PBD Podcast - Dr. Peter McCullough | PBD Podcast | EP 132

Episode Date: March 11, 2022

In this episode, Patrick Bet-David is joined by Adam Sosnick and Dr. Peter McCullough. Peter Andrew McCullough is an American cardiologist. He was vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center and a professor at Texas A&M University. During the COVID-19 pandemic, McCullough has been skeptical about COVID-19, the COVID-19 vaccine, and COVID-19 treatments. Follow Peter on Twitter here: https://bit.ly/3q02OA9 Text: PODCAST to 310.340.1132 to get added to the distribution list About Co-Host: Adam “Sos” Sosnick has lived a true rags to riches story. He hasn’t always been an authority on money. Connect with him on his weekly SOSCAST here: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLw4s_zB_R7I0VW88nOW4PJkyREjT7rJic Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal bestseller Your Next Five Moves (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.   To reach the Valuetainment team you can email: [e-mail] --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/pbdpodcast/support

Gentlemen, we're rolling. Excellent folks, this is a different kind of a podcast because you will not be able to find this on YouTube. This is only going to be on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, those places because our guests today, according to some data, he is the most viewed, interviewed, done with Joe Rogan. If not, I think you're one of the heights, if not not the highest that you were on with Joe Rogan on Spotify and It was taking that one was on YouTube most your content can't be found on YouTube only a few things that are left up there and he

Got on Rogan. He's been on many different places. You've seen him He's an American cardiologist. He was a white vice chief of internal medicine at Bayley University Medical Center and a professor at Texas A&M University, areas of specialty is coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, as a cardiovascular risk state and high blood pressure, high cholesterol, high hypertension sports cardiology. And he was practicing while this is happening.

So it's not like somebody that's on TV that we listen to that doesn't actually sit with patients and they tell us how to deal with patients. He was actually sitting with patients and made some comments that upset people. And a couple of things we need to know before we do this. I just wanna give some data here so we all know about it. As of today, we've had 79.4 million cases in US.

That's the data that we get from the website. 964,000 people that have died. 87,000 in California, 86 in Texas, 71,000 in Florida, 67,000 in New York, 37,000 in Illinois. Yesterday we had 1559 people that died. That's on March 10th and the 7-day average is 1292. So it's not a topic of discussion too much on TV. You don't see it everything on TV right now. They're not talking about it. Most of the stuff being talked about today is Ukraine and Russia and the COVID kind of disappeared. And that's what we wanted to have a follow up with Dr. Peter McCullough. Dr. Peter McCullough, thank you for being on the podcast.

Well, thanks for having me after quickly correct credentials. I've had sequentially almost every credential behind my name stripped away without due process phone calls or discussions So I am not a professor of medicine at any university and I've been stripped of a position that happened That's happened over the course of the last two years it's over the last two years. It's progressive Un unbelievable to see that taking place right so I can have no credentials ascribed to my name outside of the fact that a academic physician in Dallas, Texas, I practice internal medicine in cardiology. I finished with a lot of patients yesterday. I'm at a big academic medical center, spent half my time in clinical practice, half my time as a

author, as a reviewer and a clinical scholar and everything that I'll mention today will be cited in a library of 165 slides that have been curated and continuing medical education approved. This is built upon what I reviewed with Joe Rogan and many others across the world. So no opinions, no hyperbole, and no claims, just the data. That's good to hear. So let me ask you, are you surprised because you know in law if you do something that they're not happy with, they'll take your license away from you.

Are you surprised that they haven't tried to take your license to practice as a doctor away from you? I practice at the highest quality of medicine possible. I am fully board certified and recertified I practice at the highest quality of medicine possible. I am fully board certified and recertified in internal medicine and cardiology. I am very clear on my interpretations of the data and my reductions to clinical practice.

And if anybody wants to review my license, my answer is bring it on, because I want to review the information with them and we'll ask which paper, which citation do they want to review first? Because we have a lot to go over. Dr. McCulloch, is it fair to say that you are controversial? No, you're not. Other people would disagree. My question to you is, were you controversial or did people look at you as being controversial

prior to COVID? No, I've never been controversial. What is getting people uncomfortable is the truth. And you mentioned that I'm effectively kryptonite to YouTube and Google and to any of these other social media why because it's the truth and they melt away from it in fear. So today what we will do, you went in a direction where a lot of people feel kind of the way you feel out there because of what the media does to you. If they're taking it down the average person sitting there saying this guy must be given

this information. So we're going to go through some person sitting there saying this guy must be given this information. So we're gonna go through some of the claims that people made against you where one of this article says, you know, Peter McCullough's most outrageous COVID-19 claims, and each one of them we can debunk will go through the process. But before going here, I just wanna ask an open-ended question from you. So it is now today's what day, today's the 11th.

Okay, last year, no, two years ago, March 12th, I'm in LA for board meeting, I think it was March 11th or March 12th, and that was the day when NBA shut down and the show shut down, Universal Studios shut down, Disney shut down. Two years ago, one of the, Tom, your phone is making noise. All that stuff shut down. And it was like you turn on a TV. It's like, you know, and we're in Beverly Hills, Hilton and my wife and I were about to have a board meeting with the kids. And that's when Donovan Mitchell got COVID and he was upset at Rudy Gobert and all the microphones. And every board member of mine cancelled the meeting.

Then it would come to the meeting from Connecticut, from Florida, nobody showed it. The day that the NBA shut down, the nose, like the canary from Florida nobody showed today that the NBA shut down everything was basically they call me They said this is real. We're shutting it down. We're not showing up. We're not having an appointment. It's now been two years. Okay, and throughout the two years You know a lot's happened we had a new president the market went all the way down, I don't know what the number was, 16, 17, 18,000. Came back up to 34, 35,000. We've had stimulus after stimulus after stimulus that's been sent out. We've had travel that's been restricted.

We've had TSA reports on amount of people traveling on a daily basis go from 2.4 to 2.5 million to 100, 200,000 a day, which is absolutely insane. Warren Buffett sold out his 10 or 11% shares in United, American Delta, and he just said he thinks the system's gonna be changing. We travel, a company called Zoom went from being a company that we knew about

to all of us on overnight. We're all zooming, we're all on Zoom, doing meetings, everything changed overnight. Two years has passed. What have we learned in the last two years, specifically to what we thought was true two years ago to the, you know, not controversies to the contradictions that we had. Well, this is what this is and this is what that is. Two years later, things have settled down. No one goes out worried about COVID. New

York's even shutting down masks. And a lot of other people are shutting down masks. What have we learned last two years? There's a lot more COVID now than it was two years ago. Why were so people so afraid two years ago to not even get in the same room and have a sales meeting? But yet, now they're perfectly comfortable going into an 80,000 per person state

and watching a pro football game. Why? Fear. Fear is an unbelievable human emotion. And the fear has always been much greater and out of proportion to the reality. OK, so I totally get that. Fear sharpens listening.

When we're afraid, we're willing to listen because we don't know, we like knowledge, but what have we learned about the severity of COVID, maybe the lack of severity of COVID, maybe on how to handle the next pandemic on strategies like when you run a business and I run multiple businesses and you hire somebody, doesn't work out and you hire five people from the same way,

doesn't work out. And he said maybe our hiring process is the problem. Maybe the person doing the hiring is the problem. Maybe the way we start people is the problem. Maybe the benefits is the problem. Maybe the staff and agency we're using is the problem. But what have we learned as for us to prepare us for the next, because my concern isn't COVID. my concern is the next pandemic.

All I care about is us being ready for the next one, because the R-NOT score on this one wasn't that high. If the R-NOT, I mean, the Delta was high, Omicron was the highest, I believe, and COVID was the lowest, Delta was the second one, but the R-NOT score wasn't as high, some of the other one, and the death rate wasn't as high, but if something comes out with a high R-NAT score and it's deadly, we're gonna be in trouble. So what do we learn from this pandemic to prepare for the next one?

Well, I'll say five quick points about the COVID-19 pandemic and the crisis and maybe some of these can be applied to the next one. Of course, each is gonna be dependent on what the next organism is. If there is one, most of us have gone our whole lives, everybody around the table here looks probably 40 years older over and you've gone 40 years, you haven't been through this. And I may not be another one, but this is our five points we've learned. For COVID-19,

it's spread through the air. It's an aerosol. It's not spread basically by contact. Very important. So we had montages of people sterilizing pizza boxes. Sanjay Gupta, the CNN medical correspondent, was teaching America how to sterilize their grocery packages. We had films in Europe where they were spraying stadium seats and spraying sidewalks. Still, I went through the airport last night at Miami. Every couple of feet is a hand sanitizer thing. The airlines proudly announced that they were, they sanitized things as if it's spread over the seats of a plane.

So it became in people's minds that this was Ebola and you just touched somebody and you get it. Or it's like a clustering of difficile. It's not very importantly on spread, we learned that it spread from a sick person to a susceptible person. And there's negligible asymptomatic spread. There was a false narrative put out early on in conjecture

that 30 to 50% of the spread occurred between perfectly asymptomatic individuals. They could just walk into a room, look at each other, and transmit the virus to each other. That would have been the first virus in the history of the world that transmitted asymptomatically from person to person. That false narrative that was put out there was actually in the medical literature, fueled all the fear about you having your sales meeting, fueled all the fear that we have to be on Zoom. So there's perfectly well people on Zoom every day.

Those perfectly well people could have been meeting and traveling like they always do. It was only an issue when someone became sick, did they, could they be contagious? So the point number one is on spread. So we really missed one is on spread. So we really missed the boat on spread. And because of that, we've had two years of inappropriate, excessive, economically harmful fear. Number two, point number two, is that because it's not spread asymptomatically, all that testing of asymptomatic people

is completely scientifically inappropriate, unsupportable, it's not approved by the FDA. The FDA has never said, oh, you can use this test to go ahead and check airline people flying in a plane or going across the border or in schools. The World Health Organization in June said, don't do asymptomatic testing

because there's no scientific support for it. And when it's done, it has a yield of a positive test of way less than 1% two recent studies have shown that one from the Olympics in Japan and one from a large workplace in JAMA both have shown that there's less than a 1% yield and when it is positive, there's a high likelihood that it's a false positive. So asymptomatic testing is point number two, a complete waste of time. We have tested hundreds and hundreds of millions

of people in the United States asymptomatically and completely wasted our time, completely against regulatory guidance and against the World Health Organization, point number three. Point number three is when someone recovers from COVID from the wild type through the Delta variant, the immunity was robust and complete and durable against a second variant infection like Delta, et cetera.

So the idea is one had only one chance at having that we get immunity. Omicron broke through natural immunity. It was the first one to break through natural immunity. So it allowed a second infection, but still even the natural immunity and a paper recently published from Qatar in the New England Journal of Medicine showed even the natural immunity

from the legacy of variants was about 60% protective against Omicron. But Omicron broke through natural immunity, clearly broke through vaccine immunity, and we had the highest curves we've ever had with Omicron. We've actually had more people simultaneously sick with Omicron than at any time through the pandemic, and we were about 70% fully vaccinated. So the immunity counts, and progressively, if one gets a second infection, it's far more

milder than the first infection. So that's wonderful. The fourth point is that the virus and the infection has always been treatable. It's always been treatable. It's a not a death sentence. It's been treatable and treatable early. We've had a whole succession of drugs that we used in sequence, the combination, both appropriately prescribed generic medications and now emergency use authorized medications we used in combination. So it's treatable.

The treatment effect is estimated now, and it's in the Senate record, that it's 95% effective, meaning we can keep people out of the hospital and keep them from dying, if we treat in the golden windows the first three days of illness. Point number five and final point. The vaccines as presented as a major aspect of the entire world's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the vaccines are not sufficiently effective and not sufficiently safe to handle the problem. And many analyses suggest the mass vaccination program

has made things worse. There's three analyses by supermanian, camp, and bd. Notice I'll use the author's first name so we have this down that have all concluded the mass vaccination program worldwide has failed. In fact, his main thing's worse. Okay, so before we get to that, that vaccine has made things worse because I don't want to ask you the credibility behind that for the listener and the viewer. The one thing that was confusing to me was a following.

When I got COVID, I went to the doctor. They test it. Okay, you're positive. Great. What do I do? Yeah, I mean, just go home and quarantine for two weeks. What do I take? Take some zinc and vitamin C in this.

I said, okay, is there anything? Is there antibiotics? Is there anything I I take? Take some zinc and vitamin C in this. I said, okay, is there anything? Is there antibiotics? Is there anything I can take? Is there anything I can do? Nope, just go home, you gotta go through it. So, my son yesterday had his ear hurts. You go to the doctor last night. You go, let's just say you go to the doctor.

They're gonna give you ear drops. Here's what you do. You put ear drops. My dog two weeks ago, his eye, he scratches his eye. We went to the doctor, they put the thing around his neck, you know what I'm talking about, and every day we would have to put these eye drops in them, goes away, okay.

You go to the doctor, you have an upset stomach, he says, hey, take this, okay. It was very confusing for you to go to the doctor after you got tested positive. And there's nothing that they're prescribing you to take anything. Unlike, I'm saying, I'm willing to test. I don't want to go through this. Is there anything I can take?

Nope, we suggest you take nothing. You suggest I take nothing. That was very confusing to me on how a doctor, a specialist you you go to, typically, will tell you, if you're going through this, here's some options that we have, we can go through here, through here, through here, through here. But here, as if doctors were just sitting there saying, yep, we give you the positive report, go home, knowing what we know now, and not from your analysis, because your analysis, I'm aware of hydroxychloroquine and you know, I've remecting and all those things that we can, I got questions on that as well.

But what's the government's position or CDC's position today if I go to the doctor and I test positive? What do they recommend me taking to help me heal faster? Well, the recommendations today are certainly different probably than when you had it. The one thing you didn't mention is you didn't mention that you were offered a given access to being in research. You know, so many of the government recommendations have said, listen, you know, we don't advise taking this drug except in a research protocol.

And the one thing you didn't mention is, weren't you offered a research protocol? weren't you given a 1-800 number to call? I bet you weren't. In fact, I had COVID-19, so to my wife, we weren't offered any research either. So it is a fraudulent claim by our government to say, we don't advise that we use any of these medicines outside of research protocol without offering

a research protocol. I mean, every single urgent care in the center in the United States should have a bevy of offerings, at least at 1-800 numbers, so one can get into research. So as we say here today, you as someone in your middle life, the current approach, official U.S. approach, says that you can receive Paxil Void, which is a Pfizer offering. It's a combination of Nelfan Pure Enveyor and Ratonovere in randomized trials. It reduces the risk of hospitalization and death

by over Paxelvoid. Paxelvoid. Can you pull that up, Brooklyn? Over 85% over 85% is tested in people in their 40s. Is that what they're prescribing today? That's what they're prescribing today Paxle by the way just out of curiosity Tyler. Did you get COVID? Yeah, I had COVID twice. I had it in August and then I had you I'm a cron in December have you guys you guys all Tom

You got it. I know you got it as well. I had it twice Did any one of you guys get prescribed Paxle void or no? Have you heard of Paxle void? No, how recent is this by the way doc? You can pull it of Paxelvoid? No. How recent is this by the way, Doc? You can pull it up. Paxelvoid had market entry in 2022. So in January, February, you could also be offered MonepairaVir. If you had severe, which is a merc drug, you could be offered with severe symptoms all the way since November, you could have been offered a monoclonal antibody offered by Lilli, which would have been BAMLIVAMAB and then later on, Regeneron, which would be Caracifimab and Indivimab and then later on by GSK in May of 2021, we have the entry of Socherifimab and most recently Lilli back

on with Betelivomab. So I can tell you there are a bevy of drugs. Here we are in the Miami metro area. Where's the billboards for these drugs? Where is the wayfinding to get these drugs? Where's the FAQ when you get sick with COVID of where you can get these drugs? I've made the claim from the very beginning. When I went on Tucker Carlson, he went nuts. This is about a year ago. I said, Tucker, the treatment is being obscured. The treatment is being held away and not offered

and not popularized by Americans. I think in a very intentional way. So the obvious question becomes why? You know, I'm not making the calls, but that's a great call to ask for our public health officials. Why don't you ask your local health officials? Where's the billboards for the monoclonal antibodies? Which centers have, there will be some seniors here. You got a ton of seniors in Florida.

They could get Omicron with some severe symptoms. It can happen. Where's the bill boards to help your seniors get them on a clinical antibiotics, get the Pfizer drug, get the Merck drug, and by the way, there's other drugs we use after those, including steroids, anti-inflammatories, blood thinners, we can use and do use all of these

before the illness. I'm not making the calls, but the question, why is there no mention of treatment? When was the last time you turned on a TV station here in Florida, where they had a doctor come on and review the treatments for COVID-19 in the morning? Let's say I'm warning, News Show. I bet you've never seen one. You know what's crazy?

I've never seen a commercial on this. And why wouldn't you, though? Like, why wouldn't you late night news have a commercial on any of these? If it's something that's being prescribed and it's now approved by CDC, why wouldn't you see a commercial? Maybe there is, maybe I haven't seen it. I've just never seen a COVID-19 commercial

for any kind of medicine. Well listen, the equally as approved as the vaccines, have you ever seen a commercial for the vaccines? I have not, but I've heard it from everybody telling me to take the vaccine. Have you ever... Every official. You don't need a commercial when you have... No, I mean, it was...

Sean Hannity said you got to take the vaccine. Trump said you got to take the vaccine. Or Biden, the vaccine eventually became something where people from both sides were saying go take the vaccine. It didn't even... It wasn't even political. Can I ask you a question? We're having a very, very logical, you know, medical, fact-based conversation. I just want to get more of an emotional question to you. You sound kind of angry. Are you angry? Are you, are you upset? Are you optimistic? Are you pessimistic? Are you feel muscled? Where are you at emotionally right now? Do you feel muscled? Where are you at emotionally right now? I feel charged and I think that's the best thing charged because I am charged with very clear points.

There are emergency use authorized products for treating COVID-19. I'm surrounded by three intelligent middle-aged men who appear to have no awareness over the emergency use authorized treatments. And it's not your fault. But you don't have any awareness because the media has had no review for you. The public health agencies have given you no points of interest. You can have a grandmother tomorrow who could get very sick with COVID-19 and you have no compass in order to find your way to the treatment. But you do know about a vaccine,

and in fact, it has been recently released in the media. We've had over a billion dollars spent on vaccine advertising, over a billion. To my estimation, we've had over a billion dollars spent on vaccine advertising, over a billion. To my estimation, we've had almost none on treatment. You know, you bring up something really important. I'm going to give you two perspectives. I'm in Dallas with you and my wife's a school teacher and my kids are at a separate school. She doesn't teach this.

There's been a lot of emphasis in those schools. They're just trying to get it right. And I speak to the administrators and stuff. These people are not shrill far left. They're just trying to get it right. And I speak to the administrators and stuff, these people are not shrill far left, they're not way out here far right, but they're just trying to get it right. And what I have noticed is since last October, this is a group of people that have primary care physicians, a regular family doctor, they see regularly that has a history and Texas health presbyterian to get the app my charts, you can see yourself over time for PSA and

other things. So these folks are consumers of regular medicine with a good primary care physician. Since last September when school started there has been a great awareness among the physicians that say, hey if you test positive I want to talk to you quick because those first 72 hours, very correct. You said we can consider monoclonal for you,

but it's in more limited supply and I gotta get you in line to get it. And I wanna know how quickly is your fever spiking? How quickly is this? And so they've been also been using telemedicine. The other side of it, what you brought up is very interesting. We have a family member with Alzheimer's. And we have been offered several times clinical trial information about dementia and Alzheimer's

drugs, as well as giving a paper that says you really don't know which it is until you take a brain sample at an autopsy, correct? You really don't know which you really have, dementia or something else, but we've been offered clinical trials for this family member literally three times in the last three years as we've been progressing on slope. So it's very interesting, no such trials have I been hearing about. But I have people, I heard people saying that the doctors now have a pretty harmonized view about the 72 hours of monoclonal. And I find this really interesting what you're saying, but there's no billboards giving you anything. There's more billboards around Miami about STDs and other things and about where to get help.

Then there is about what is a national and global pandemic. Well, that's very important in Miami, but go ahead. But minor clonels was the most frequently used word in the transcript of my Joe Rogan interview, because Joe Rogan got sick with COVID. He received what's called the McCullough Protocols, copyrighted in my name, a sequential multi-drug therapy for COVID-19, which it does lead off with monoclonals. And in my protocol, if we get monoclonals,

we can skip the oral antivirals and we move into cortical steroids and other drugs, but he was able to get through it in a few days as opposed to develop a permanent syndrome. So did Aaron Rogers, he received the macolor protocol. It's called the macolor protocol, name that's real. It's copy right in macolor, it's copy right in my name by a group of physicians

who use it, a former president. What's in that protocol? What is, there's like three things that you have to do. What is it? The protocol starts up top. The most recent version is we start with nasal and oral virus cytol therapy. We can actually reduce the viral burden in the nose

by using dilute pavidone iodine or hydrogen peroxide. There is a layer of what's called OTC over the counter bundle, which is the nutraceuticals and supplements and a drug that has an antiviral effect called Fomodidine or Pepsi over the counter. And then monoclonal antibodies, you can get it for high risk individuals. And if no monoclonal antibodies

in the oral antivirals, the featured oral antiviral now is Paxelvoid because it has the best efficacy data and best randomized trial data. And then we move into the use of culture seen in the largest prospective randomized trial so far, has an effect in reducing hospitalization, the use of aspirin, and help you destinide. Wonderful. 85% reductions in hospitalizations in the air of aspirin, inhaled Udesanide, wonderful, 85% reductions in hospitalizations and air visas with that alone, oral prednisone with pulmonary symptoms,

set in, and then high-risk people, wheelchairs, bed ridden, nursing homes, we use injectable blood thinners, low-vanox, or oral blood thinners. What was that? I'm not worried that sure, but I came up with, with all due respect, what you're saying sounds pretty complicated. I mean, I'd have to Google half the words you just said.

No, listen, you're not. You wouldn't be fair to just say, take a shot and you're good. I'm not saying that that's what I'm advising. But what you're basically saying is like, take all brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrman. For the layman, yeah, it's not the layman's job to do self-prescription. The layman goes to a doctor and the doctor should be doing what I just outlined. Now, McCullough protocol is one protocol, separately in France they developed a DDR re-alty, developed another protocol. Vladimir's like in my row, New York, yet another protocol, similar concepts, frontline,

critical care consortium. There's four national telemedicine services, 15 regional services, people calling and they get prescribed these drugs. Doctors who are on the ball are prescribing these drugs, saving lives. Doctors who tell patients go home and wait do you get sick and do you come into the hospital when it's too late? That's where the lives are lost. So the percentage of doctors are lost. So the-

A percentage of doctors are quote unquote, on the ball. We estimate. We estimate 500 doctors are on the ball out of a million. What? Well, in your defense. A point five percent of doctors are on the ball. When it comes to treating COVID-19, that's our estimate.

I can tell you, I've been- I've been on a second. In your defense, in your defense, for a chapter of my life, I lived several years in San Francisco and I worked with other white color professionals and it was a couple of them that were living HIV positive. And there were doctors there that had reputations, some of them were at University of San Francisco, some were at the research hospital, somewhere around Stanford. And they were all working on the same thing called the HIV cocktail.

And each individual was reacting different to it. And they were working with different sets of drugs. Some drugs had a terrible effect on your stomach lining. Cricks belly was, I think I'm saying that correctly, with the byproduct of the cocktail. So you had these doctors that were working feverishly with a lot of different drugs, and it wasn't an alphabet soup, and they were trying to do this, and that none of them were threatened with their license.

None of them were, and they were using, well, maybe this drug or this drug will work, and they weren't being told, oh, Ivermectin's not for that, you should be doing that. They were never told. So there's a precedent in this country,

and around the world, where doctors were looking and doing sensible research and trying to find combinations and medications that would help patients. And this is goes back to HIV. But suddenly we get here and I find this very ironic and very telling where doctors are not allowed to be doing this and not allowed to be applying their expertise. Yet when we go back to HIV, you know what I'm talking about, everything from, you know, proteins and inhibitors and all the things that went that in T cell counts that

you had to constantly take. It was okay to do the cocktail back then and it's called the cocktail and you were a good noble physician that was out there trying to help and trying to find solutions for people. Now, oh no no you're just you're just not with the program. But that's in the United States. Listen you go just a few hours south at Texas and Central America or South. You know here they're passing out these cocktails in high-risk patients in baggies. This has been going on from the very beginning. So there's over 30 countries that officially recommend hydroxychloroquine in combinations with other drugs. Hydroxychloroquine is the most modestly effective of the drugs. And I've always said that none of these drugs are perfect. It's

an imperfect world as we're learning how to treat the illness. Over 20 countries officially support Ivermectin-based multi-drug protocols. So the problem is what's wrong with America? Why can these other countries give their patients a chance? I've looked at the papers that report deaths with COVID-19. I'll tell you one characteristic of a death with COVID-19. Zero early treatment or very truncated and inadequate

early treatment in every case. Do you remember a laetriol in cancer in the late 80s or early mid 80s, Steve McQueen? I'm going to Mexico to get laetriol because no doctor in the United States is allowed to give it to me. Remember, and his cancer was caught late. Remember this? So these situations are as old as the hills, but now we're dealing with this global pandemic

and I think there's other things going on here that are very very bothersome. But you know what I'm talking about? The Leotro and cancer and Steve McQueen go into Mexico and all that. I think about this this this this gamble. The gamble that I took was and people in my circles took going on. Think about this gamble. The gamble that I took was, and people in my circles took, is that we are going to try to help patients early with a potentially fatal disease that we understood risk ratification. It's not the same in you as it would be in your grandfather. It is a very different illness according to age and multiple risk factors,

but in somebody who has an appreciable chance of dying with this illness, we took the gamble of doing something that was reasonable, putting drugs in the combination to try to reduce viral replication, to reduce inflammation or cytokine storm and thrombosis. Other doctors took a different view of doing nothing, doing nothing and let the illness take its course. What a gamble, what a gamble. And so if in the end, it's determined that doctors like myself and my circle were completely wrong. None of the drugs worked. The monoclonal antibodies never worked.

Fies are drug, never worked. The blood thinners never worked. Then what can we be accused of? We did our best to try to save lives. What about those doctors who did nothing? What are they going to be accused of if I'm right? They're going to be accused of failure to treat. Failure to treat is malpractice. And it becomes all the way from the government levels down.

If the government was advising failure to treat, which they were, the original set of national and social guidelines said in October, do nothing. October 2020, when I testified in the US Senate in November, we reviewed the energy guys. They said specifically, do nothing and wait until you're so sick. The NIH has fallen guidelines though. It's not on them. But hang on. The NIH said specifically, do nothing until you're sick enough to go to the hospital and still do nothing, still do nothing to the hospital until you get to the point where you need oxygen,

the patient needs oxygen, then start remdesivir. That was the National Institute of Health, now remdesiveer is an intravenous antiviral where the randomized trials show more deaths with REM-desiveer than control or placebo, and REM-desiveer is officially recommended against use by the World Health Organization. So to this day, an average American who's developing severe, permanent COVID-19 will get no treatment at home, none, and the way to go in the hospital, they go in oxygen, and then they get remdesivir. In U.S. hospitals, that the World Health Organization

officially recommends, don't do this. So, but the doctors following what they're being told to do, right? So, failure to, you know, practice or failure to do the, the writing for the patient, if they're being told to do nothing, they're not breaking any guidelines. Well, they're, they're being told, don't forget, guidelines can be viewed in two different ways. I'll tell you the way I view them.

Guidelines are the way I view them. Guidelines are the base standard of care. They don't basically demarcate the boundaries of what I can do, but they're a base standard of care. Base. So the guidelines give information about COVID, and they do say, you know, give oxygen if they need oxygen. It's a base of care. And in the very first set of guidelines, in a particular page, is that I would call, I think it's page eight of the guidelines, said, even though these are recommendations, it's the doctor who decides what happens to the patient.

And one time I was called by a pharmacist, well, the guidelines don't recommend the use of Iver-Machina hydroxychloric. I said, look, I'm page eight. It says, in the end, I decide. So all these doctors that said, listen, I wasn't doing more than the guidelines. My answer is you weren't doing enough.

Got it. So Tom, when you got COVID, okay. And we were in a grinage, we had the meeting. You didn't make it. Correct. And you went and you were on Zoom. Then all of a sudden, your condition got worse. You went to the doctor.

You ended up going ICU for seven or eight days. Whatever the day was, you'll share with us here right now. What I'm curious about is did they give you any medicine, did they give you any antidepressure? What did they prescribe to you before things got worse? Okay. When I got my fever spiked in less than 72 hours. So in 48 hours, I went from zero to one of four point five And I was taking Tylenol and and regular aspirin and it was knocking it down to like 102 So there was something going on the body was turning it up

So I knew there was going on. I had telemedicine with my regular doctor I'm with Texas health presbyterian right there in Dallas. So down there at Greenville my doctor again, he says I was Texas health presbyterian right there in Dallas. So down there at Greenville, my doctor again, he says, I wanna get you a monoclonal, but I'm really, really worried that you're moving really fast. And it says, you know, and so, I subsequently, it was admitted at 72 hours. I was really short of breath.

I couldn't finish sentences. Took a chest S-Grey and they said, wow, you know, the COVID pneumonia is clear here. And after 48 hours in a hospital, it took me down to ICU so they could give me the leotry, which has to be administered in ICU so you can monitor it. And my oxygen, my unassisted oxygen was like at 88, 85.

And so I was never intubated, but I was given the second level oxygen that applies some air pressure with it You know, not just the simple and I you're gonna help me on this, but you know what I'm talking about There's the thin tube and there's the big tube and Then I was given as you point out steroids along with some other drugs to help balance the side effects of the Scorrigid days after having COVID I COVID? I was in ICU on day five. Okay. From when I knew something was really, really wrong. And then I was eight days in ICU.

And the oxygen got better. They were able to turn down the percent of oxygen I needed. And so we're just, we're gonna help you while you fight this. And so, but it was the valetri, which what was described to me and you can correct me if I'm getting this wrong, because I'm not the physician. Hey, the valetri, which what was described to me, and you can correct me if I'm getting this wrong because I'm not the physician. Hey, the valetri is going to help slow the virus's replication while it's going through its life cycle and your body is fighting it. And every day they were taking me through white blood cell counts and during their best

to explain what was going on. And I found these physicians to be really balanced, but that's what happened. I came out of ICU and four days later, I went home. And so that was it. Now I don't have a lupus, you can't tell, but I don't have a lupus, but you can tell my BMI is good, and I'm a healthy person, I'm a non-smoker. So all of those check boxes I was in, the doctor told me, he said, I'm 99% certain, you got this Delta variant, and Tom, you're just one of this 1%,

he said that this thing got a hold of you, and you had no of the comorbidities or anything out in front, and you're... How old are you? How old are you? 58. 58. 58. If you would have called me with Delta around this time point, boom, I would have said,

listen, hit every four hours, dilute a pavillon iodine, sniff it up in your nose, sniff it all the way back and spit it out in gargoyles. You started immediately knocking down the viral replication, okay? This is August to give you a balance of what the doctor's knowledge base was. This is August last year, 2021. Okay. That would have been early, but we still had it in there. Clearly by the fall we did, would have hit you hard with nutraceuticals and supplements.

You would have been starting from auditing. And then that day, you would have gotten 600 milligrams per kilogram of Ivermectin. And because you were moving quickly, I would have given you 40 milligrams of prednisone, 0.6 milligrams of culture scene. You would have started inhaling, but you'd have died because your oxygen levels were going down quickly. You would have been on full dose, aspirin 325, and I would have put you on low-vanox injections. That would have been by five to six things at home that I would have done as a skilled doctor

no hospitalization for you. Is that the McCulloch protocol? That's the McCulloch protocol. You did implement on him and how would that have changed his situation? No hospitalization. He was that effective. That effective.

95% effective. He received everything late. In the end, this medication, believe me, this is actually to dilate the blood vessels. He needed blood thinners. Now, who agrees with you saying, yeah, he's absolutely right. Macala protocol, that's exactly,

and who's like, dude, this guy is out of his mind that it's definitely not the protocol. Who do you think would be? The association of American physicians and surgeons from the very beginning used versions of the Macala protocol, the frontline critical care network, FLCC.net, from the very beginning used versions of the macolor protocol the front line uh... critical care network flcc dot net from the very beginning uh... they would agree with you yes and if that patience in america

hundreds of thousands of not millions of people have been treated with these multi drug protocols other countries across the world would have used these protocols if you were in j, you would have received a form of a protocol. So then the question becomes, why didn't we hear? And I know you can't answer that because you see, you got to go ask a question from XYZ, but that's the question I think about. Why can't we? But it takes me to a different place.

So as a patient, doctor relationship, patient doctor relationship, do I have the ability to say, I don't care, I'll sign off something, give me Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and I'll sign off that I'm releasing you of all the liability it's all on me. Can I as a patient say that to the doctor or no? It's irrelevant really. The doctor has a duty to treat and in you ask your doctor, you ask your doctor. I'm answering you I says yes, he can is that correct? What he just said yes, he can and then you're elaborating But yes, he can as a patient right because you can it you can say

We have proxy for the family member. I can't say that to the doctor. Yeah We've said to the doctor. We'll sign off because there's a liability sheet and then there's shaking his head though. No, no, it's not an issue of liability. It's an issue of duty to treat, which is a fundamental principle. So your question to the doctor is, listen, I've got COVID-19. Are you going to treat me for COVID-19? If the answer's no, I don't treat COVID-19. Okay, refer me. There's a duty to refer. But it's not okay to say, I don't treat COVID-19 and I'm not going to refer. But it's not okay to say, I don't treat COVID-19 and I'm not gonna refer and there's nothing for you.

So let's just say, let's just say he refers to somebody that does treat COVID-19. I go to that doctor and the doctor says, I suggest you not take Ivermectin, I suggest you not touch hydroxyclin, I suggest you not take all this stuff and I say, hey doc, I know you don't and I know what CDC is recommending. Here's what I want to do.

I'm willing to release all the liability that you're going to have for you to prescribe me, Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine because at this point in the game, the alternative sucks and I don't want to wait for it. I'm willing to take the risk. Can you do that for me? It's not a liability shield for the doctor. The doctor always incurs liability. The doctor has, we have male practice liability.

If something happened to you, the doctor prescribed hydroxychloroquine and you had a reaction, he's responsible anyway. There's no release of liability. It's impossible for you to release liability. Dr. Zincurr, everything, even with monoclonal antibodies. That's good to know. But getting back to your situation, it could have been far better managed early on. A giant mistake was to not give them monoclonal antibodies.

So as you came into the hospital, you were an outpatient in the ER, give them monoclonal antibodies. As soon as they clicked you over to admission, I bet they told you you can't get monoclonal antibodies. These are artificial administrative barriers that are up there. And the monoclonal antibodies, the reason why Joe Rogan and I made such a big deal about it, these are safe, effective, miraculous drugs, miraculous drugs, and they've been grossly underutilized.

I can't tell you the scores of senior citizens in our country who've died and they haven't received monoclonal antibodies. It's a tragedy. What are monoclonal antibodies exactly? They are specifically high-tech drugs developed through Operation Warp Speed by our best companies in America, in worldwide, and they actually bind the virus. They literally block the virus from ravaging the body. These are wonderful drugs. And when people have been down on the government, they say, oh, the government's done a terrible on COVID-19. I disagree because it's mixed picture.

The monoclonal antibodies are miraculous drugs. I've used them continuously now for over a year. The biggest problem is not being transparent on where the monoclonal antibodies are, not letting people have access to them. In fact, in mid-January, we got emails from my system saying, listen, we're out of ammo. Ammo. And I went on Sean Hannity radio. I said, Sean, listen, some people are going to get sick with Omekron. We're in the battle of the bulge and we're out of ammo. How can the government drop the ball on the supply chain from on to clone antibodies? Yeah, but let me go back to the question.

Again, I'm thinking long term. I want to learn, too, for us to be mentally and emotionally prepared for the next one when it happens because I want to know my rights And I want the listener to know their rights as a patient as a person who gets sick what a what what what power do I have to tell my doctor What what do I have the power to tell the doctor to sit there and say Doc Here's what risk I'm willing to take what what are my freedom? What are the choices I have as a patient? You have all the privileges of shared decision-making and it really depends on the relationship. And you're in a relationship with a doctor

and the doctor's saying, well, I'm not sure about this drug or that drug. Listen, I saw a ton of patients yesterday. Every single interaction is shared decision-making. You have that right in that relationship. The rub of the grain is when the doctor doesn't feel supported or in fact feels negative pressures to not prescribe you something, but you want it. And that's what's happened with COVID-19. Doctors have wanted to use monoclonal antibodies. They've wanted to use Pfizer and Merck

and hydroxychloroquine and prednisone would have you. But they haven't felt supported by our government agencies. Have you ever seen anybody come out and say, listen, we fully support the doctors in doing everything they can to help our patients with COVID. Have we ever seen and heard a full-throated endorsement of early treatment for COVID-19? I gave a speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial that I did was I was going to be a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a

little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a little bit more of a But this takes me to I want to know the privilege I privilege as I have. You're saying the relationship with the doctor fine, but from the standpoint of me making a request for the doctor to give me something and me, giving up my liability, I can't risk, I cannot sue you.

You're saying you cannot do that. Then it takes me to think what are doctors who are afraid of prescribing or even making a decision to treat you? What are they afraid of prescribing or even making a decision to treat you, what are they afraid of? If you, who some may call controversial, or you push the envelope, the words they use, and you say you're not, how come they haven't taken your license? So what are those doctors afraid of? Are they not going to get the sponsorship money to speak for 10 grand from Pfizer? Is that what they're concerned is? What is their concern to walk on excels on what to do?

What's their fears? You have to ask a doctor. Who is that? Sound was about it. Was that also a computer made a sound? Okay. I heard it. But go ahead.

Keep going. You have to ask a doctor whose head scores of COVID-19 patients in their practice and that doctor hasn't treated a single one. He's let all of them get hospitalized and die. You have to ask that doctor what's in their mind? What's in their mind? Of course. But it's not one of them. It's 98% of them. So they there has to be something they fear to not do. You can't tell me 98% none of them are free thinkers. We have had public symposiums. We just had one in Kansas City. And Pierre Corrie, myself, Jose Lopez, as doctors who treat patients early in COVID-19, we innovated, we've published, I've gotten research grants, I've done everything the right way to treat COVID-19. I'm not

making this stuff up and I use every government product that's well supported as well. And we went to Kansas City and we put on this symposium and we invited the faculty from the University of Kansas months ahead of time. Months ahead of time. They didn't show.

In fact, they produced a video. And the video said that they don't treat patients early and they're academic physicians and they don't think it's a part of the day. Who did they fear though? I want to know what did they fear and who did they fear? If they can't take your license away from you, what are you fearing and who are you fearing?

Because as a lawyer, I get if you have the fear of losing? Because as a lawyer, I get if you, you know, you have the fear of losing your license as a lawyer. How often do doctors lose their license to practice? Very rarely. Okay, that's what I'm, you know how a teacher like a 10-year and teachers are never afraid because they never get fired. You know, as someone I'm saying, right?

And so if doctors are never getting fired, what are you scared of? What are you scared of to say? You know what, I'm gonna test this because I worry, this guy's gonna die, it's gonna be on my hands for the rest of my life. Listen, I don't want you to die, bro. Listen, here's my recommendation.

This is what I suggest, so what are you afraid of? I wanna know what, and who are you afraid of? Go ahead, Tom. So when I was being treated, I asked about Ivermectin, and they said, that is not one of the drug of choices here at Texas Health Presbyterian, where I'm practicing. So that doctor is effectively an employee of Texas Health Presbyterian.

And they worry about losing that employment. The doctors that I've seen, and I've looked at, you know, you look, when you see the doctors that are fearlessly doing the things you're talking about, Dr. McCullough, I'm noticing that we're a lot more full independent private practice. They built up a practice on their own and it was private. So they don't worry about getting fired by themselves. But so many doctors with the way health insurance works in America, the insurance reimbursement, have to be associated with a plan or have to be associated with a group. And once you're associated with a group, then you've got these drug of choice mandates that sometimes come from the health system itself, correct? So is it

correct to say that some of these doctors may feel differently internally, but are marching to the orders of what is the drug of choice and what are we doing here at Texas Health Presbyterian, here at Baylor Scott and White? Aren't the doctors fearing that? Whereas the ones that are in pure private practice and have built up their own practice, don't have to worry about that. Are those doctors fearful of treating diabetes? Are they fearful of treating diabetes?

I'm asking you as a physician, many doctors that are with a health plan or a system, aren't they scared of getting fired by that system versus the very few doctors that have been able to build up a pure private practice? This is in the context of treating COVID. So why are they fearful of being fired in the context of treating COVID, but they're not fearful of being fired in the context of treating diabetes or another condition? That's the question on the table. Are they sure of what happened to you?

Baylor's gotten white. What makes this so unique? So what happened to me at Baylor's gotten white? So in March of 2020, COVID-19 is coming. People are gonna be slaughtered by the virus. What do I do as a leading doctor in America, the most published person in my field in the world in history, and I have more academic firepower than anybody who can come to the table? What do I do?

I redirect all of my efforts to COVID-19. Within a matter of days, I work with the FDA and I get to get an investigation into drug application going and improve. I get an IND number. I start a protocol to try to best help protect our workers. I then innovated with doctors in Italy and then all over the world and came up with the very first treatment protocol of how to treat it. And the principles were based on the fact that, listen, we can't wait for large randomized trials.

People are going to be slaughtered by the virus. We need drugs that show a signal benefit, acceptable safety, put them into combination. No single drug can treat COVID-19 because there's viral replication inside a kind storm and thrombosis. We need drugs and combination. I did that. I published it in one of the best medical journals. It became the most frequently downloaded and utilized paper in all of COVID-19. I did better than that.

I updated it a few months later and I published it in Reviews and Cardiovascular Medicine and a special issue. That whole year went by. I treated all my high-risk patients. Did I treat everyone? No, but I treated all my high-risk patients using my best judgment to try to save lives. What happened to me? I came up towards the end of January. I got walked into a room by two administrators and they said, we're not going to renew your contract for next year. Now, my...

You sound pretty charged. Now my contract says that if I don't lose my license, commit an act of moral turpitude or lose my medical staff privileges, then the contract says a renewal term and a failure renew requires a two-thirds board vote. Requires basically requires the president to sign off on that. So the problem was here, there was no due process. And I asked, where's the two thirds board vote? We didn't do it. I said, why are we not redoing my contract?

No reason. No reason. So who's your beef with? What's the bottom line? Who's your beef with? Is it Fauci? Is it the NIH? Is it the WHO? Is it the schools that basically told you that you couldn't be a part of it anymore? Is it big tech? I mean, I want to get to the heart of the matter here. We're doing all these using all these words that I'm gonna have to Google for the rest of my life. What's the damn bottom line? Who you mad at? Who fucked up? You tell me. I want to know. You look mad. I am mad because like the world has been shut down.

You know, we're having these conversations that's like, I don't know, blah blah blah Google this. Go am mad because the world has been shut down. We're having these conversations that's like, I don't know, but I'll go to the ass, go to the ass, monoclonal blah, blah, blah. I wanna know the bottom line here. And I think a lot of our viewers are like, all right, I agree with you. What can be done?

What should be done? What could have been done differently? Did Fauci fuck up? What percentage did he fuck up? Should he have been fired years ago? What's the bottom line? You know what I'm saying? We can do all this talking circles all that talk about time situation, but like I just

want bottom line and from information. I feel like for two years we've just been running in circles. We got the doctor here who knows more than anybody. I'm looking for a bottom line already. What do you want? Truth. But specifically what do you forget about what I want? What does the world want to know? What do you think the world should what I want, what is the world wanna know? What do you think the world should know? What do you think the world wants to know? How did this start? What should have been done?

Did Fauci do the good or bad job? And why are you being muscled? Those questions. Okay, we've been focusing on treatment. Is it agreed that the virus and the infection should be treated in high-risk patients? Yes. Did they question again, please?

Is it agreed that the virus and the infection should be treated in high-risk patients? Is there any resistance in it? Elderly people immunocompromised, very, very heavy people who are smokers under 40, that whole group. Yes. Okay, so don't you want information, rapidly available information, to patients and to doctors and to health systems to treat patients. Don't you want those doctors and health systems

to treat patients early to prevent hospitalization? Yes. Okay, then where have you been? Where have you been? Me? Yes. Where have I been? Where have you been? Me? Yes. Where have I been? Yes.

The hell doesn't matter where I've been. Because it matters, I'm a community. Because it matters. If you haven't spoken up, if you haven't stepped out, if you haven't done a lick of anything, then you're as complicit as everybody else. Where have you been? I think that's a horrible unfair charge, Dr. McCulloch,

because what am I supposed to do? I'm living my life, I'm 39 years old. This thing just happens. I don't know where and you want me to quote unquote, step up. What the hell do I know? What the hell do any of us know? Doesn't matter what you know, it matters what you want. How would I know what I want or how would anyone know what they want when they've never even heard of COVID and the world and people are telling you, hey, you know, shut down for two weeks, shut down for two months. I'm supposed to step up. The average person is supposed to step up. This is where we trust the science.

This is where we trust the medical field. This is where we trust people on stage with the mics. So for the average person, the quote, unquote, step up, I feel like is a little inappropriate. Listen, you're not an average person. You're sitting with two cans on your ear and a lot of people listening to you. You're not an average person. You're sitting with two cans on your ear and a lot of people listening to you. You're not an average person. You just told me you wanted to be treated. And I'm asking you, what have you done?

Do you see the problem? The media is as complicit as the biomedical pharmaceutical complex. You're not demanding treatment. And because you're not demanding treatment, and the average person is not demanding treatment, what's happening is people are not being treated by the virus. People are coming to me and saying, Dr. McCullough, save America. You're the one who published these protocols. You're the one to do this.

Do even more. And what I'm telling you, if we don't have 330 million people screaming for treatment, whether it's this virus or the next one, I think they were though. No, I think they were though. No, I think they were though. I think they were. Show me. Show me. I think, well, okay, fine, let's go through it.

And I'll process this like a lawyer, and I'm not even a lawyer. I think number one, a lot of people, we had Malona, Dr. Malona. And when we had Dr. Malona, it was was I think it was the next day after he was on Roken and it just so happened we didn't even know each other's calendar But he apparently was doing a tour he was on Roken one day the next day was with us, right? You're familiar with Dr. Raman. Yeah, and he was taken down immediately We had Judy Mike of its on at the peak. I'm talking two years ago I'm talking we had her on in April of 2020. We had Judy Mike of its on

First day gets couple million views boom the video is taken 2020. We had Judy Mike of it's on. First day gets a couple million views. Boom, the video's taken down. We had RFK on coming in debate, uh, uh, Dershowitz on the topic of vaccine mandates a year and a half ago, two years ago. I'm not even talking about it in the last three months. Year and a half ago in the thick of things, they came in, they debated and that video still on, uh, on the internet till today's a couple million views. We brought a lot of people on, but the challenge becomes the ability for yesterday. Trump was on this podcast, false send, NELK boys writing, the video Trump says, don't worry, this thing's not gonna stay on for too long.

And next thing, you know, less than 24 hours gets five, six million views and it's taken down. And you know, he gets on hand, he'd say the thing was taken, but I told him it's gonna be taken out because they know you he gets on hand it say the thing was taken out but I told him it's going to be taken out because they know I wanted him to do this podcast so censorship you know what what I learned from the outside here's what I've learned as the non-expert I learned that that the most powerful organization here when it comes out to handling pandemic for me to be able to seek the truth

Is the one that's putting the muzzle on the average day-to-day person that eventually says I'm not gonna post anything Why do we not have to a radio today on you to why is this not being posted on you to why is this only being posted on Spotify and Apple and it's ditching all the other why not because we know the folks at Google are not gonna Let this thing stay for another 24 hours They'll be taking now will get a strike then we can't do any podcast and we're shutting down for doing podcasts for a week And then we may get a second strike and we're shutting down for three months then we don't have a product to produce so the the the policies by these major Social networks virtual governments played a very big role where a lot of average people like Adam is talking about felt they were muscled. So that I realize they have the power. Number two, I don't think a person

needs to have as much power as they did to control and intimidate the average day-to-day person to dictate what kids should wear in school as a mask or take a vaccine like if Fauci does. I think giving too much power to one person is very scary when it comes on to some like this. A president, I get it, there's got to be a shot caller, someone's got to make the decision because we have Congress Senate, we have a system, judicial system, legislative, we have a system that works, you know, even a Joe mansion, his vote mattered so much that the left was upset. Our system, for the most part, works, it's a decent system that we have. But Fauci had a little too much of a monopoly

and everybody had to look at him as the main. At first, if you think about when the pandemic first got started, it wasn't just Fauci. It was a group of people that we heard. It was Berks, it was him. It was handful of other people. It wasn't just Fauci, Fauci, Fauci. Gradually, he won by one by one.

God rid of everybody else, whether he did or another way of getting away from it and all of a sudden he's the guy He's the voice, you know He's the one that we have to listen to and the hypocrisy started coming out So the average a person sitting there saying no some is saying you got to wear a mask and annexes that French laundry Not wearing a mask Mary Egrosa saying you got to wear a mask and he's seen out of game not wearing a mask and he says oh I don't breathe when I'm taking pictures with people.

So the more and more things like that happen, people started realizing, maybe these guys are just full of shit. And then you sit there and you wonder, what is really going on behind closed doors? Yeah, I was watching the Kennedy's documentary yesterday. I interviewed a lot of guys on Kennedy, whether it's one of the Secret Service agent,

you know, Bolden, who was the first African-American Secret Service agent, whether it's one of the secret service agent, you know, Bolden, who was the first African-American secret service agent, whether it's Jim Jenkins, who was one of the four guys that held this brain 30 minutes after he died. And Oliver Stone does his documentary on John F. Kennedy, and you're sitting there. 1963, what's today? 2022, how many years is that? 60 years, nearly 59 years later, and we have an idea of what went on,

but for 75 years, we can really do investigation to dig into the numbers and the charge, and even his own doctor, who had been his own doctor for years, when interviewed in 1967 at the library was asked, hey, do you still agree with the three shots that was taken and what people are saying with the Warren report and he says, I'd have no interest in commenting on that.

Would you mean you have no interest in commenting on that? We kind of have an idea what happened with John F. Kennedy's assassination. Are we not gonna find that till 2000 and whatever the year is that Pfizer put on a thing that we cannot investigate this? So the average person sitting there saying, honestly, you guys are so cocky, doctors are very cocky.

I know a lot of competitive people. I'm in a pretty competitive environment. Football players are cocky, a competitive. Everybody thinks they're better basketball. I got to tell you the, the doctor world, oh my gosh, you guys are cocky. Holy moly, everybody is so competitive. So what happens when you guys are so competitive, the doctor world that I'm a runner and I talk to experts like yourself, everybody is so damn

worried about being right and God forbid if you're wrong once that you stick to your ego of what is right, what is your right rather than shit, you may have been wrong once and these doctors are afraid to freaking debate each other because you're a doctor, you have to keep this facade of how smart you are. Not saying you I'm talking about as most of those doctors. So who gets to hit the average day to day person? The bottom line is listen, I'm not afraid.

Yeah. It's obvious. Many people are. It's obvious that many people never spoke up. It's really obvious. The media is afraid. The media is a big problem, a huge problem. Now, who in the media wouldn't be interested in an update on how to treat COVID-19? People in the

media, thousands of local TV stations, why wouldn't they be interested in giving an update? Let's have a doctor on it. Let's go over what you should do when you get COVID. Have you ever seen that even once? Think about the oblivion. It didn't come into the producer's mind once to go over an action plan when senior citizens get COVID not once. Think about that. That is profound. That is profound.

It didn't come up once in a single press briefing for two years with the White House Task Force One, White House Task Force Two, President One, President Two, Vice President One, Vice President Two, CNN Fox, CNBC, MSBC, not once to have a review on what we should do today when we get treatment for COVID-19. Not once. What would happen if you had a debate with COVID-19? Wait, but I don't know about that. Will you mean never came up once? I don't know if I agree with that, because you were on Tucker.

I've watched Tucker bring doctors on who recommended what to do and what to prescribe. And I've seen it even with Gupta making his own recommendation, but it's the recommendations that what the CD would, I've seen a lot of that. Look, I have one concern. Here's the only concern I have. Very simple for me.

My entire outcome of sitting down with you today and we appreciate you for coming out. My only outcome is preventative for the next one. That's all I care about. I don't like to be manipulated. I've never liked it. I don't like to be bullied. I've never liked it. I don't like to be played games with I've never liked it. And all those three things happen the last two years. Those three things create an emotion to me. That's not healthy. I don't like it. I want to know what my options are as a parent, as a father, as a CEO, as an entrepreneur, as a content creator, as an American. What are my options? And I want to know we have the right leaders

in place that when the next thing happens because of all this crisis that's going on the world right now, Ukraine, Russia, Putin's a big personality, Giza big personality, Iran's got their own thing that they're dealing with. Somebody gets upset and they create many ways to want to hurt our lives through bio or through cyber. I want to know we're prepared. And I want to know how what controls do I have as an individual when I deal with a doctor, when I deal with the people that are that's their duty to do what they're doing on a daily basis. That's that's my biggest concern I have now. I tell you I totally disagree with you. We have not seen anything on early treatment.

The minimum standards as a citizen and a doctor that I would expect is monthly updates. We've had nearly a million people die of this illness. We've had tens of millions of hospitalizations, not enough, not nearly enough, monthly updates, full review, action plan, billboards up in every city, how you get treatment, every single medical group, emails, outpatient treatment centers, people get sick with COVID, they should walk in and they should be treated, not even close. You're not even on first space. You haven't even gotten out of the dugout.

I am telling you, the next one that comes, we better have a completely different plan. We better have our marquee medical institution step up. I told Tucker Carlson, I said, you know, there's no male clinic protocol to treat COVID-19. There's no Harvard protocol. There's no Duke protocol. They haven't done a single thing. They have an attempted treat a single patient to prevent hospitalization. Even when they get in the hospital, they don't get having a unique, innovative,

advanced protocols. It is a complete and total failure. I completely disagree with this. And the one of the reasons why this has happened is the media has been complicit in this. The media has had an oblivion to early treatment and the people haven't demanded it. The people have been slaughtered by this virus.

I think people have demanded it. I think people want to know when you lose, people don't, when you lose a husband, a wife, a kid, a mom, a dad, there's no way those people are silent just sitting on the silence and saying, well, I just lost my mom. Cool.

Okay, I gotta go to work. No, that's not how life works I don't know about that I don't know if I'm willing to put 964,000 people who lost somebody to say they're not demanding it I think the muzzle is what's really hurting a lot of people I think mainstream media I agree it's got a big responsibility because they're not willing to they're just just following whatever the big, you know, even if you look at some of the numbers on how much they're advertising on their channels or whatever it is, the dollar amount, Merck, Pfizer, all these guys. Billions on top of billions. So your viewpoint is people have been screaming for early treatment to prevent hospitalization and death and they have been

completely and effectively muscled to the point where there's not even a segment in a TV show. I agree. Complete muslim. Now your question is, who's doing the muscling and why? That's your question. Well, we know who's doing the muscling and why. We know who's doing the muscling and why.

Big tech, because the reason we're not on YouTube today. Well, no, big tech is responsible for somebody is telling big tech on what philosophies to control and not to control. So it's big tech is not, you know how you're doing the whole, the great cadence trying to figure out who killed two pop or big and you're trying to figure out who's the guy at the top, not the guy here. Big tech is number two, but the person at the top is a way of thinking is a protect that person or who's that. This has been going on for a while.

You know the whole thing with Oswald who Oswald was the person that killed Kennedy and oh he's the guy that killed Kennedy and you know he was never part of the CIA. Do you know for four years 12 CIA agents were following Oswald? Do you know a week before Oswald did what he did? He got it. The CIA got a full on report on this guy. Do you know that same year in 1963, there was two other attempts on assassination on Kennedy. One of them was in Chicago, I think November 2nd or November 3rd, and another one was in Tampa, and the guy that was in Chicago, him and Oswald are both ex-Marines. They both were at the base in Japan. They both had a certain training for the CIA, and they were both in a similar exact looking building on the sixth floor when that was supposed to be taking place and somebody whispered to them saying, hey, you may not want to go on that 27 mile, whatever barricaded the card he was going to go through so the city was going to see him.

There's people of higher power that want to use every crisis to move their agenda and I'm certain that happens. All I'm saying is, that's nothing new. The people of power have been trying to do that for a while. I think there's got to be a different strategy on how to hold these types of people accountable. I, we haven't even started doing any kind of investigation to see what China's responsibility was on this. It's like, oh, it's gone. Great.

All right. We don't even know who did this. Who started this? Now, let's just go and look at Ukraine. It's like, listen, it's gone. Great. All right. You know, I, we don't even know who did this. Who started this? Now, now let's just go and look at Ukraine. It's like, listen, no, no, we got to run the credit to see what happened here to learn. We're not doing enough digging to find out whether you're right or Fauci's right. We're not doing enough of that. We're not doing enough debates. We're not doing enough discourse. The world would love to see Fauci come with four people on his camp. You come with four people on your camp

and you guys face off in a three hour debate. January 24th, we had five hours of US Senate testimony in the Kennedy caucus room in the Senate building. We had over a dozen treating doctors with thousands of peer-reviewed publications to their name. Many thousands of treatment experience, we had pre-clinical sciences, vaccine developers, we had patients, we had attorneys, we invited all of those individuals, every single one of them to get a second opinion on COVID-19 pandemic response and none of them showed. I can tell you the problem is, they don't have the courage to show. I can tell you the problem with big tech They don't have the courage to face me. They don't And you feel crushed by them. I don't I have what what I have what they don't have

I have the truth and it's a kryptonite to them. It's absolute kryptonite to them You're right people have been screaming for help for two years and it's not new It's not old. It's not like this happens all the time. We don't have a million people slaughtered by a virus all the time. You're wrong about that. The bottom line is this is brand new. And this has been something very disturbing that we've seen. We've seen a complicit nature in the media, which has been total. You think at least a broadcaster here and there. Let me give you an example. We do have some courageous people in the media. Listen to this.

Laura Ingram, on Ingram Angle, two days ago, reviewed a dossier part of a release by Pfizer on the vaccine. With Joe LaDapoe, your surgeon general here in Florida. Laura Ingram brought up a report that indicated that Pfizer knew within 90 days of release, Pfizer knew about 1223 deaths that happened after taking their vaccine over 90 days. 1291 unique new diseases caused by the Pfizer vaccine. Do you know that the CEO of Pfizer was just on CNBC an hour ago? No discussion of any of those data. They were asking him about a fourth booster. It's as if CNBC and Fox are in two different worlds, two different worlds. What's going on is not usual. It's very unusual. It's not like you can go back and start,

you know, giving a montage of history and say, oh, I know this. Something is in the minds of people right now. There is a disturbia. You care about early treatment, but you've kind of never really got on stage to do it. You're saying that YouTube and Big Tap is squatching you, but you're not strong enough to do really do anything about it.

You're doing the best you can. I'm telling you, what matters here is the truth, and the truth, hot pursuit of it, and continuous and relentless presentation of the truth is far stronger than any suppression of big tech. And that's the reason why I have been extraordinarily successful in doctors in my circles. The average person does know about hydroxychloroquine.

The average person knows about Ivermectin. The average person now knows about monoclonal antibodies that are the drugs and sequence combination. Things could have been way worse if I wasn't here. Right. Okay. So that goes again back to, by the way, here's the other question for you. We wake up one morning, no one's talking about COVID anymore. I mean, it just seems like it happened the last six weeks, four weeks. Ukraine, Russia shows up. Boom, COVID disappears. Are we going to get people talking about COVID again or is it gradually going to kind of disappear and almost going to talk about it?

You know, those are decisions made by producers. I can tell you that I see the scenes from Ukraine. I've never been there, but it looks like a pretty reasonable place. Kiev looks pretty similar to a lot of European cities I've been to. I see people scrambling over, I see the Russian soldiers. I don't see an ounce of concern regarding COVID-19 in those people's eyes. Exactly. Right, they're running for their lives right now. What's happened with COVID is the fear greatly outpaced the reality. And you know who was really right about this was right after my seminal publication that we can treat COVID-19 came the Great Barrington Declaration. And the Great Barrington from Jay Badajar from Stanford, Martin called off from Harvard, and Sanitia Gupta from Oxford said, we don't have to overblow this thing.

All we need to do is protect the elderly who are at risk for COVID-19. And everybody go about their business as they are. They were right and everybody who went beyond the great barrington declaration turns out to be grossly wrong. And that is the entire media complex and the entire pandemic response out of Washington. Let me ask you, Tom, this is a question for both you and the doc.

What can our politicians, Congress, Senate do to say, look, we want a panel full day from people on both sides and different doctors and experts that we bring in to debate and the world to watch to see what really happened where your health to the fire, you know, as well as fouches held, you know, and bring people from both sides to talk about what really happened here because we got to learn to move on. Which politician or leader has the authority to push for that to happen? Well, both Congress and Senate have the ability to put together hearings because like what came out of Facebook, remember, not only were they talking about the control of the advertising market, which is a federal trade commission, Is there a monopoly here, hurting businesses?

But then there was also the subcommittee on, are we really harming youth? Are people committing suicide because their depression is accelerated by their addiction and the impact of social media? And those hearings come out. It takes a senator or congressman with guts to call and then compel. They can call hearings all the time. They do open hearings all the time and people decide not to show up. They're corporate counsel and they're peer-opening. Because they're a way to do a hearing that you have to show up.

Yeah, it's federal, yeah, they issue subpoenas. And usually it has- What do you need? What control do you need for that to happen? You usually need an incident that is sort of, you know, criminal or ultra high impact so that you can... This qualifies for them. Yeah. You can't sit in tough two years that cost a million people. Right.

But I think what's also been going on here, and that's what's needed. Do you need somebody with guns? No, I'm asking. Yeah. You need a couple of senators with guts that to pull. Rand Paul. Cruz,

Brubio, X, Traygaudy. I mean, all I'm saying is, this isn't something that is a left or right thing. We just want to know, I want to know what the hell happened. How are we going to be ready for the next one?

So, in my opinion, we need a Warren Commission on the COVID pandemic. The Warren Commission looked at many. You have to mention that one as well, though. Well, no, no, no, no, no, no, but the point is about the Warren Commission, it wasn't a in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world.

The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world.

The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world.

The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the world. The war in the to the doctors to autopsy to people that understand the the forensics and the who can start that. You can start that. Senator Johnson had the very first hearing he had was on cortical steroids. He had pure Corey as the lead witness. The very second one he had was on early treatment one. I was the lead. Third one, early treatment two, pure Corey back in the lead, multiple experts. Fourth one, we have 12, pure Corey back in the lead, multiple experts. Fourth one, we have 12 people in general. We're five Senate hearings into this. I'm telling you, the other side won't show and I love the idea of subpoenas. They won't show to face the truth.

What I'm saying is why don't we create what, what if we, if the people in Senate have the authority to make it that you have to show up. You go ahead and do something to get people to show up. Let me ask you this question. You're right. If at midterms, if midterms is a blood bath that everybody's predicting it to be, if midterms is a blood bath and they control how since Senate does that give them the authority to be able to push for this kind of a hearing or no?

Absolutely. Okay, so this midterm is gonna be very important for people that want to know What really happened we kind of need to make a Push on this one because if they win is the speaker the house gonna be McCart who's gonna be the speaker the house They're saying he's gonna be the one right in the car thing. Yeah, yeah That's kind of like the leading name that keeps popping up, right? Correct. And he doesn't seem like he's a pushover. He seems like he's going to want to push for something like this. He's not a liked guy there.

That's correct. Yeah. The hearings and say, hey, we're going to have a series of hearings in COVID. First we have the origin, the origin hearing. Then we have the public safety hearing. And then we're going to have the pharmaceutical hearing. And what you have to get, some people in their pat that have not been Lobby'd or received donations from big pharma because that's gonna impact you understand

Like if I'm a senator and I've got a lot of pharma behind me I'm not gonna be the guy that's gonna Yeah, but is there a number if it's 51% who cares if you did or not? I don't think is the the one that comes forward has to be one that is not beholds MacArthur. It's MacArthur. Can you pull up who MacArthur's funders are? Like who funded his campaign? Just because who was the one that talked across that that he took money away from Google? Who was the Jim Jordan? That's what Jim Jordan was. That's exactly what you need. So can you make that bigger so we can see it?

To the contributors that's who who's that Charles and put on a capital? Okay, that seems like a hedge fund come oil. Okay, auto co-part. I don't see any top industries go down, retired, republished, or real estate. Okay, so there is no form. It's okay. Good. This is good. So the fact that this guy is not funded by them. Go ahead. But what Tom's saying is the people that come in and speak have to not be beholden because they can just Here's though, but but they can do what Komi did or what Brennan. I don't say I don't recall. I don't care. Here's a point though. I don't care because when Komi spoke and the other guy Peter, what was his name? ZZ you know the guy with the last name that he was the FBI guy that he had the mean look yeah uh... what was the guy's name anyway so the fact that they have to go there is what i care about because i care about yeah peter struck i care about the fact that people are gonna be healthy you can lie

all you want i just want to see you do it listen people have anybody in the space i have way more than that with various clinical trial applications. What have you? People who are doing anything in the space of research in biomedical aren't going to have ties to a variety of funding sources. The pharmaceutical company's fund about two thirds of research and government funds about a third. Every person out there runs a two third, one third blend.

It's just a reality. The bottom line is you want the truth. You are frustrated. I can see the tension in you. You are frustrated that you have a sense that this has always been treatable, that the treatment has been suppressed. It's been suppressed at every level. Big tech down to our government agencies, down to our health care systems, you were a victim of that suppression since your health system did not have an outpatient protocol, a multi-drug protocol that they used from the very beginning. And the suppression of early treatment, it's my interpretation, is occurring for a reason.

The suppression of early treatment, the reason appears to me, is to basically create fear, suffering, hospitalization and death, and the hospitalization happened to you, but fortunately you didn't die, in order to prepare you to accept mass vaccination. And the mass vaccination is not a one-time event. It is something that's going to go in your body every three or six months indefinitely. The two appeared to be linked a year ago roughly. I went in a Tucker Carlson long program and I told Tucker I

said it appears to be clear. Those who are actively working the hardest to suppress early treatment are the same people who are working overtime to promote the vaccines. The two are linked. Do you know that the American Medical Association has a stated objective in September to abolish the use of Ivermectin, to abolish the use of Ivermectin. To abolish the use of Ivermectin. Now, Ivermectin is supported by over 70 studies, over 33 randomized trials.

It has, it's not a perfect drug, but it has about a 50% benefit to patients who take it, reducing the intensity and duration of symptoms. It's supported by 20 countries that feature Ivermectin as its base of a treatment protocol. Over three dozen non-governmental organizations, including multiple American organizations, support the use of Ivermectin. Why would the AMA have a stake in this? Why would they even care about Ivermectin? Why would anybody even care?

If it's a safe, innocuous drug, why don't they have a campaign against Benadryl? Why don't they have a campaign against a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, the American College of Sexist and Gynecology. Why do they wildly support mass vaccination and none of those organizations support treatment at all? Is that why Ivermacken was labeled a horse the warmer, used by veterinarians? That would seem to be the common thing. Why would the NIH and the FDA come out with misinformation? That's misinformation that it's only a horse the warmer. Why would our director of the National Anthem and Immunology Branch

say, through this quote, no evidence for Ivermectin? I just rattled off 70 studies, 33 randomized trials. You can't say something incorrect. These public health officials, they work for us. The employment relationship is they work for us, not vice versa. I can't have an employee that reports to me, give wrong information in public. We've had public officials who work for us state that there's no evidence for Ivermectin. That is malfeasance. That is wrong doing by people in positions of authority. We can't have our employees mislead America. And Rogan called out Sanjay Gupta to his face on this exact point, right?

We can't have the media mislead the public. So Sanjay Gupta, as so many in the media, he can't mislead the public. I'm a doctor in a position of authority. I can't mislead the public either. I have an obligation to describe risks and benefits. By the way, any entity or any person who said get vaccinated has broken the law.

We have laws that say that for any biological product, it must be presented in fair balance. There must be risks and benefits. No one can bark a command getting get vaccinated. They didn't say they've broken the law. They've broken the law. They've broken the law. They've broken the law by presenting the vaccines

without risks and benefits. They cannot do that. You know that because you see any other commercial for any other product on TV, it says what the benefits are than it says warning. Side effects may include, right? But how can the vaccines be presented with no fair balance of risk and benefits? It's breaking the law. From the highest position, our president of the United States has broken the law.

You cannot present information on biological products without risks and benefits. A little hold them accountable, though. We know who they work for. They work for us. We're holding them accountable. Right. To Pat's point about hearings, there's something that comes out. This is going to have to come out. And this is part of healthcare reform in the United States.

We know that there's one simple truth. Sick people are very profitable, healthy people are not. We know that old drugs with expired patents, not expired efficacy, but expired patents, a set of mid-offent, everybody can make them cheaply, because there's no longer patent protection. New drugs are crazy profitable, older drugs less so. We understand that's just, that's the way it works. And pharma in this country, you can go back and you look at a movie that Pat both in Iowa watched, because we love Matthew McConaughey's work,

The Texas Buyers Club. Now that's a house. That's a house. That's a house. Yep, the Texas Buyers Club. Now that's a house. That's a house-buyers club, yep. That Dallas Buyers Club. That was a Hollywood interpretation of a true story of an individual who became HIV positive and started being an independent consumer getting

as much research as they could, which is what you were encouraging. And then he started going to Mexico to get certain drugs and put them together because he was reading that around the world techniques and simple cocktails, really cocktails, were giving these people with HIV positive a fighting chance so that their HIV didn't go to ARC. Or they cross over to what really would kill them back in those days, help me out with

the pronouncing it, Carp C's Sarcoma. Yeah, Carp Cropos C's Sarcoma. Carp Cropos C's Sarcoma, thank you. Jesus, just put it in the whole word, man. But at the time the people that stopped the Dallas Buyers Club was pharmaceuticals went to the FBI that is a true story and went to get this guy stopped and then they also helped border agent stop him. So

helped border agent stop him. So, pharma, standing in the way of things in our healthcare system has been going on for 50 years in a very, very big way. But, you know, this is so. But hearings, I think, would expose a lot of these things and the origin side, I mean. But this is so unique to COVID. I'm on the page.

But COVID is unique compared to all these other things. If I have two patients in the ICU, you with COVID, and the next person, an Afghan refugee, with another condition. And I want to use Ivermectin in the Afghan refugee, because I'm supposed to, actually, government protocol, say I'm supposed to, because it decontaminates them from parasitic infections.

But I want to use Ivermectin in you based on 33 randomized trials and a lot of good beneficial data in COVID. I can't use Ivermectin in the COVID patient according to the hospital, but I can use it in the Afghan refugee. So you just made the point that I made, and I'm not attacking you, but you just made the point I made a half hour ago, where if I work for a health system, I am tied to my supervisors and what they put on paper as these are our drug of choice and these are accepted protocols.

But if I'm a physician and private practice, this is another thing that's part of our health, you know, healthcare industry in the US, as a private physician, I don't have to make that choice. is another thing that's part of our health care industry in the US as a private physician, I don't have to make that choice. I can help the Afghan refugee that maybe was brought in by missionary to my office or I can help the person that walked in.

As a private physician, I'm not tied to that because it's not illegal to prescribe Ivermectin. Yes or no? Yes. It's only in COVID though. So if I have the Afghan refugee and then I have a third patient over here who's got something else I can still use Ivermectin. You see what I mean? I can use Ivermectin for anything I want to As a private doctor, except for a health if I work for a health system and they say you will be fired if you don't

If you are not if you are getting outside of what our drug of choice because they have only for COVID, only for COVID, what I'm saying is for anything, no, no, no, only for COVID. Now, if a doctor with any health system wants to use Ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine for anything other than COVID, they're free to do so. There's not a single person that would come up to me, let's take hydroxychloroquine. That's a very diverse drug. I don't know if that's correct. And I want cancer protocols that are more experimental and people are told, hey, these

is what we're using for uterine cancer. This is the drug of choice. This is the protocol we have. And if you're going to be here, this is what you do. If you want to be a researcher, go to research hospital and get a research position and do experimental stuff. Listen, I take care of patients every day. I am telling you, I can walk into any hospital in America

and I can prescribe hydroxychloroquine for a range of conditions unlabeled and off label. There is no question. There's no problems. But the minute I do it for COVID, then I've crossed the line. And the same thing is true for Ivermectin. Okay, and who's drawing that line in your opinion?

Who's drawing that line you've crossed on what you prescribed Ivermack for COVID? I've crossed the line. Who drew the line in your example? Specifically. In the example, it will start with Medical Executive Committee and the pharmacy formulary decisions. So at the health system, you're employed, right? Correct. Right. Okay. But only for COVID. okay, and who's above them that they're following? Who's above them that would be the health system and who's above them? They almost certainly receive federal money so they have FAQs that are coming down for COVID relief funds See now we've started the hearing now we've started the hearing paths talking about. You see? Okay. And who's who's pushing them? Just keep going. There is a willpower.

There is a force that wants to stop treatment of patients with COVID. And it is resulting in massive loss of life and hospitalization. It's clear. These drugs are harmless. There is an oblivion to monoclonal antibodies. There's an oblivion to the Pfizer drug. You guys didn't even know about this stuff. It should be up on billboards all over the place.

It's across all treatment, EUA and people have just taken hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin as the lightning rods. I had ABC news come in Dallas a couple weeks ago and they wanted to do a basically a hit job on Ivermectin. I said, fine, I'll talk to him. I'm afraid. So I've done, I said, listen, the first year of the pandemic was hydroxychloroquine-based protocols.

That's fine. Second year was Ivermectin-based protocols. We're in the third year. Fizer-based protocols. That's fine. Don't have any problem with it. Don't eat Ivermectin-based protocols. We're in the third year. Pfizer-based protocols. That's fine. Don't have any problem with it. Don't need Ivermectin anymore. Do you know there's in South Africa,

Dr. Chetty and Dr. Burrentios in South America? Those two drugs got so, quote, controversial, generic safe drugs becoming controversial should never happen. They said, forget it. We'll treat COVID without these drugs. And they do fine. So there are protocols.

As long as we use enough drugs, we can take an edge off the virus and prevent hospitalization and death. But the will, there is a will and a desire to block all treatment, to never mention any treatment. And the media is complicit in this will. If the media wasn't complicit, we'd have occasional reviews. We're never getting them. And ultimately, is this all just one big case of follow the money? There is an overwhelming desire to get a needle in every arm. It is so clear. You hear vaccine morning, noon, and night. I've never said the word vaccine so many times in my life. People can't do that. Is that because there's no money in natural immunity?

There's money in vaccines. There's money in getting a Pfizer shot. Number, Durneshot, J&J. Is that the, is it ultimately, is it a money play? Listen, it's the same with Sinovac and CoronaVac. It's the same with the dead virus vaccine in China. They got people on their knees in Indonesia. If they don't take Sinovac, they can't get a government check.

There is a desire to get a shot in everybody on a regular basis, and it doesn't even matter if there's money or not involved. It doesn't even matter what type of shot it is. But it's in the minds of people that the only thing they can be done by COVID is to take a shot. So check this out. I want you to do me a favor. So you just pulled up the story.

The Pfizer vaccine has only 1,291 side effects. This came out a week ago. So do me a favor and go back, go back, and I want you to type this into some, make it bigger so everybody in the audience can see it. Make it bigger. Just keep zooming in a little bit more. OK.

Type in the following. Fizer, vaccine, Pfizer vaccine, 1291 with the comma. Put a comma right. Yep. Two two two nine one side effects. Okay. Side effects. And then click search. Now go to news. Oh, you're on duck. Go. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, take that. Take that just to control copy paste. Yeah, just go there and copy paste. Take that and copy paste and go to Google. Go to Google and type in, control, they go. Click on that.

So now top story is what? Go a little closer. C-H-T says Pfizer and it will be a baby. Which is by who though? By Yahoo, finest. Now click and watch what happens. What do you see at the top? Russia? No, no, no, no, no No, no, no, the page you're looking for isn't here. So now go back go back

Go back and go to the ABC story click on that right there all right that is an ABC Organization go up is an ABC organization. Go up. Is it ABC? It is not an it's an ABC dot net. That's not an ABC dot. I don't know if it's a same organization or not. Do you see an ABC dot net or ABC dot com all the way at the top? It's not it's Australia dot net. So Australia. Okay, so Australia. Well, so George Christiansen says elites have suddenly started hiding vaccinated death statistics. Here's why that's wrong. Okay, let's see it. Keep going up to read it. Now let's see what our argument is going to be and we got the doc here.

Corona checks are meant to have a fact check quickly. Newsletters are meant to get a five-year-old. You can say, okay, Corona check number 103. In this week's newsletter, we can check in a congressional federal bench, a general attorney who took a Facebook to suggest incorrectly that the government was hiding comment. We also check in his partner, the colleague Craig Kelly and Gerard Renek, who has shared some misleading

information about a document from vaccine manufacturer Pfizer. No, the government hasn't suddenly started hiding death statistics, data, okay, go up a little bit. Let's see what they say. Outspoken Nationals, MP and vaccine skeptic, we're seeing one of the most, you know, we can see, okay, in Facebook, can you get to the point, the post-perfeatures,

a chart taken from a website showing the number of COVID-19 deaths in our vaccination status, the chart ends on January 22, 2022, after three weeks rising, that amongst the double vaccinated people, and just like that, they stop telling us the vaccine status of COVID deaths reads a caption added to the image, but there has been no change to the way COVID-19 that statistics are being reported. In fact, then SW, which

currently accounts for 36% Australia's COVID-19 deaths was the only state to ever consistently report that's by vaccination. Okay, go a little lower. And so then go other is reporting deaths, whether they were vaccinated or not. Right. So now go back to the other article that you have, the 1291, the one on the duck.co that you showed us. No, not this one.

The one you showed me. The one you had up, which one did you have up? Was this the one? Okay. The FDA was forced by a judge to release clinical data on COVID vaccines back in January in a 55,000-page, so the just so released. FD has originally wanted to hide the data of 75 years and release it to 2096 because of the course. Of course, the FD is basically engaged in a criminal conspiracy to COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID vaccine should never have been approved. This was obvious from the very beginning when animal trials were skipped and the Trump administration elfated operation of war speed and now it's undeniably true. We have the clinical data and its horrific. Hiding out in one appendix, okay, go down. Less 1,291 side effects here in joy. And it goes through all of them. Yeah, so this is the actual document here.

It's pages and pages and pages of side effects. It just keeps going. But this is the first release of a few dozen pages of 400,000 pages that Pfizer had. Pfizer knew within 90 days, 90 days that there were 1,223 deaths. I'm telling you, it is an obligation of a pharmaceutical company.

And there was very few people vaccinated back then. The obligation of a pharmaceutical company, they typically get to few people vaccinated back then. Their obligation of a pharmaceutical company, they typically get to 50 deaths, they just pull a drug off the market. They say, listen, this is gonna be awful. And if they're not, usually the FDA tells them, listen, this is not looking good. Five deaths gets a black box warning,

50 deaths is off the market. Pfizer had on their books 1,223 deaths, and they didn't say a word. on their books, 1,223 deaths, and they didn't say a word. I don't know if this is true or not, and I don't know what's behind this. I just want to hear it. So all I'm saying, and I want to hear it. I want people to be up there and folks like yourself on others to debate, hash it out, investigate. Let's put a hearing behind it and see what comes out of it. That's what I'm interested in. The truth here is not of question.

These are basically court order documents. So you know this is true. You know this is true. Pfizer knew about 1,223 deaths. You know this, too, because the court order document in Pfizer provided it. Let's have them be held accountable to it publicly and answer for it.

Let's put the COD in. By the way, have you taken a vaccine? Have you taken any of the vaccines? I've taken every vaccine in the vaccine schedule that's safe and effective that I'm supposed to take, but I have not taken one of the investigational vaccines because I already had COVID and in me, the risks of the vaccine far outweigh any benefits. And I haven't taken the vaccine because I don't want to lose my life. You haven't taken the vaccine. I haven't taken a COVID vaccine because I don't want to lose my life. Is that good enough? Yeah. Yeah. You have the choice to take over. You have the choice. Yeah. And about a third of the people in the world haven't

taken one of these vaccines. And they have a similar desire. They don't want to lose their lives. We had truckers shut down Ottawa because they don't want to take one of these vaccines and lose their life. We've had people protesting all over the world because they don't want to lose their life with a vaccine. Isn't that a fair concern? Now what do you save somebody says? Well, COVID-964,000 people died. 1200 and what was the number you said that died from the vaccine? 1291. 1291. 1290 days. No, that's 1291. It's how many side effects? It's a different number. You got 1223. It's a different number.

You got 1223. The 1223 is within 90 days. 1223 within 90 days. So somebody may say, well, 1223 compared to 964, I'm willing to take the risk to take the vaccine. What would you say to that? Listen, that's 1223 within 90 days. How many people are vaccinated in 90 days?

Maybe 30 million. We're up to, our CDC is telling us that they have in their vaccine averse event reporting system, 24,000 deaths. They have 24,000 deaths, which occur within a couple days of taking the needle. People walk in. 24,000. 24,000.

There's a paper by Pantas Atos Encelement using U.S. Census data and vaccine administration data. The estimate could be as high as 187,000 Americans have walked in and voluntarily taken the vaccine and lost their lives. Now, let me tell you, it's not a one-for-one. Oh, I'll lose my life with a shot, or I'll get COVID and lose my life. There's an analysis by cost-offen colleagues that said, listen, if you're 65 years old and you've got a choice, you're better off forgetting the vaccine and taking your chances

because you may not get COVID. And if you get COVID, you may have a mild case. And even if you have a more severe case, you can get treatment. Then if you get treatment, you can be spared hospitalization and death. So when you actually do the calculation, it's far more risky to take a vaccine and lose your life.

Then for go the vaccine. So in me, I am telling you, I've done the analysis. I'm more likely to die with the vaccine than ever with another version of COVID. So I'm not going to make a choice. That's going to risk my life. That's the reason why people are protesting. That's the reason why people want this shut down.

That's the reason why people are walking off the job. People are giving up their careers because of this because they don't want to lose their life with the vaccine. People are losing an entire military career. There's doctors walking off the job. Nurses walking off the job. I took the meningococcal vaccine. I'm, my kids have taken the meningococcal for you. I've taken hepatitis B. I take all the vaccines that are safe and effective. I would never walk off the job because the hepatitis B vaccine. But I'm going to walk off the job for the COVID-19 vaccine because patients are dying of the vaccine. That's the problem. I don't know pure speculation and opinion, so there's

no facts behind this, that's just an opinion. I don't know if most people who are not taking a vaccine or not taking it because they don't want to die. I think most people who are not taking it just don't want to be told what to do. I think majority people is more about do. Don't tell me what to do my body. I don't think it's about, if I take it, I'm gonna die. I know a lot of people that are pretty influential people in my circle who have not taken a shot for one reason. Don't tell me what to do my body. Don't tell me what I got to do my body.

Now, some people are probably not wanted to take it. There's a percentage that doesn't want to take you because they think it's a conspiracy theory. There's a percentage that doesn't want to take you because I think you're gonna conspiracy theory. There's a percentage that doesn't want to take you because I think you're going to die, the concerns that they have. But I think the majority is kind of like, this is my body I get to do what I want to do. I think just the opposite. Listen, the word is out. The word is out. We've had 1.1 million verified vaccine injuries reported to our CDC, and that is a gross under report. 86% of the time, it's a doctor, a nurse,

or a coroner who reports it to the CDC. Do you know how many are not reported? The number of people who have injured, been injured or died with a vaccine, it is so clear. Every patient I see, I say, doctor, I'm really worried about this. Listen, this is a worry. People are worried about their health.

It's not like, listen, if they didn't want to be told what to do with their body, we would have had doctors and nurses walk off the job over the hepatitis back. Be vaccine. No, it won't mock stuff the job for that. It's not what you said at all. It's not about personal choice. It's about fear of being injured or dying with this vaccine. It's not any vaccine.

It's this vaccine. Yeah, I don't know about that, but we'll see. Have you been following this story with the soccer players? Nobody can verify what's going on. We're having record numbers of soccer players on the field. We're having record numbers of pilots, the U.S. airlines, a pilot association, has had a skyrocketing of deaths in 2021 since the vaccine program. Do you know there are multiple insurance companies that are reporting record mortality among working-age individuals and they say it's not COVID due to their respiratory illness. We've had a German healthcare insurance company come out and by extrapolation,

they think 3.6% of the German population is injured now due to the vaccines. This is all over you guys. It's not just a matter of free will, what do you mean you don't know about it? People take vaccines, people comply, people do things that are reasonable. They're not doing this because they know it's a health threat. Well, based on the last five minutes, I don't know what I'm saying, you're right,

you're wrong, we're here to ask questions, you're the expert. I think it's pretty clear why they don't want you talking. Based on your last literally literally few minutes of speaking, you're basically encouraging people not to get the vaccine. It's not an anti-mandate thing, it's not a don't tell me what to do with my body thing. It's you believe the vaccine causes death, period, full stop. I listen, I've looked at things very carefully. There's no other explanation of why such record numbers of people are dying shortly after

taking the vaccine. There are analyses that are published on the pre-print server, one by McLaughlin and colleagues. This is early in the pandemic with only 1,200 deaths. They reviewed all the deaths. They read the vignettes. They coded the deaths. They said did the vaccine cause that it was of some other? 86% of the time, there's no other cause. 50% of the deaths occur within two days to take in the shot.

80% occur within a week. It's becoming clear and clear and clear, and you say this all the time, you need, we talking about a commission, you need to debate Fauci, or someone on the Fauci camp, and there needs to be some clear answers here Well, what? No, listen, this is not In my view an issue of debate the deaths need to be explained sure But there's no if a CDC is sitting on 24,000 death reports Don't you think they owe America a report? I do. Okay. Aren't you worried you haven't seen a report? I am

Why don't you think you've seen a report? There's something a hot Bingo That's why we're doing these meetings and that's why we appreciate you by the who do people say you look like just curious If I'm not the only person I have a feeling you've been told this before John McRome I've been looking up every angle. I'm like that's Patrick man. No, that's John McRome yeah, I see the brothers, but you look like you play tennis or no. No, I don't. I wish you can't be serious. Macala. That was good. Are you a sports guy or no?

Do you be? Yeah. What do you play? What's? Well, you know, I'm a big runner. So I ran a marathon in every state in the United States. I'm pretty sick. And so seriously, so that's the reason why I have a lot of it. That's the reason I have a lot of endurance. I can basically... I can actually... Respect. That's the reason why I can beat YouTube.

That's the reason why I can be Google. Do you know virtually every household in America knows my name? Do you know that? And that's against complete suppression of big tech. Look how bad they're losing. So you ran a marathon in West Virginia. I did. You did? Yeah. Aren't you concerned about an immunomacroscopus, a little couple of kinoconiosis? I was far away from those minds. Okay. All right. Hey, Doc, really enjoyed you coming out. Thank

you so much. I'm sure the audience enjoyed it. And folks, if you're watching this, you know, this entire time, you know, you would have thought Twitter would have taken you off But he's on Twitter. You can go follow him on Twitter and see what he has to say We're gonna put the link below make sure you do that in the bottom so that he can follow his content on Twitter And this is probably gonna end up being all over social people gonna cut it up and put a different place on YouTube But you can only find this thing on Spotify Apple or Google Google podcast

Stitcher. Always pay some money. Yes. Doc, once again, thanks for coming up. Thank you. Take care everybody. Bye-bye.