutes, but I want to, I want to ask you like,

I'm curious, Kelly, where are you on, on autism and vaccines causing autism? Because, you know, when I looked, I started going into this, you know, after I got red pilled on the COVID vaccines, and then I started hearing about, oh, vaccines cause autism. And then I started going into this, you know, after I got red-pilled on the COVID vaccines, and then I started hearing about, oh, vaccines cause autism. And then I started getting red-pilled on, oh, gee, you know, kids that don't have vaccines at all, they're so much healthier. And I did my own survey of 10,000 followers, and I have the best followers ever because 75% of them aren't vaccinated with the COVID vaccine. And so I actually have a large number of fully unvaccinated kids. So the beauty of my surveys is that I have a comparison group. Somebody else doing the same survey would have to survey a hundred thousand or a million people to get the same number of unvaccinated kids as I do. So I can compare the unvaccinated kids with the vaccinated kids in my followers. And what was reported back is that

the more vaccines you give your kid, the more likely they are to suffer from any kind of chronic diseases from autism to ADHD to sinusitis to epilepsy to autoimmune diseases to panda pans and the whole nine yards. It is unbelievable. And I saw this with my own eyes, my own followers, and it matches up with the studies that have been done by independent researchers who are not funded by pharma. And it's like every piece of data aligns saying more vaccines are bad news for America. Kelly, I'm curious, where are you on vaccines and autism and vaccines in general? Well, I'm glad that you asked, actually, because prior to COVID, I was actually identified by many as a vaccine zealot. I've spoken and written prolifically on the importance of vaccines, the importance of vaccination programs, and so forth. I had also said on more than one occasion, I said that there

are, quote unquote, I'd said there's no credible evidence that vaccines are associated with autism. I would do a 180 on that at this point. And here's why. I really have done a deep dive over the past three years now into the entire vaccine industry and into the history of them. I don't know exactly how old you are, Steve, but I could say that Drew and I are the same vintage. And so I'm guessing that all of us, when we were growing up in the 60s, the number of vaccines that you would have gotten if you were a normal kid our age is somewhere in the range of six to nine at the most. Six or eight vaccines was what was on the schedule. By the early 80s, that number was up to 32 vaccinations to be given on the childhood schedule. And it is now up to 72. 72 vaccines. I will tell you that the human

immune system is the last great frontier of medicine. It is complex. We don't understand it well. The immune system reacts in ways we don't necessarily anticipate. And we have been effing with it in a way by continually flogging the immune system with vaccine after vaccine after vaccine, initiating, giving foreign proteins, suggesting that you make antibodies to lots of things over and over again. And we are seeing unprecedented rates, not only of autism, Steve, but in other things that I think are likely attributed to, or potentially made worse by this assault on the human immune system. Things like autoimmune diseases, which includes everything from asthma to allergies, psoriasis,

eczema, and lots of things in between. So I truly believe we are over immunizing. I don't think it's necessarily any one vaccine in particular. I think it is the frequency with which we are vaccinating and the intervals in which we are vaccinating, which are far too close. We have underestimated the remarkable nature of the human immune system to do its own job. And we are vaccinated against things, Drew, that you pointed out that weren't lethal in the first place. You know, I don't want to necessarily get shingles, but people don't die of shingles. So how much risk are you willing to take to

vaccinate somebody against chickenpox for something to avoid a painful rash that you might get decades later and on and on? We aren't talking about vaccinating people anymore against something like polio that has devastating consequence. We're vaccinating people for everything in between. So what? You get a common cold. Maybe that's the way your immune system's supposed to work. So that's perhaps a longer answer, Steve, than you expected. But the answer is Dr. Kelly Victory has become far more circumspect. I am vaccinated for more things than most people because of what I do for a living and where I've chosen to travel. So I've had things like yellow fever and, you know, those sorts of weird vaccines.

But I'm nowhere near as vaccinated as a kid who's currently 18 years old, you know. Those people's immune systems have been flogged. And I think we are absolutely remiss if we don't look really hard at what we are doing with this and whether not only autism has been increased by this, but also, as I said, the host of autoimmune illnesses, childhood cancers, and those sorts of things. Okay. Well, so I'm going to set a challenge for myself. I'm going to try to fully red pill you. I'm going to have you- Which one of us? What do you mean by red pill? What do you mean by red pill? What do you mean? What does that

really mean? I don't quite get what that means. I mean, see the truth, okay? Because the problem is that in med school, when Kelly went to med school, they told her, hey, vaccines are the safest medicines ever. We don't even question those. And they don't even have, they don't even teach you about them because they're so safe and so forth. And so you go through life assuming that they're safe, and you tell your patients that they're safe, because that's what you learned in med school. Nobody's questioning the gospel, okay?

And what I'm saying is that when you actually go and look at the underlying data on this, you're going to be—so red-pilled means let's look at what's really going on. Let's look at the stuff they didn't tell you because it was all kind of centered or they chose not to tell you but once you look yeah once you look at this data you're gonna you're gonna say whoops we made a big mistake we should not be vaccinating any of the kids because the the thing the deal breaker for me is when I found out about this clinic that these doctors at this very top medical school send their kids to. And this clinic basically says, do not vaccinate your kids for anything, no vaccines at all. And what happens is that these kids are like 25 times healthier than any other kids in the surrounding clinics that go through the entire vaccination schedule.

And in 25 years, not a single case of autism. Okay. So you don't have to go far. It won't take. It's not a big leap. Yeah. I read turtles all the way down, which was a very helpful book. Again, I don't just sort of, you know, go do the 180, you know, flip-flop with that, you know, but I'm

telling you, I think there's a real problem. And interestingly, I came to this conclusion five, eight years ago with regard to my animals. I have a lot of animals, you know, horses, dogs, cats, you know, and I felt that we were over-vaccinating the animals. I said a lot of animals, horses, dogs, cats. And I felt that we were over-vaccinating the animals. I said, they don't need to get vaccinated. We're overdoing it. So I backed way down the veterinary schedules because I felt that we were causing potential harm to them. I was less insightful about human vaccination until this debacle. And I have been living through, and Drew and I talk about it a lot, it's kind of an existential crisis of, you know, what the hell do I believe?

What else have I been doing? It's not just vaccines. Listen, you know, Steve, we're here talking about COVID and vaccines. That's all we're focusing on. What about what I've done in my career with regard to statin drugs or pain medications or treating people for hypertension? Because if I can't rely on the medical journals, and I clearly can't because they are the marketing arm of big pharma, then what exactly do I rely on? So to say that I am in somewhat of an existential crisis, and I think Drew probably shares some of this as well, is you start going,

God, I rely on my colleagues that I trust for what they're seeing, for their data. I always thought I was doing the right thing by going to the journals and actually reading the articles, reading the studies. I mean i mean i did that i was that girl you know i didn't just read the abstract i read the damn study except that now i'm realizing that the studies you know were bought and paid for and largely you know propaganda uh it's it's a real conundrum for those of us who uh who have md after our names yeah no it's, it's great. We'll have a conversation offline and I'm going to push you all the way into the reality. Did you ever see the movie The Matrix? Oh, yeah. Oh, I did. Yes. Did you ever see the movie The Matrix? Okay. So you remember when

Morpheus says, you know, I can show you the door, but you're the one who has to go and walk through it. Yeah. I'm going to show you where the door is. Bring a bottle of vodka with you. I'm with you, Steve. I look forward to that report from Kelly across the Matrix. But Steve, thanks for joining us.

Drew, you're next. You're next. Kelly's first. I'm a slow poke. I'm very slow to the door, but I'm listening. My mind is open. All right. Take care of yourself. Good.

Kelly, you and I take a couple calls here this is uh bless steve health is wealth uh we never got him a debate the poor guy he tried so hard keep working at it if we can get somebody good to come i think i think there will be an rfk debate for before we get a debate uh Health is wealth. Any questions? I don't think debate is a good word for it. I don't think you heard me, but we should be saying

parallel conversation. Steve has been after me for three years to do a debate. What is that? Health Uncensored. Okay, and go ahead um i heard you guys talking about the link between vaccines and autism and um you know in my mind before we have that discussion

we kind of have to ask what autism is you know autism is just a name for a group of symptoms you know um with autism there's chronic underlying neurological inflammation low brain encephalitis there's poor natural killer cell function which are a subset of lymphocytes responsible for viral clearance viral infection um there's a lot of immune system nervous system endocrine problems with an autism diagnosis um i've read multiple showing how people that are diagnosed with herpes simplex encephalitis afterwards they are clinically speaking um qualified for autism spectrum disorder they're on out after they have an episode of viral encephalitis there's also a study showing how women who have a herpes simplex outbreak during pregnancy are significantly more likely to have a child with autism um then we talk about vaccines and

okay if if if let's say autism is underlying chronic viral encephalitis, and then poor natural killer cell function. Hang on. You're positing something. Yeah, you're positing something. You've described something and then posited it as a diagnosis. That's a giant leap. But go ahead.

Posit that. Well, it's just a hypothesis. It's a hypothesis based on my research. Then we start talking about vaccines containing things like ethylmercury and how they can impair. Mercury is shown to impair natural killer cell function in multiple studies. Mercury is shown to push the immune system to a Th2 dominant state of hyperallergy, where a person over responds to allergens that they should not. So without getting deeper into the weeds,

you're making a case that perhaps we should look at inflammatory, not just, well, really inflammatory or viral mediators as somehow involved with this, which I think people are doing. That's why you're getting access to that research, and we have to keep looking no that's not the only theory listen go ahead Kelly as you say there there are lots of you know we know that that most autistic kids have normal CSF that you know so they don't show signs of chronic encephalitis we know that their MRIs don't show signs of

chronic encephalitis there's know that their MRIs don't show signs of chronic encephalitis. There's no question that things like mercury, lead, aluminum that have been added to vaccines and added purposefully, by the way, not just as preservatives, but specifically to increase that immunoreactive component, because it was believed that by adding aluminum or mercury to the vaccine, you would get a better immune response, yet those are highly neurotoxic. So I'm not saying that I disagree that we are doing things. There are things in the vaccines that cause these neurologic problems, but I think, and I don't think that vaccines are certainly not the only cause of autism. Even if you buy into the idea that I do now that there's likely an association, I'm not saying that's the only thing that causes it.

And he pointed something out that, you know, the nomenclature around this condition is shifting all the time. And we have to really get to a sustained consensus about what the syndrome. He's saying, you you know he's saying maybe there's a biological basis and we can define it biologically that's optimistic that is optimistic uh you'll love in many in many ways drew in in many ways autism is a diagnosis of exclusion i hate to say it's once you've ruled out that there's something you know anatomical once you've ruled out that it's this you've ruled out meningitis you've ruled out that it's this, you've ruled out meningitis, you've ruled out encephalitis,

you've ruled out all these things, then you kind of are left with. So I feel you're correct that autism is not as well defined as other disease or other conditions, I should say. Well, that's why we say autistic spectrum. That's why we say spectrum-y, things should say. Well, that's why we say autistic spectrum. That's why we say spectrum-y, things like that. Already, you know, as soon as you say spectrum, you're talking about now a syndrome. And a syndrome has multiple diagnoses and multiple causes, but they group in a similar symptom complex. Like hypertension is a syndrome. It's caused by lots of different

things. But to have a disease state, you have to have a common biology, and this does not seem to be the case. Yolanta, go ahead there and unmute yourself in the lower left-hand corner. And let's hear what you want to say. And if you guys can't pull that off, there's always a little delay there.

I've got to put you back into the pond. Sorry about that. And let me bring someone else up here. This is Janice wants to ask a question or say something. I appreciate you guys. I'm going to have to wrap up pretty quick here, Kelly. I've got to catch a plane in pretty quick order here. Hello. But let's see if Janice, go ahead. catch a plane in pretty quick order. Hello.

By the Sea of Janice. Go ahead. There we go. There's somebody. Yeah. Hi. I just wanted to put out there that recently we had a niece who was pregnant, and it was about, oh, six, eight weeks after she got a booster and she lost the pregnancy. And a friend of mine had a grandchild that was due within two weeks.

The mother went in for a one week checkup and um two weeks before the baby's due date and they were unable to find a heartbeat and she'd had all of her covid shots you know and that's that's really late in a pregnancy for something to happen you, and it was really, really sad. This makes my wife crazy. I don't mean crazy in a pejorative sense. I mean, it drives her to distraction to hear these stories. Maybe you want to comment, Susan. Yeah, I just, I don't see why healthy women who are pregnant and have high levels of progesterone,

which I remember vaguely hearing that might have been a good way to not get COVID. But why we would inject somebody with a fetus, you know, it just blows my mind. Like, I didn't drink for nine months, and I felt like a hero, you know? I would argue it's complicated. Steve and Kelly would say it's not complicated. It's apparent. But that Alpha Delta, there was some data that suggested it was a little bit scary. I mean, maybe if you work in the hospital or you're around it a lot.

What risk were we taking to prevent that was what I can't tell. But I don't know if getting COVID would be worse. You're going to get it anyway. Yeah. Well, the argument goes back think susan's argument goes back i think that's the point is go ahead i i would have said that the that the risk of getting coveted you have no reason to think that somebody would have a bad go of it they you know pregnant women get influenza pregnant women get common colds pregnant women get all kinds of different

viral infections you know you get i don't think i even took anything correct right so right because you you tell your average pregnant woman you know if they're being quote viral infections. But I didn't take anything. You know, you get- I don't think I even took antibiotics. Correct. Right. I was like- So, right. Because you tell your average pregnant woman, you know, if they're being quote, good and conscientious, they don't smoke, they don't drink, they don't eat unpasteurized, you know, cheese. We don't have them, you know, we don't have them sit in hot tubs, you know, but lots of

things we don't have them do to prevent any risk to that baby, to that, you know, developing fetus, you know? So why we would take this risk? You feel so guilty. I mean, when you give birth and there's something wrong with your child, especially if they come out and then they have heart problems or whatever, you're always wondering if it was because you made the decision to take the vaccine. And then you have to live with that as well. It's like being a mother is just so painful because anything that happens to your kids, it's your fault. Topical Rocket has a question about studies and infant mortality.

Not that I can point at, but that doesn't mean they aren't out there. This is the problem. These kinds of literature are very difficult to come by right now but be that as it may it it's all it's so disturbing it's it's just all really disturbing to me and uh well we were mandated we were scared we were frightened we were you know i remember going to the obstetrician's office and looking at all the signs on the wall the vaccine is totally safe for pregnant women and it's like i was just i asked my doctor i said you know did you see any fallout from this vaccine she she wouldn't tell me she says i i do hormone hormones only now because i mean they all saw

it but they couldn't do anything about it they had they see it so i guess i don't know well so they so the issue is really this. If you go back to nothing else, Drew, to the concept, the obligation of a physician to provide informed consent or to get informed consent from a patient. If you told me that pregnant women were going into their doctor's office and they were being told this, there's a virus out there. We don't have any reason to believe that you're a healthy person. So we have no idea if you would get significantly ill from it. There's lots of ways to treat the virus if you do get it. But we do have this vaccine that hasn't been proven and

was never tested on pregnant women. So we can't tell you that it's safe, but we certainly have it. If you gave them that kind of, you told them the truth, it was never tested on pregnant women. We don't know. And we don't have any reason to think that it will keep you from getting COVID and it isn't going to keep you from transmitting COVID to others. And we don't have any data, but they weren't. We didn't tell people that, not me, because I didn't give it to anybody, but people weren't given informed consent. They weren't. They weren't. They were not told the truth. But part of the truth is also, you know, we can use steroids in pregnancy,

and steroids have been shown to be useful. I had steroids. Yep, in treating COVID. I had a Bell's palsy. My kids grew like five pounds that day. I was telling you that I was doing my rheumatology board reviews for the MKSAP, for the Internal Medicine Board Reviews. And I came upon this one question

about using hydroxychloroquine during pregnancy. And they were like, yeah, use it. Don't worry about it. It just absolutely has no effect on a pregnancy. That's the only medicine I know of. I won't use Tylenol. Tylenol, you can't say that about Tylenol. You wouldn't let me take Tylenol when I broke my finger. And so if that's another only medicine i know of i won't use tylenol tylenol you can't say that about tylenol let me take tylenol when i broke my finger and so if you know that's another how you

feel about that but that's another option you know yeah the point is there's other stuff to be done i don't know i just read a long study today that was one horror story over another after another about uh covid and long effects and icu stays with women and just it just looked gruesome during some of alpha and delta. It didn't look so great. Yeah. You know, you just mentioned something else that I'm going to throw out there just for folks who are still listening here. This issue of Tylenol. There's a theory out there. And again, these are the things that need to be studied. You know, when you look at kids, kids get vaccinated and you guys have, you know, three kids, but they get vaccinated. What's the most common thing that happens when a little kid gets a vaccine? They spike a fever,

okay? Or they're cranky because they got their vaccines that day. And what are you told to do? Give them Tylenol. So the question is, is there an association with acetaminophen and the vaccine? Is there some interaction between getting that MMR vaccine and the timing of acetaminophen administration that causes the neurologic damage that we refer to as autism? Just, you know, you can't just, maybe it's not the vaccine. Maybe it's the Tylenol timing with the vaccination. There, you know as i said i'm not somebody who's just a clinical raise rise syndrome yeah exactly exactly so so so who so who knows but as i said i i will say that i have become far far more um circumspect about my use of my recommendation of vaccines and

furthermore just in general what we were told is true and you know the words of in the words of Mark Twain it's not what you don't know that's the problem it's what you know that isn't true you know and and I wonder sometimes how much you and I as doctors know something that fundamentally isn't true. Wait, quick question. Yes. Did you say that Tylenol isn't safe for pregnant women? Is that what you're saying?

I don't give it to pregnant women. I don't let pregnant women take anything. Anything. That's my policy. I was just saying that it was weird to me that hydroxychloroquine was one drug where you could say just the rheumatology community was sort of like, yeah, all our lupus patients stay on it. Don't even think about it. It's like nothing. Conventional wisdom, Caleb, is that Tylenol is safe in pregnancy.

It's probably fine. We don't give aspirin. It's probably fine. Yeah, we don't give aspirin and we don't give ibuprofen, not steroidals to pregnant women, but Tylenol is the one that we do. But I'm simply saying when you start seeing associations, because the other thing that changed, Tylenol, you know, people think Tylenol was around for forever, Drew. When you and I were in medical school, Tylenol had just become over the counter. It was by prescription, Oh, and I saw multiple, because I worked in a

psychiatric setting, I saw multiple irreversible hepatic failures from a relatively modest ingestion of Tylenol. That was before we had liver transplants to offer. Those people died inexorably. And it was a gruesome death

too, terrible. So yeah, and in Europe, they used paracetamol, right? Those people died inexorably. And it was a gruesome death, too. Terrible. Correct. So, yeah. And in Europe, they use paracetamol, right? Yeah. Yeah. They don't really use acetaminophen so much. It's paracetamol.

Yeah. So, who knows? Maybe there's an association there. I guess we just need to really look into it and stop saying, I guess, you know, the idea that, you know, all these vaccines are safe and effective because I don't think that the, uh, trial data, that the safety data is there to support what you and I have, have grew up believing. And I'm only, I'm only worried about the only thing I'm worried about now is on the, uh, the, the outcome side. Cause I really don't understand that piece.

What is the case fatality rate for measles? What is the rate of measles encephalitis in a modern population? What is that? And because I've, you know, what is, you know, 12 children died of COVID last year. That was unacceptable in the pediatric community.

That's an interesting risk tolerance. I don't quite understand that, unless you're super clear on how you're preventing that. But anyway, it's getting complicated and it's up to our profession to kind of sort this out, but it requires lots and lots of talking and sharing and thinking about it. And collecting data is only a piece the clinical part is a critical part of this all right well listen we got to wrap this up i got to get on a plane uh kelly as always we will see you when uh next next wednesday we've got yeah we've got dr joseph frayman uh that's the 26th right yeah uh next wednesday Tell me about him. He did the meta-analysis. He reanalyzed the data,

the safety data on the COVID vaccines and published it in a peer-reviewed study, large study. And his conclusion, I believe, is that they were seeing somewhere in the range of one in 800 vaccine recipients had a severe adverse event. I wonder if it has anything to do with that Danish study that showed 4% of the batches were creating 60% of the adverse events. I wonder if he has anything to add to that whole spectrum. Yeah, I'm not sure. I don't know. But he's a physician who's going to be coming on to talk about his analysis of the data on adverse events related to the COVID vaccine.

All right. And then I've got Rami Adelike, a guy that kicked my ass in the desert, special forces. He'll be here on Tuesday. And Susan loves when I talk to Remy. I love Remy. Caleb, you too? Yeah. Oh, yes.

Remy is one of the most interesting guests that we've had on the show before. He was actually, he's a Navy SE and he's uh he actively fought uh human trafficking and organ harvesting gangs he's going to come and talk about that especially with that movie sound of freedom he's written a couple movies about oh yes he's a very interesting guy you do not want to miss and uh if you want i'm if you look at the dr drew i believe the dr drew podcast right now is me interviewing him and uh but it's a primer it'll it'll just that's not good well it is good because it tells his origin story so you're not going to tell that story again i might you can do it in a quick and abbreviated way but my point being

though is if you actually was on the show already we heard the whole story here you listen to his story you'll have a million questions for him so that's the re maybe my producer give me some suggestions on how to do so all right thank you i i am merely the talent here guys i i know my role uh kelly thank you thank you so much and everyone else we will see you on tuesday three o'clock pacific time ta-ta monday safe travels monday is monday okay yes remy is Monday. Safe travels. Monday? Is Monday? Yes, Remy is on Monday. Thank you for straightening me out.

Here we go again. Perfect. See you then. Bye-bye. Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Caleb Nation and Susan Pinsky. As a reminder, the discussions here are not a substitute for medical care, diagnosis,

or treatment. This show is intended for educational and informational purposes only. I am a licensed physician, but I am not a replacement for your personal doctor, and I am not practicing medicine here. Always remember that our understanding of medicine and science is constantly evolving. Though my opinion is based on the information that is available to me today, some of the contents of this show could be outdated in the future. Be sure to check with trusted resources in case any of the information has been updated since this was published. If you

or someone you know is in immediate danger, don't call me, call 911. If you're feeling hopeless or suicidal, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255. You can find more of my recommended organizations and helpful resources at drdrew.com slash help.