The Adam and Dr. Drew Show - #1777 Bioethical Transgressions

Episode Date: October 6, 2023

Dr. Drew is joined again by Mark Geragos for some important conversations about the medical community today. From bioethical transgressions, to curtailing the excesses of the federal government, and some new technologies that are assisting in various ailments like cancer. Dr. Drew mentions how some magnets are being used to change the chemistry of the brain with astounding results. Please support our sponsors: Simplisafe.com/ADAM2 Justworks.com/Podcast

Oh, that's just me, Perez Hilton, drinking all the tea that goes on in this world. And with the way social media is, I just can't get enough. I'm obsessed. It's like every day something new and scandalous comes out and I want it all. I'm the OG of entertainment gossip and if you are like me and have an unrelenting thirst for all the drama that's flying around, you should listen to my podcast, the Perez Hilton Podcast, available wherever you get your podcasts. Recorded live at Corolla One Studios with Mark Garagos and board-certified physician

and addiction medicine specialist, Dr. Drew Pinsky. You're listening to The Mark and Dr. Drew Show. Yeah, you are. Get it on. Get it on. No choice but to get it on, man, to get it on. Mark Gergos, Dr. Drew, Adam and Absentia. And we have had a glorious week together.

It has been fantastic. You know, a lot of people say that we should do this more often. I have to talk to your wife. Yeah, that's who you got to get through. I know. And we're close. We're getting more we're softening the target. Exactly. We're both

working on it from different sides. It's really funny. I'm going to tell Susan she's the cock block, but she probably wouldn't appreciate that. No, no, she would. She would go, yeah, that's what I'm going to tell Susan she's the cock block, but she probably wouldn't appreciate it. No, no, she would. She would go, yeah, that's what I'm doing. That sounds like her. But you, at the last, you teased something at the point we were leaving our last episode, and you were talking about immunity and skin in the game and how this is the problem in these decisions these folks are making. Well, look, there's various immunities in the law. And as most things in the law, they start off with a very good purpose or at least an

altruistic purpose. We don't want people to second guess what they're doing. With the police, we don't want police to second guess what they're doing. You know, with the police, we don't want police to second guess split second decisions. But that doesn't mean that they should be, you know, you shouldn't take that to the point where you lose all perspective that when somebody has basically assassinated or murdered a citizen that there's no redress. Well, then you have kind of immunities for prosecutors. And right now, at least, prosecutors, even if they withhold evidence, even if they keep somebody in custody when they investigative niche, they get immunity from being sued, not only prosecutorial, but civil. And now, when it comes to anything COVID-related, the pharmaceutical companies, as part of the Emergency Authorization Act that was passed, as part of the Emergency Authorization Act that was passed. They have immunities from all of the kind of deleterious effects

that these vaccines that you've chronicled have caused, which, by the way, goes against everything that we've learned over the last decades about how we do it. You talked about Vioxx. We were taking Vioxx off because there were deaths. A few. A very small number, but we took that seriously. We not only took it seriously, but we did a cost-benefit analysis.

We said that as a population, we were not going to risk a handful of deaths for basically the common good. So there is a cost-benefit analysis with all drugs, with all pharmaceuticals. But we didn't do that here. And we continue to refuse to do it. to refuse to do it. We've so tilted that there is no analysis. We've just said we're going to give blanket immunity. We're not going to weigh. We're just going to say that this is so compelling a problem that we're going to give blanket immunity is is two two things occur to me when when i see how they behave with this stuff one is is this simply an hysteria are they hysterical and they're just in their own hysterical bubble or is there something about this thing we don't

know like it's a bioweapon and there's research behind it or something that – I don't mean the vaccine. I mean the original illness. The housing is the illness. Yeah. Well, I've always thought – by the way, now that you talk about lab leak and everything else. You can talk about it now. You couldn't even talk about it. Talk about free speech by the way we were uh adam and i and i i think you two as well we were we

were banned repeatedly for talking about it and i always said the thing that gave me such great pause is how did the government the chinese government know almost instantaneously to shut down that area right in that and i mean that just did not compute just from a common sense standpoint right and what are the odds that a wet market in close proximity to a lab that does this kind of research is going to be the ground zero so those things did not compute but to your point what do they know what you what is what is the or what was and what continues to be the concern because the chinese still have a great concern because they continue to this day doing shutdowns and lockdowns that we now kind of mock without any institutional memory of how crazy we got. But that's what worries me about what you just said.

Is there something we don't know? Right. And that's causing them to push this thing so vigorously. And by the same token, last show we were talking about how the spike protein is the source of a lot of the toxicity. It's sort of interesting to me the vaccine that create a lot of spike protein are not being allowed by the Chinese government. It's like, do they know something?

Why is that? Yeah, do they know something about the spike protein they've been studying? There is this woman I keep interviewing, Lee Kuan Wan, I think is her name. She's at Dr. Ed TV also. And she was a Chinese virologist, and she's a very bright woman. And she was working on the coronavirus backbone. She was working, and it was sent to her to be worked on by the People's Liberation Army. It was a military operation. And she started asking questions, and her supervisor said, you need to stop or you will be disappeared. And she got out of there at that point.

So, yeah, wow is right. Do you have a hypothesis or a theory, or are you just asking the question as to what this could potentially be that would still cause this level of scrutiny, for lack of a better term. I worry that they know that the viral infection causes some sort of neurological something, where it's amyloid or something. where it's amyloid or something. And perhaps they know that the virus is so malleable that it will continue to get around everything no matter what they do, but could, has a measurable potential to turn back into something bad. So that's what I worry about. I see no evidence that either are true, but that's what I worry about.

So I'm looking for that evidence everywhere. In the meantime, what I keep seeing is worse problems with the vaccine than those I'm looking for for the original illness or the combination of the vaccine and the illness is the problem. Because no one is teasing these things out. That's what's interesting to me because I always ask the question, is this a result of the virus or is it a result of the vaccine?

Or both. Or both. Which is most people. Most people have both. And so, fine. It's both. I don't know. But they're not asking any questions. You can't,

what's astonishing to me, again, back to this word that keeps coming up for us, is you're not allowed to, you certainly won't be published. You will not get past preprint if you ask any question that as a result of answering the question, you could implicate the vaccine. Even if you're not looking to implicate the vaccine, if there's a possibility of implicating the vaccine, no. There's a Danish woman I interviewed. Again, I've interviewed all these people. It's been very interesting. I was going to say, I'm surprised that you're allowed to still do that.

Yeah. There you go. That's an endorsement of free speech. Well, it has been challenging. We've been put on YouTube jail many times and whatnot, and we have to put a disclaimer up every time we talk to somebody. And I try to tow the party line, but I'm just interested in what these people have to say. But this Danish physician researcher did an excellent study where she showed early in the pandemic that 90% of the adverse events came from 10% of the batches of vaccine. This, I think, was Moderna vaccine, if I remember right.

And that's an astonishing, and it was a clear, I'm a beautifully done study, clear as day. These 10% were responsible for everything. And you would think, and it made it through preprintprint and peer review and everyone agreed it was an excellent study two years sitting on the sideline no one would publish it two years you would think the fear because of the fear of what you would think they'd rush to go let's take us figure out what's happening there so we can reduce the risk of this vaccine. No. It implicated the vaccine, therefore no publication. Two years. Now it's been published

and then nobody pays any attention to it. It's crazy. When you interviewed, I'm going to have to watch some of these. When you did the interview, were there any external forces that were brought to

bear i mean did anybody come down on us or anything not formally that i remember of course on twitter and whatnot there's this there's a weird chorus of people that just go wild if you if you say anything slightly concerning about vaccines in any way, they just go berserko. Just raising a simple question like we get crushed for this one, for going, hey, this is the first vaccine in history being recommended for populations for which it has not been formally studied, i.e. pregnant women.

First time in history. And then they go, well, we have so much respect. We have all this experience. We have all this experience. Yeah, but we do have all this experience, but they're also not collecting that data. So I'd like to see that data and just tell me it's okay. It's good. Fine. But you need a control. The Annals of Internal Medicine in May put a journal out that finally started asking some real questions. And they posed the question, why aren't we doing these age-matched control prospective studies? It'd be so easy to do.

Vaccine, not vaccine, go forward, do it for six months, a year or something, and that's it. Nobody is doing it. In that same journal, quietly, they showed that fluvoxamine and budesonide together were excellent in early COVID. These were things that people were crushed for suggesting. Crushed. Careers ended. You're laughing. You're saying, wow, again, astonishing.

Let me talk about our friends at Simply Safe. You're squeezing in one last summer getaway before you take off. Protect your home with the latest innovation from Simply Safe Home Security. It's their 24-7 live guard protection. With the fast monitoring, Simply Safe agents can deter intruders through smart alarm, wireless camera, warning them they're being recorded and that police are on the way. This must create all kinds of interesting problems for a defense lawyer, having these Ring, these SimpliSafe cameras going. The best home security of 2023, according to U.S. News and World Report.

Adam has it. A lot of guys here have it. We like it because there's no long-term contracts. It's easy to install yourself. You can move it with you when you move. You can take it with you. It goes right back up again. And right now, our listeners can get 20% off any SimpliSafe system. When you sign up for fast

protect monitoring, it's a huge offer. It's limited time. Again, that is fast protect monitoring at simplisafe.com slash Adam two S I M P L I safe.com slash Adam two number two. One more time, simplisafe.com slash Adam two. There's more time simply safe.com slash adam2 there's no safe like simply safe all right i want to tell you about miracle made everybody your temperature at night of course impacts your quality of sleep god adam is like you just have to have a fan and an air conditioner okay yeah if you wake up too hot or too cold check out miracle maids bed sheets self-cooling temperature regulating silverregulating, silver-infused fabrics. You will sleep the perfect temperature all night long. There's self-cleaning, that is the silver, prevents up to 99.7% of bacterial growth.

Stay cleaner, smell fresh three times longer than other sheets. It's comfort and quality and cleanliness. Miracle-Made sheets are comfortable, luxurious without the high price tag. A nice or nicer than sheets in some five-star hotels. You'll see it. If you try it, you'll understand what I'm talking about. And they have a 30-day money-back guarantee. How bad could that be? If you are not 100% satisfied, you will get a full refund. Sleep clean with Miracle. It is Miracle-Made. Right, Ben? Go to trymiracle.com slash ADS to try Miracle-Made sheets today.

Whether you're buying them for yourself or for a loved one, if you order today, you can save over 40% off. And if you use our promo code ADS at checkout, you'll get three free towels and save an extra 20%. Upgrade your sleep with MiracleMade. So, wow, indeed. This has been quite a week, by the way. I don't know This has been quite a week, by the way. I don't know why I have to wait. How long has it been since the last week we did together? At least two months, yeah?

Yeah, probably six weeks, two months. It's way too long. Okay, we'll have Adam killed or something. But before we get you out of here, I've got about 10 more minutes with you. There's another case I wanted to bring up, which is Biden versus Missouri. Have you seen this one? Oh, my God. This case, for those who are paying attention or maybe not, it was brought in federal court. was a district court judge who at the time was pilloried and mocked for an opinion where he had basically restrained the administration from their influence, not just the administration,

the FBI, the CDC, I mean, you name it, kind of went from the administration on down into all the tentacles as to what they were doing, including the FBI, towards social media companies and trying to inhibit speech. So it goes up through the, I believe it was the 11th circuit. And they wrote an opinion that I invite anybody who's listening to this to read, because if you take a look at the factual synopsis oh yeah and then the law yeah the facts are very clear as they lay it out yeah boy it is it's damning makes you shudder it's damning and and and the again astonishing that everybody doesn't see it that way that's

just and it's going to the supreme court, right? Well, it's clearly will. And by the way, I, you know, I love to prognosticate. I will prognosticate that that will be a six, three, uh, affirming of the opinion. If they actually vote to hear it. I mean, they may just say, we're not going to, and it's just deny cert but i will tell you reading it it's it is to quote you it's a damning findings of factual uh uh underpinnings for what was going on these suggestions of and they kind of mock the 11th Circuit kind of mocks the arguments by the government in defense of what they were doing. So, yeah, what you call strong suggestion, we call strong arming, basically.

Yes, that's right. And the idea that we're the, I always joke when I'm talking to a jury and I'm knocking on the door and saying, we're the government, we're here to help. This one was more like knocking on the door saying, we're the government, we're here to strongly suggest you don't do this and you take this down and you do it. You're not doing it fast enough. It really should give people pause across the ideological spectrum. pause across the ideological spectrum. Yes. This is something you can't say, but it really, the left used to be.

The champions of this, the champions of this. This should be a left leaning, left side of the aisle prosecution. And I actually almost got involved in this thing. And several friends of mine are in it. And, you know, Jay, people whose careers are ruined. One of the most. Jay, I used as a declarant in several of our lawsuits. He would, this poor guy was, talk about, cancel doesn't even do it justice. Yes.

And this guy is a, to say he's a mensch does not even like begin to describe how great a guy he is and by the way could you get better bona fides yeah you know pre yes pre-covid trying to destroy him but um here this is somebody who is schooled as opposed to some uh somebody who's got a master's in social work. Somebody. Somebody. Yes, he was a physician, a brilliant epidemiologist, a celebrated teacher, and a great guy. He comes across just perfectly when you talk to him. But that was the playbook.

They only went after people with real pedigrees because those were the ones that they were worried about. Those were the ones that endangered their control. And the other guy is a guy named Aaron Cariotti. You should know this guy. He's a psychiatrist. And he was the head of also brilliant psychiatrist, a decorated teacher, best teacher at the medical school at UC Irvine for several years in a row or something like that. I don't know the details.

But he also was the chairman of the bioethics department and committee. And he said, listen, I've been talking about bioethics my entire career. The time has come when I have to put my money where my mouth is. I have to walk the walk rather than just talk the talk. You don't have the data to mandate this vaccine to young people. You just don't have it. And therefore, the mandate from a bioethical standpoint is not defensible. Immediately put on leave and ultimately fired. Give me a break. Give me a break. By the way, I hadn't followed that, but did he try to challenge it legally?

Do we know? I don't know if this is it. You know, I would love to talk with him. All right. With you. Okay. And talk the legal and the medical and do a dive on that. Well, let's get you on that streaming show I do.

Again, we've got so many interesting people that we're kind of booked up, but yes, let's do that, and we'll get you and him in there. He's a very nice guy, very careful in how he expresses himself and selects his language and things. And he has been writing about this, clear about this, and he is concerned about the bioethics of this. That's been his career, and the bioethical transgressions have been egregious. And he's just pointing that out.

Now, once this does or does not go to the Supreme Court, let's say they say it just stands such as it is, what happens then? Well, I think that there is a argument that could be made. That's why I'm asking about the legal. I think that there's an argument that can be made that you could try to seek legal redress against specifically the university who had taken some action against them. Yeah. And what about you're going to have issues of immunities you're going to have issues about statute of limitations you're

going to have all kinds of issues that i could highlight but you could also argue tolling i mean there's a whole host of things you could probably argue and i think maybe you might have something to pursue. We promised a little bit more on immunities. It's kind of, I'm going to let you go in a minute, but before you do tell me what can be done about these immunities? Is there anything? I think that part of what you have to do when finding them, I'm, you know, it's interesting because just last week, one of the cases i have that's in the eighth circuit which was a case where the kid it was a young teenager who had a gun to his head and the and the mother

called uh the cops the cops came told him to drop the gun mind you he's out in the woods it's not like he's threatening anybody tell him to drop the. As soon as he starts to drop the gun, they killed him. And that was an immunity case. It's been dismissed twice. I've gone up to the Court of Appeal. They lost again. The police department lost again. And in a two-to-one decision, we reversed it again.

And just last week, they denied the petition of the Benton Police Department to rehear that case in bank, meaning the entire Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. That may be what happens in the 11th Circuit in the Biden case, where they asked for an in-bank hearing. If not, then each one of these cases would end up with a cert petition at the U.S. Supreme Court. So you got to kind of work through the system. Right. And let's say you get to the Supreme Court with this. Will it just apply to this case or will the immunities be sort of- No, it could literally. I've been trying. I've had four of these now from the various circuits across the country, trying to get the U.S. Supreme Court to take one of these cases so that we can try to get the immunities once and for all defined. Remember, this is a judicially created doctrine.

This is not the legislature saying we're creating these immunities judges came up with this and so judges can do something about it and that's what we're trying to do and it would it apply to politicians and their immunities and public health officials you could you could take this you could expand this depending on the context i mean i we don't have enough time to talk about it but if we could get if that's where we end up at the U.S. Supreme Court, I can see where you could expand it. So I hope you get there. And then I also hope then that the Biden versus Missouri gets there too

so we start to curtail some of the excesses of the federal government, right? Well, both of these cases are working their way so that they may be in front of the SCOTUS at the same time. Oh, my God. That would be amazing. All right. Mark Garagos, give them where they can find you. I'm going to let you go.

I'm going to keep talking after I let you go. But where do they find you? At Mark Garagos on Twitter or Garagos.com on the web. All right, man. Talk soon. See you. Thanks. Great, Mark Garagos.

And before we go on, I want to mention our friends at JustWorks. Small business leaders want an easier way to onboard and manage remote employees. JustWorks makes it easier for you to start, run, and grow a business. Here's how it works. Peace of mind. Payroll will run smoothly. Your team can access benefits, and your business will get the support it needs. JustWorks can – I mean, this should all – the fact that we're not using – all not using JustWorks is sort of astonishing to me,

speaking of that word we've been using all day. JustWorks can help attract and retain top talent, can get access to medical, dental, and vision benefits, plus wellness, mental health support, fertility, financial planning, and more. It's all there. It takes care of it. It makes it simple. It is JustWorks.

Payroll, running smoothly, benefits. It's it simple. It is JustWorks. Payroll, running smoothly. Benefits. It's all there. The fact that everyone uses something like this is just astonishing. JustWorks makes it simple to hire and manage remote employees across all 50 states. You don't have to worry about each state's laws and all the different regulations. They take care of it for you at JustWorks. Right, Ben? Run your business with confidence. Learn more about JustWorks and how they can help you get

more done by visiting JustWorks.com slash podcast. That's JustWorks.com slash podcast. All right. So yeah, this was an interesting week. I appreciate you all hanging in with us. Mark and I keep fantasizing about doing our own podcast one of these days on a regular basis. And Mrs. Pinsky keeps getting in the way of that, I'm just saying. So we'll see if she softens on it. Mr. Garagos and I are both. You guys are laughing at that, are you? Is that what you're laughing at?

Why is that so funny? Tell me. I don't know. It just seemed funny. Okay, good. Well, she's the one that's getting in the way. As he and I mentioned, we are both. Yeah, it just came full circle.

Yeah, we're both softening the target as best we can to try to bring it around. In the meantime, Adam can take off and do what he wants, and Mark and I will have a good time together hanging out. We got the intro, so intro's already made. The intro's there for our pod and everything. We're all good. But it's always really, I learn something every time i talked to mark and it's just so interesting when he and i've come we come from these very different disciplines and uh share our notes and to talk

about things we always sort of we learn we we grow from it so i hope you guys all get something as well um there's one other thing i was going to bring up with him is I'll just tell everyone here. I interviewed a psychiatrist for the Dr. Drew podcast. I don't know when it's going to air. His guy's name is Owen Muir, M-U-I-R. Maybe Kristen. I don't know if you guys have any access to this stuff, but it was so inspiring to hear some of the new ideas in psychiatry that are specifically directed at things like PTSD. There's a guy I interviewed some time ago, maybe a year ago, who was doing stellate ganglion blockades. And this particular psychiatrist had been a part of the research protocol that led to that technique being approved. And he said, it's

astonishing. You don't have anxiety. You just lose the experience of anxiety. And for people with PTSD and people with certain kinds of personality disorders with their autonomic nervous system is always on overcharge, this is an amazing improvement. Also, transcranial magnetic stimulation. I think people are aware that we can use these big magnets to sort of change the chemistry of the brain. You run a current using magnets. Magnets, of course, create currents. And as such, you can raise chemicals in certain regions. But now they can do it in highly specific regions. And they can do it once an hour for 10 hours and do that a couple of days in a row,

and they're having tremendous success. So keep an eye out for that podcast. I just think that was just so exciting. And don't forget DrDudotTV, where as we discussed, I'm going to bring Mr. Garagos in and Dr. Cariotti, and we're going to have a deep dive into the legality of some of these things, such as Biden versus Missouri. And do check out the other things there that I've been mentioning this week, Dr. Freeman interview. And there's just a lot to be, I guess, concerned about. The biggest thing for me that keeps me sort of asking questions is how the medical literature

these days kind of only goes one direction. And I'm used to the medical literature being something I keep abreast of to look at the back and forth. And there's always like a dialogue that goes on in medical literature for and against certain things, proving and disproving. And you always kind of move towards an understanding. And in the last three years, we've only seen one direction, particularly as it comes to issues of vaccine therapies and whatnot. So there's something wrong. Something is out of alignment.

And we talked a little bit about that this week, Mr. Garagos. And I hope you'll check out Dr. Ed TV or a lot of that stuff, those interviews. If you want to really get caught up, I'd say it's Dr. Freeman, it's Ed Dowd, it's John Bowdoin, it's Paul Alexander.

These are all names you should look for and you'll be astonished at how things kind of went down. And then Jay Bhattacharya, who I interviewed several times and actually is coming up again if you want to see a real-time interview coming up. Check it out at drdrew.tv. And of course, Adam will be rejoining me next week, so I appreciate you guys

all sticking around for that. The Adam and Dr. Drew show, nothing Mark and Dr. Drew show, will return in its normal format and host next time. So until then, I'll see you. It is Dr. Drew on behalf of Mark Dargos and Adam Corolla

in absentia saying mahalo.