The Charlie Kirk Show - Vaccines: What Should A New Parent Do?

Episode Date: January 17, 2026

RFK Jr.’s HHS is shaking up healthcare for American children by altering the vaccine schedule and retracting long-existing advisories. What should new parents think about this? Doctor Joel Warsh and lawyer Aaron Siri guide Andrew and Rylee through the current state of vaccines and offer advice to parents unsure about what is safe for their own kids. Watch every episode ad-free on members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

My name is Charlie Kirk. I run the largest pro-American student organization in the country fighting for the future of our republic. My call is to fight evil and to proclaim truth. If the most important thing for you is just feeling good, you're going to end up miserable. But if the most important thing is doing good, you will end up purposeful. College is a scam, everybody. You've got to stop sending your kids to college. You should get married as young as possible and have as many kids as possible. Go start a turning point USA College chapter. Go start a turning point you would say high school chapter.

Go find out how your church can get involved. Sign up and become an activist. I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade. Most important decision I ever made in my life and I encourage you to do the same. Here I am. Lord, use me. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go.

The Charlie Kirk Show is proudly sponsored by Preserve Gold, the leading gold and silver experts and the only precious metals company I recommend to my family, friends, and viewers. Hey, everybody. Welcome to a very special episode of the Charlie Kirk Show. We're going to have a long-form discussion about some changes that are happening at the CDC, conversations that are continuing to evolve when it comes to vaccines and autism about the Hep B shot, and getting deep into questions that we receive here at the Charlie Kirk Show from moms all around the country,

wanting to know how they should be addressing and thinking about the issues that come up when they have their own children, when they're pregnant. There's so much here and so much practical discussions that we need to have for you out there in the audience that we wanted to bring in two experts of this area. It's a very dynamic area. There's a lot of confusion about it. And that's what this conversation is designed to do is to bring clarity in a sea of confusion where there's still a lot of questions. and to help us navigate this very important topic is Dr. Joel Gator Warsh, his MD, an author of A New Book Between a Shot and a Hard Place right here. You can find them on X in Instagram at Dr. Joel Gator.

Thank you so much for joining us. I know that Alex Clark has also had you on panels at our events, and it's honored to have you back with us here. It's an honor to be here, and I really appreciate you guys having a vaccine talk. I know that that is not something that everyone's willing to do, and I think it's so important. Well, there's no way to honor Charlie Kirk, the namesake of this show, then talking about this topic because he was passionate about it. And the second guest that we have here is Aaron Siri. He's also the, he's the, so let me get all of your titles here, because there's a few. Your civil rights attorney. You're the managing partner of Siri and Gilmstad, LLP. Your website is SiriLLP.com.

And you're the author of this book, Vaccines Amen, which has just come out. And you guys were, before we took the show here, you guys were both read each other's stuff. So this is going to be a really fantastic conversation back and forth. And it's not a debate. It really is. There's just so many practical questions that parents and families are having about this topic. And there's been some new changes at the CDC. Obviously, RFK is now ahead of HHS.

There's a lot of controversy about that, a lot of discussion about that. So we want to just try and help bring clarity to a dynamic conversation. So here to help us also bring clarity to this is Riley Marty. She is our resident Maha expert. And you're just a fan of all things health-related. You and Charlie shared that in common. And so thank you for joining as well and for setting this up. So let's get into it.

These are, there's two things. I want to take the first thing. I think it's a little easier to, to wrap our brains around and there's probably fewer questions, but it's very, very important. And so that'll be kind of our on ramp into this larger vaccine discussion. So on December 5th, the CDC's advisory committee on immunization, so ASIP or ACIP, voted 8 to 3 to drop the longstanding universal recommendation that every newborn receive hepatitis B vaccines. I will tell you, I have three small kids.

when you have a baby in the hospital and they just start shooting things into the baby and they're putting you know you're like you don't even many parents are probably like me especially with our first where you just had no idea that was even going to happen and you're wondering like it must be necessary they're doing this so when it comes to hep B let's explain the logic originally maybe first with you dr. Gator what was the logic of making it mandatory the CDC was was advising it now that they are no longer. What was the original rationale for that and why the change? So originally when the hepatitis B vaccine was brought out, it was more for high risk groups because the main way that you would get it would be like an STD through sexual contact or through drug use. But there were still tens of thousands of cases every year. And so they decided that they would recommend that to all babies in the first day of life to get that hepatitis B to decrease those cases near down to zero. And the reality is it did work pretty well. I mean, we did see a big decrease in hepatitis B disease,

but that is still mainly coming from individuals who had hepatitis B as mom, passing it on to the baby. It was extremely rare. It's still extremely rare for a baby who's born to a hepatitis B negative mother to get hepatitis B. Is it possible? Yes, it is possible that a test could be wrong, that you could get hepatitis B after you do the testing,

or somebody could come by and bleed on your baby. But again, that's extremely, extremely rare. We're talking like one in a million to one in seven million by best guesses. And so when you're talking about the medical community, a lot of times you only hear about benefits, and a lot of doctors saying, well, we want to make sure every single baby gets hepatitis B vaccine so that no babies ever get it. And the reality is, I don't want any baby to get hepatitis B or any infection at all,

but you have to weigh the risks versus the benefits. And there are risks to any, intervention that we do, any medication and any vaccine, and we're not acknowledging that in the medical community. And I think for something that's so rare, let's say it's one in a million, you have to ask, giving this vaccine to three million kids that don't necessarily need it to protect one kid, is that worth it? Within the first 24 hours of what? Within the first 24 hours life, and then you're talking about the known risks and the unknown risk, and you have to weigh that. And a lot of other countries have looked at that calculation and said, you know what, we're going to only recommend it to

high-risk babies. And so what we decided, what ASEP decided was that they are going to go to this high-risk group decision where you're not necessarily going to recommend it for every baby. If you are in that high-risk group, you can do it. If you want to do it, you can still do it. But now it's a shared clinical decision-making versus an explicit recommendation. It was never mandatory per se. It was just a recommendation. And now they're removing that recommendation in place of making it shared clinical decision-making. So you're saying that basically this new advisory or this new decision 8-3, which remember, and you were educating me on this, and I remember the story, is that, you know, RFK came in, he basically removed the 17 members of ASIP, right? I don't know what you would call them, the voting.

Voting members, voting members. And now they haven't replaced all of them yet, but the one, there's an 8-3 vote to drop this universal recommendation. and you're, I guess, you were, we were discussing this before we took on the show here, but you were saying that some of the risks are fever, other known risks that maybe would be potentially worse than, I guess I wouldn't say worse, but you have to know the risk, right? This is informed consent idea. Right. I mean, we know that there's a risk of fever, and in the hepatitis B trials, it was about 1 to 5%.

And if a newborn gets a fever, that's a big deal. They're getting a full workup. They're getting a lumbar puncture. So that's something to keep in mind. We also know that they can have encephalitis and encephalopathy. We know that they can have autoimmune conditions like Yombray syndrome. That's just what we know. And then there's all the things that we don't know because by and large, we haven't really studied it long term.

We're not really sure what it does to the immune system long term. And if there are long term complications, and that gets controversial. But to be, you have to take that into account when you're saying that you're protecting only one out of a million or one out of three million kids for something that you're giving to all of these kids. So I don't think it's unreasonable to have those discussions. That's what they decided. When the medical community gets upset, they're looking at just the benefits, just the kids that are protected, but that's not the only thing in the decision tree here. And we have to get back to that risk versus benefit analysis. And we just haven't been, I don't know why medicine doesn't want to do that. I don't understand. Just to be clear,

so for the audience's sake, Dr. Warsh, you prefer Gator or Warsh? I get called Gator. Okay. I don't care. Would you describe yourself as anti-vax? Absolutely not. I mean, you can ask any patient that's been in my office recently that has gotten a vaccine. I believe in informed consent. I believe people should be able to choose what they feel like is best for them. I have patients in my office that do the regular schedule, some that do a slow schedule, some that don't do it. We have discussions. We talk about what we know and what we don't know. And then they come up with that decision. I've never forced anybody to do anything. Got it. Just establishing the record here.

So, Aaron, so you're a civil rights attorney. I found it interesting Just little things I'm picking up As the layman here Where technically it wasn't mandated To get the Hep B shot But I don't feel like And I'm trying to remember back to my own experience

I don't remember And now my kids were born in California So maybe it's different I don't know But the I don't remember feeling like There was much informed consent with Hep B It was just kind of done

And Is there a civil rights component to this You were just at ASIP. You literally flew here, I think, yesterday. He came back yesterday this morning. So you were in and around this whole debate that was ongoing. So give us the Hep B story from your vantage point. And are there civil rights implications to this?

Sure. I'll add one data point on the safety side. I've never heard or I'm not aware of a single baby that's ever died from Hep B on the first day of life. but I can tell you definitively that babies have died on the first day of life in the Heppeed shot. Okay. So including one that was adjudicated not long ago, something called the Vaccine Indie Compensation Program, which is the federal program where you can get compensation if you're injured by vaccine.

And there was a baby that was adjudicated as having died from the Hep B shot on the first day of life. Also another just quick data point, I'll go to the civil rights question is the very first hepatitis B vaccine was in 1981. It was based, it was actually a maid using the plasma, the blood of those who were chronic hepatitis B carriers. There were under 300 deaths in America of hepatitis B in 1980. We are now well over 1,500 deaths a year in hepatitis B. Okay, so we haven't actually gotten down in mortality. It's just an interesting data point.

Do you know what's causing that increase? I'll leave that. Okay, fair enough. But it's interesting because they always talk about, well, you know, we have to reduce, whenever mortality goes down, they immediately attributed to the vaccine. When mortality goes up, nobody wants to look. But let's leave that aside. Let's put the data aside.

On the civil rights side of things, there's absolutely a civil rights component. Number one, we have endless cases where parents have provided written notice to the hospital that they do not want to hepatitis B vaccine as part of their birthing program. In writing, signed, and the hospital does it anyway. we probably have about over 100 clients like that at the firm right now. So my firm has over 100 folks. About 50 of them do just vaccine-related work. And one of the things we do is this type of these cases.

We're actually, we've started taking on these representations. They're supported by a group called ICANN, the Informicor Action Network, because they're not very lucrative. But a nonprofit has decided they want to put a stop to this practice. And so we've done those cases. There's another component, too. We get lots of calls from parents. who are in, they've just given birth, they're in happiest moment of their lives, and they've decided

they don't want the shot. And the hospital's telling them if they don't get it, they're going to call CPS on them. No kidding. Yep, we've had that happen a few times. Is this in red states too? I mean, is it all across the board? Because, you know, you think about red versus blue states, but it's actually like a medical establishment that is very, very keen on this. I will tell you, it's interesting. I don't, it really comes down to whoever the attendant is in that moment. Sometimes it's not even the hospital. It's not even the state that matters. It's the attention. It's the attention. attendant who is the attending physician in that hospital in that moment are they in a good mood what's going on with them that day really can come down to that i see the doctors agree with me it

could be anybody that could be anybody they get a bad feeling about the situation and then they can call for whatever reason yeah it just it strikes me that i do not have a a clear memory and now with babies two and three three three kids the second the third i remember being very much more like queued in and I was I was aware of a lot more because I had been through it once before but especially on that on our oldest I can't remember even being given the option I can't remember at all now on the third one I I successfully delayed the hep B um like a day though I mean it was like you know we don't need to do that right now and then they they they harped on us um so what I'm gonna throw it to Riley just really quick here because you are a mom

you're really in touch with the maha community what are moms saying about the hep hep be stuff um it's honestly it's 50 50 a lot of moms are saying i'm getting stuff from both sides i don't know you know i have the things that are reading online are scary i don't know how to interpret this if you don't have a science background you don't do your research on your own even if you do research on your own if you don't understand how to read and interpret a clinical study um you may not know what's right what's wrong or what you're being told. It's all over the place. I know a lot of the issue is, like with birthing plans, I have a one-year-old. So obviously, I had my birthday plan. Did it change by the time the baby was born? But when I walked in, of course, that it happens. I made sure that

the hospital that I had was 100% agree with my birth plan that they would accommodate that, no matter what. but there are a lot of moms that are they're scared they go in they don't know what to expect if you've never had a baby you you don't know what to expect you're reading all this stuff online you're overwhelmed you're already stressed because you're about to have a baby let alone going in and not knowing what you don't know because you don't know what you don't know um one of the things was is making sure that that dad is always with baby because you're doing your own thing you're having the baby but if that doctor takes that baby out there's a lot of parents that are concerned that my birth plan may be this, but I don't 100% trust the establishment.

I don't 100% trust the doctors or the hospital, but they're not going to give my kids something, even though I have it in writing and I've stated that I don't want this. I never left my kids side, not for a second. My husband was with our baby from day one. Yeah, never for a second, because they make mistakes and they have their, like you said, that's the default, right? The default is to do all, everything.

And there's always nurse changes and shift changes. And so you have to assume that they just by default will do, the things that are on their checklist. So I agree fully. So yeah, I mean, do you get that a lot where have you, have you been litigating cases like that where hospitals just can just defy a parent's birth plan? Oh, absolutely. We've settled them where hospitals have to pay the parents. Absolutely. We have, like I said, we have probably about a hundred clients literally right now as you know, as we sit here where my law firm is handling their cases right now. So it happens all the time because, you know, and that's part of the issue with the routine.

recommendation from ASIP because when it's viewed as routine what does that mean there that means that the medical community views it as everybody should get it and you know your right to inform consent sometimes Gush goes out the window even apparently when you have it in writing so i just for the audience sake ASIP stands for advisory committee on immunization practices okay so it's a really powerful committee yes it's within the CDC and again RFK junior famously now notoriously whatever you to look at it, removed the 17 sitting members of that and has been replacing that. But you said before we came on the air, so I just want to catch our audience up, that he's actually, the people that have been appointed to this board are pretty, they're across the spectrum, ideologically

when it comes to this stuff. Oh, absolutely. If you watch an ace appearing, you will hear a quite, you will hear a diversity of opinion. Well, that's great, though, right? I mean, the way should be. Well, not everyone thinks that, though. I mean, have you seen the, the tweets about him from Senator, Senator Cassidy. About you? Yeah. I mean, they were saying that he shouldn't be there

because Bill Cassidy from Louisiana who famously voted to impeach President Trump. Okay, continue. There are many people that are saying that he shouldn't be allowed to be there because he sues and makes money off of vaccines a lawsuit.

And that doesn't make any sense to me as a physician. It just makes no logical sense whatsoever. All the vaccine companies are there. They're always speaking. I mean, everybody has some sort of conflict of interest. And you want people that know about vaccines, that work on vaccines.

the companies to be there. I mean, you want them to talk, you want to be able to grill them. So why should you not be able to have somebody who is thinking in different ways? It's absurd to say that that's a conflict event just that couldn't be there. Well, did you see my response to Senator? It was in CNN. They covered the exchange, actually. Wait, so are you on ASIP? No, I spoke before ASIP. That's what I thought. Okay. And so I was invited to speak about the development of the childhood schedule,

and Senator Cassidy tweeted out that I'm, you know, something about how I shouldn't have been invited because I make my living is what he wrote, suing vaccine makers. So I tweeted back and I said, it's ironic you write that because actually I can't make my living suing vaccine makers because they have immunity. Childhood vaccines are the only product in America, literally the only one. As four of us sit here in this room, look around this room. We're surrounded by thousands of manufacture products on your way into this room, okay?

For every one of them, you could sue the customers. company on the basis that had they made that product safer, you or your child would not have died or gotten seriously injured. Okay? So for extra penny, they could have made the gas tank and your car not explode, you could sue them because they could have made it safer. If this wall material could have been made safer, so it didn't cause you cancer, you could sue them. The only product you can't sue for are vaccines since 1986 because it's something called the National Child to Vaccine and React, 1986. So when Senator Cassidy says, I make my living soon vaccine makers, It's pretty ironic because it's Congress.

We've got it up, yeah. It's Congress that, can you find my response? It's Congress that, you know, eliminated that right in 1986 precisely because of how much harm of those vaccines were causing. Yeah, I mean, I have like a lot of questions. So the, let's get, so I, before we move on, actually, I just want to make sure we're putting a pin in this whole idea of the Hepbee. So it's no longer universally recommended.

What's that? Only at birth. At birth. Okay, so that's the question. So the follow-up questions are, do you get it on day one? Do you get it on 20 days after? You get it two months after. Is there something we're comfortable recommending?

Their recommendation now is two months or later, which generally is what kids were doing anyways. If they didn't get the vaccine at birth, they would get it at two months, four months, and six months, or any time after that. Okay. And generally speaking, that is. much safer when it comes to fevers,

encephalitis, or, you know? I mean, it's definitely safer if you get a fever that you're older, but whether that makes the vaccine safer or not, that's debatable. So that's something that should be studied. Okay. But we haven't studied those differences to see whether it is safer. And the manufacturer's disclosure about cephalitis and cephalopathy don't distinguish between age.

And most of the safety research, I mean, the original safety research, which is really interesting and might get us a little off topic, but it was four to five days of safety research, which is great. four to five days. Yes. On the habitat of be vaccinated. So I want to go back to something you said, doctor. You said you don't mandate for any of your clients.

You give them essentially informed consent. You go back and forth. So question might be, don't vaccines at some point lose their broader appeal or their broader, I guess, upside if we don't have universal vaccination of some of these diseases. You have to go vaccine by vaccine on each of these. because for many of the vaccines, and this is something that you don't realize, unless you really look into it or think about it, is that most of them don't protect the community. They just protect you. So many of the diseases don't have this community immunity that you're talking about. Some of them do. I mean, the measles vaccine, certainly. Well, that's another hot topic. Yeah, we can talk about that. But there are some more than others, but the polio vaccine protects you. Well, Vinkovac vaccine protects you. Many of the vaccines just protect you. So it's not really about the community immunity like you're mentioning. So it depends. Each one is a little bit. different. Anything you want to say about Heppe that we've missed? Because there's a whole bunch of other

topics we can get into, but I want to make sure. You know, there's so much to talk about that. Okay. What are we missing? I mean, I'll just build on what the doctor said, which is the clinical trial relied upon to license. There are two standalone hepatitis B vaccines. One was licensed 86, 1 and 89, Rekamovacch v. HB and Drixby. Rekamovacch B was licensed. based on a clinical trial, and this is what the doctor was talking about, with a clinical trial that monitored children for five days for safety after injection. That's it, five days. There were 147 kids and no control group.

That was the whole trial. That's it. Okay. Nothing else. That is useless to determine the safety of the product. Who regulates these control groups and these, you know, because there's a lot of this going on right now. Alex Berenzen has been talking about the COVID shots and the clinical trials that were done. for that, and he's basically of the position that these companies are very good at rigging.

He didn't use that word, but essentially they're very good at these. They're good at these control groups or these clinical trials to make sure they get the outcome they want. Yes. For most drugs, they normally have multi-year placebo control trials. Why? Because they're liable for the injuries from drug products after they go to market. So they want to make sure they don't lose money. And that's what they're in business for.

These companies are in the business to make money. You have a retirement account. You got a 401k. You want the companies in your portfolio to make money. So does Wall Street. So does everybody that has stock. Right. So do the CEO.

So does the board members. In fact, you fire a company. You take them out of your portfolio if they weren't making money, right? Correct. So that's how they make their decision. Now, normally, the interest to make money is aligned with safety. Because if you put out a product, it's not safe. You lose money.

And so, but with vaccines, it's the only one that, as I noted, it has that immunity I talked about earlier. So the financial entrance has been inverted, which is why for vaccine trials, you will often see days or weeks of safety review, never a placebo control for any of the routine injected vaccines, and they're often underpowered, meaning not enough kids. So to answer you, it was a long way to answer your question,

but to answer your question, FDA regulates these trials, okay, but it's the companies that conduct them. Right. Why would the FDA accept the trial that short? that's because there's a drug division, there's a vaccine division. If you've interacted with the vaccine division, they are believers in these products. Even during RFK's tenure so far, is it changed? Is there more skepticism?

Venae Prasad, who is the head of Ciber, the fact, which has the vaccine division at the FDA. You saw that memo he released. That was leaked where he talked about the 10 kids dying. I don't know if you've read it. I have not read it, but he is trying to reform. He is facing mass dissent and opposition. Look, if you sat in FDA for the last few decades, anybody in there, and you licensed these vaccines based on these kinds of clinical trials that in no way could have confirmed safety, you must have incredible cognitive dissonance when faced those without reality.

They just assume safety. And can I just say that I think that your question, it's so reasonable. And my question is why they would allow that. Like that doesn't make sense. And that's when you have sued them and the Furfoya request to find out if there more information because it doesn't make sense that we would give a vaccine to a newborn unless we had the very best safety data possible.

That doesn't make you anti-vax. It just means if you're going to put a new vaccine on the schedule, if you're going to give a new vaccine to my baby, I want to know that it's been studied in thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of kids against a vaccine. An inert placebo followed forward and looked at to see what the safety profile is. How is that anti-anything? It doesn't mean that they shouldn't get it, but we should be sure that it's safe before you give to a healthy newborn. It's not the same thing as giving to somebody who's sick.

My Pillow wants to say a heartfelt thank you to our listeners for your continued support. To show their appreciation, they're offering an incredible after-Christmas sale with some of the best prices that they've ever had. and all when you use promo code Kirk, K-I-R-K. Right now, you can get their luxurious Giza Dream Sheets for as low as 2998. That's pretty insane. You'll also find cozy blankets, comforters, and duvet covers starting at just $25. Six-pack towel sets are only $39.98, making it the perfect time to refresh your home. But the savings don't stop there.

Everything is on sale from dog beds and socks to couch pillows and much more. This is the best opportunity of the year to stock up on my pillow. favorites take advantage of these unbeatable specials don't wait head to mypillow dot com or call 800875 0425 now and don't forget to use promo code kirk these offers won't last long call 800 8750425 or visit my pillow today and use promo code kirk yeah so let me just tell you how i'm hearing this as as the layman in this conversation even more so than riley i'm hearing unless you are in a very you know high risk group. It doesn't sound to me like this is something that I would be inclined or rushing to give my child at least immediately. Maybe you could talk about two months, six months, first year, maybe.

But that's basically where I'm landing on this hearing the intel. Now, I just want to make sure that everybody knows we invited Dr. Paul Offutt to this discussion. And Riley reached out kindly. and it was, I would say, not a welcome invite. Was concerned that we were going to be confusing the audience and maybe causing more vaccine hesitancy or anti-vax sentiment. But we did want to get his perspective, and he is, I would say, much more of an adherent to, you know, the medical establishments view,

I think that's safe to say, the wider medical establishment, his view about vaccine efficacy and the need for vaccine. So we did want him to be on this conversation. But regardless, I don't think you would not describe yourself as anti-vax, would you? I mean, look, all I can use is a dictionary for the use of words, okay? And under Webster's dictionary, it defines antivax that somebody opposes mandating one or more vaccines or receiving one or more.

So under that definition, most of the country is anti-vax because a majority oppose mandating COVID vaccine, flu shots, and some of the other ones, so forth. So, you know, I mean, I guess it matters what definition you're using whether or not somebody's anti-vax. You oppose a COVID vaccine mandate? Yes. Then you're anti-vax, according to Miriam Webster. Totally. So there you go. All right. So, but, but my point, I think the layperson would think of it as, you know, you're not against all vaccines. I'm not for or against any product. They're just a product. Okay. I'm not pro or anti-car. I'm not, I don't think cars are good or bad. They're just cars. I don't think this might.

I'm not pro or anti. I personally think cars are good. But I do acknowledge there's a risk. Do you think cars that blow up are good? No. So those are bad. Those are bad. So some are good, some are bad.

Yeah, yeah. Okay, but that's really the way you think about it. I get what you're doing. I get what you're doing. I get what you're doing with this. I just think of them as products, honestly. Right. But products can have benefits.

Here. And if you become convinced the benefit outweighs the cost, you would probably... I'll answer the heart of the question. Okay. The heart of the question is this on hepatitis B. So if you're going to, for example, will really think about hepatitis B and you're trying to decide whether to take it. Here's the way I would do it.

If a baby's born to a non-hepi positive mother, I would say, okay, how many the number needed to treat, how many babies of non-hypotitis B vaccinated vaccinated vaccinated and mothers do you need to inject but to prevent one case of chronic hep B, okay? That's where you start. That's the benefit. That's the number you need. What is that number? Depending on where you look, some say millions, some say hundreds of thousands.

Okay. benefit. Now, what's the risk? How many out of, because that's rare. Yeah, so say, say the numbers a million, how many are then getting fevers or getting some other? Or getting, or getting, or, that's the right question. That's the question that we need answered. Well, there are, there are data, there are, there are, there are data that reflect that the risk in that instance might be greater than the benefit. Now, I, I, I, don't make mental decisions for other. I mean, everybody should make their own choices. At the end of day, really, my goal is just to make sure everybody has the right and the ability to do that as a civil

individual rights, you know, as an attorney. That's my goal. Not to do that mathematical. But when you do do do that, when you do do those numbers, you know, that's the way you should go about it. Yeah, and I do find it interesting. And I think this is a question that a lot of people have, is why this forceful sort of, you know, this mandate culture when it comes to, you know, this mandate culture when it comes to vaccines. And I think Blake on our team, who tends to be a little contrarian in almost everything, but it is well made this sort of community immunity idea that we want to get these diseases completely out of the population, whether that's polio, which is probably the most famous example, smallpox. We talked about before we started rolling here. And you had

some nuance with smallpox, but polio, for example, right? We eradicated polio, essentially. Maybe I'm wrong on that currently. But that was always. what it was sold to us. You know, we started vaccinate for polio and we got it out of the community. You're saying that is only a consideration on certain illnesses, maybe. Is that what you're, the community immunity? So even for polio, the original polio, the oral polio, that does protect other people in theory. The one that we use today, the inactivated doesn't? It just protects you. The oral polio was giving more people polio than actual polio that we had. So that's why they stopped using it. Because you can, you can shed it.

about measles? So measles is a different case. I think measles is probably the most difficult of the vaccines in terms of that kind of discussion because we know that measles is extremely contagious and kids can get sick and we also know that vaccine works very well and you do get some community immunity if you vaccinate enough people. So I think that that is of all the diseases, measles is probably the one where that discussion makes the most sense. Can I ask a question? I don't know which questions are dumb here or not. You guys are literally in the thick of these discussions and so I feel you know please forget my insecurity about some of this question but I have to believe if I'm having some of these questions that like our audience is having the same ones so my mom

did like a measles party when she was like where they literally tried to just get everybody sick so that they would have the immunity and they'd get it done with and I remember doing chickenpox it was like there was no there was no chickenpox vaccine when I was a kid so these kind of things so So how dangerous is measles are the measles? And do we, do you think that the, I mean, again, I don't want to put you in a physician. No, no, you're sort of, you're open-handed. Like, do you recommend them for people, the vaccine? Do you, or do you think this old way of doing things was actually better in some ways?

Like, is it a naturally gained immunity better than a vaccine immunity? General questions. No, no. Your questions are great. You should understand that these are the questions we get, or certainly, I get every single day. So they are excellent questions. In terms of measles, it is really important to understand the epidemiology of measles from way

back in the day. People were not afraid of measles a long time ago. The problem with measles, the concern around measles is that it's very contagious. It's one of the most contagious diseases that we have. So if nobody is vaccinated, it's going to go through the community. Everybody's going to get it. Most people in a room, like 9 out of 10 people are going to get measles. So a few kids will get really sick.

that's something to understand back before they were a vaccine some will die yes some will die so before a vaccine there were about three to 500 deaths a year back before measles so there are very very few deaths but not zero and and the biggest concern for measles is pneumonia a lot of kids do go to the hospital there is about a one and 20 risk for pneumonia and for serious complications so obviously we don't want any kid to go to the hospital we don't want any kid to die these are things that are possible so that's something that people do need to understand and the vaccine if you get both of them It's about 97% effective. So that's pretty good effectiveness.

The question then becomes, okay, at what cost? Yeah. So I'm going to throw that to the attorney here. So because have you litigating now or have measles cases? MMR vaccine cases? Sure. Okay. So I can give you a sense.

Yeah, yeah. I mean, to answer your initial question, which from, and I will build upon what was just said with regards to getting measles versus getting the vaccine, So Joel's correct. There were about 3 to 500 deaths a year leading up to 1963 when the first measles vaccine was introduced. 63? 63, first measles vaccine ever in the United States. Between 1900 and 19603, measles mortality, United States declined by over 98%.

Climed. Declined. Declined. Declined. Interesting. Declined. So you had over a 98% decline in mortality from measles in the United States to 1900, 1963. That's just the CDC mortality data. You know what?

didn't cause that decline of mortality, measles vaccine. Yeah, exactly. It didn't exist. It didn't exist. I know. So sometimes people have taken. I'm tracking. Okay.

So what did cause it? We could probably ascribe it to public health measures even. Maybe public health authorities probably could take credit for a lot of it. They never do. They take other than appointing to vaccines, but it's probably better sanitation, better clean water, better nutrition, go down the list, okay? Well, when they get sick, they probably had more advanced care. Yeah, antibiotics, all the things.

Better acute care, absolutely, right, because of the secondary effects. Now, measles vaccine can prevent transmission. So anybody who's got the vaccine is less likely to get clinical measles, and hence they're less likely to get harm from measles. But that's not the end of the story, in my opinion, for the following reason. First of all, if we didn't vaccinate, would that mortality curve continue to decline? Mortality from all of these infectious diseases were declining other than polio was going was the only one since the 1900 for the most part.

Okay. And so when mortality have continued to climb, that's first of all. So can we ascribe all of that reduction of mortality to measles? Remember, measles mortality was going down as the population was climbing from 1900. Okay? So even as population continued to climb, mortality likely would have continued to go down. But I assume some of the reduction of mortality can be ascribed to the vaccine. Fine.

But let me say, you the flip side. Those that have had measles, studies have shown. and have far less deaths from cardiovascular disease, cancers, and other issues. A prospective 100,000 person study in Japan, meaning forward-looking for 22 years, that tracked 100,000 people in Japan for 22 years, found. So this was a very serious study by an institution there. And, you know, by the government of Japan and major university there. And what had found is that those that had had measles and mumps had a...

Naturally. Naturally. Naturally got it. Naturally got it compared to those who didn't. Had a 20% statistically significant decline in mortality from cardiovascular disease. So this is a point that I've heard, and from a very prominent person, I was just talking to them recently. And they, their whole, this person would proudly describe themselves as anti-vax, like very proud. And the rationale for this person was that when you get diseases naturally and your body overcomes them,

that you have a stronger immunity for everything. And this person's perspective on it, and I'll probably throw it to you, either of you can answer this, actually, was that it wasn't just cardiovascular, it wasn't just against that same disease in the future. It was against things like cancer. This was this person's POV. Well, that's what the study show.

Okay, so I'm not speaking out of turn here. This was not completely. Is there, so for example, COVID, if you got a natural immunity, you got COVID, and then you overcame it. it didn't mean that you weren't going to get it in the future, but perhaps your body, I mean, I got it, I got the OG COVID in 2020, and I think I got it one more time. And the first time was rough. Second time was like a piece of cake, but also the virus is getting weaker. So I don't really know what to make of that. But I will say that their perspective on it was that you should let your body fight these things, stop injecting our kids with all this stuff like chickenpox vaccine and measles vaccine, let them get over it. That's this person's perspective. I just, I'm throwing it out there because I bet a lot of people have heard this. Yeah, I mean, there are different perspectives on it. I think, you know, one of the main things to consider the point of a vaccine, theoretically, would be to protect you from getting the disease, protect you from dying or getting very sick from a disease.

So I think we have to keep that in mind because the only people that survive are the ones that can have this protection. Right. So that's the counter argument. You have to survive the disease to have some sort of, you know, potential other benefits. Also with measles, there is immune amnesia. That's one of the things that is... Right. It like wipes your immunity memory.

I'll disagree with that. I don't think those studies are good. Sure, but that is one of the things that is certainly pointed to in the literature as something that people talk to. So it's debated whether it could be beneficial or not. But those are, again, the right questions, right? Those are the questions where we should be looking at this. We shouldn't be hearing, oh, there might be some sort of protective benefits and saying, ah, that's crazy.

You know, we need to understand those things. We need to look at the whole picture and weigh those things out to see what the long term benefits. We don't necessarily understand everything about this world and about diseases and what potential benefits there might be. It is interesting though. If you go back to like there's that famous episode of the Brady bunch where they all just get measles and it's like a laugh track, you know, and it's just like culturally we have gone very far from like, oh, the housekeeper gets, gets measles and everybody laughs about it and she's, you know, she's got red bumps or whatever to now we're like kids are going to die RFK is doing and it sounds like it's true three to

five hundred a year i mean i don't want to make light of that but it is like it's just a weird cultural difference how many kids die of chickenpox very few right so that's again what about before the vex they estimated about a hundred something a year yeah so it's very few i mean i don't even remember being uh worried about it now there was the samoa case though right that the rfk's gotten into some hot water with it'll get blamed for samoa is not smo is not the United States. Okay, so you think that that is more, because it's like a dozen kids died or something like that in the Samoa case? No, it was more than that. Was it? Okay, so however many, dozens, dozens of kids. Something about Samoa doesn't make a lot of sense because one in four hundred

hundred fifty thousand Americans died of measles before there was a vaccine. It came out to, of those infected about one in 10,000. The numbers in Samoa just don't match any, any data historically. I don't know exactly what happened there, but it doesn't match any of the actual data, real world data that exists in the United States, from any time period. That's fascinating. You had a thought on this? No is fine. Well, I did, but I guess I do. As far as how often is, are the data that is being used for vaccines, how often are the studies done in another country and not in the U.S.? Or are they all in the U.S.? They're not all in the U.S.? The FDA will accept foreign studies?

Are you talking about clinical trials of license? Or you're talking about post-licensure safety studies? Post-licensure. I don't even know what you said post-licensure? Oh, I'm so sorry. Is that what you're saying? Yes, post-licensure. After the vaccine is licensed, they often do studies outside of the U.S. actually.

Denmark's a place they often do a lot of them, like the recent aluminum study. And why is that? Well, be honest. Be honest. Well, okay, so they often do them in Denmark. They say the reason they, I'll tell you what they say, and I'll tell you my personal view. So they say they do them in Denmark because Denmark has a centralized medical care system with robust tracking of vaccination and other metrics. And so they say they can do these studies there more readily on vaccines and vaccine safety.

I would say the other side of it is they only have a tiny vaccine schedule compared to the U.S. So there's nine vaccines that are not on their schedule that are on the U.S. schedule. So kind of a better place to study vaccine safety when you're giving nine less, I'm not talking shots. I'm talking nine less different vaccines. I can tell you the whole Danish schedule. Super easy. At 3, 5, and 12 months, you get one hex availed, which is basically DTP HIP, IPV, and one other.

I'm trying to do it fast. Two doses MMR, DTAP began at 5 years, and the HPV. That's it. That's the whole schedule. That's nothing compared to the U.S. But if you're correlating that to kids here in the U.S., that is not accurate. It's not accurate, but that's what you, like you saw that recent aluminum study they came out with.

said aluminum magivants are safe and they studied them in denmark did you i don't know if i didn't see it it was all over the news it was used us to punch points against bobby against our yeah yeah i mean but it the problem is they excluded any kids that got more than a certain amount of aluminum magivant um but the problem is that every single kid in america gets that amount if they study if they followed the CDC schedule and they didn't have an unvaccinated group which well they did and they kicked them out yeah they had one initially right and then they and then they merged it. And this is one of the ingredients of a lot of vaccines, right? So it's, American kids presumably would get much, much more of this.

Far more. Right. Okay. And it, multiple times. Okay. So you said the, so maybe we'd come back to that. But you said the stated reason is that Denmark has the centralized medical system. They track everything. It's really organized. What's your opinion on why they do it there? Oh, I thought I was transparent about my opinion. Okay. Well, I could read between the lines. Which is that there are just so much fewer vaccines given. Okay.

So it doesn't trigger the same yet yet yet. Do you know what percent of kids get Hepby vaccine in Denmark by 18 years of age? Basically zero. Point one. They don't have Heppe on their schedule. You can't even get your kid a Hepi vaccine in Denmark if your mother is not happy positive or you're not high risk. My understanding is you can't even get it. So you have 0.01% of kids have Hep B vaccine.

Do you know what the Hep B rate amongst kids in Denmark versus the U.S. is effectively the same? So that's Hep B. And now you have, we've talked a lot about this. And I think what Children's Defense Fund has made a big, you know, thing about this over the years is how I learned about it, is the 1980s schedule versus, our current vaccine schedule. And you are talking about Denmark. Is there an industrialized country that you look to and say they basically do the childhood vaccine schedule in a way that you look up to that you see as the gold standard?

I don't know. I mean, there are other places that have better health overall, so I think we can look at their overall health, but I don't know that you can always compare it exactly to America. So I think it's tough. I mean, that's literally what Trump just came out and said that he wants to do. He wants to compare to other nations, look at the different. differences and have these discussions, but you would have to really do a deep dive into that. And I'm not sure that anyone's ever truly done that before. Maybe I'm wrong.

Missed Siri. Watch your phones, by the way, when you say his last name. I think you should just treat vaccines like a product, which is you want to get them, get them. It's freedom. That's America. I'll support anybody's right to get as many vaccines as they want and wear as many masks they want. I mean it. So, okay, but, but I don't think the government should mean the business of, of basically promoting vaccines. So I think that schedules are problematic to begin with. Okay, okay, the problem. I get that. I get your perspective on this. Just define it then between 19,

let's say, 85 to 20, 25. What's the how much, how much more vaccines are we getting? I guess we have a graphic over here. Yeah. So on your screen, that's the current schedule. So if you are following the current CDC schedule, including COVID vaccine, okay, because still a lot of kids are getting that. Today, by the first birthday, a child will get 29 injections, including COVID. So take COVID off three or four doses, because maybe the mother gets or not. That includes a new row, 29 injections. In the 1986, when that law was passed, a child falling in C schedule will get three injections by the first birthday. So you're going to three to 25 excluding COVID, 29 including COVID.

Okay? Three to 25 or 29. That is a massive difference. And every one of those products was, except for one. was developed and licensed by a company knowing they would virtually never have to pay for the kids that they kill or injure with that product. What's the one? MMR. Okay.

So let's get into MMR. Okay. MMR was the focus of a lot of controversy, maybe rightly or wrongly. But, you know, there was films that came out about this, how it used to be separated into individual shots. then that got grouped together, apparently a long time ago, people are saying that they're making you get it too young. These kids are getting it too young. It causes sort of a shock to the kid's system because of, I don't know,

some sort of toxins or whatever. What is the truth about MMR? And by the way, it was one of the ones that was linked most to autism according to the people that prescribed to that theory, right? So it was the most under siege, if you will, from that community. I mean, I'm just, I'm trying to ask the question in a neutral way. I'll be honest and say that, you know, our family, we tried to delay it as much as we could. And I always wanted it in separate shots.

Let me start here. So for me, when I was in training and I went to a great program, very Western, the only thing that I was ever taught about vaccines and when it comes to autism was it's been debunked. We have tons of science on this. The science is settled. And that's really all that you're taught. And so unless you go look into it yourself, you really don't know what the research is. And I'm not being hyperbolic.

I would say the most shocking thing I've ever seen in my life is when you go look at the research that actually exists on vaccines and autism, and you realize what is and isn't there. When I was doing the research for my book, what I thought I was going to do, I was trying to write a balance book as best as possible. And I thought what I was going to find, because I'm in the integrative space, I'm aware of some of the research on maybe not always the best research, but there were studies out there that said, oh, maybe vaccines are related to autism or there were people that have said that. And so I thought what I was going to find was all this amazing research that said,

here are the amazing studies vaccinated versus unvaccinated. We have tons of studies that show vaccines don't cause autism. Here's what it is. And also here are those other studies that people are talking about. So maybe it's not totally settled, but here's the both sides. When you actually go look, all of the research is only on MMR, thymarisol, which is the mercury component that's not in vaccines anymore. And that's really it. And I could not believe it. I had to go back. I looked at it again. I have a master's in epidemiology. I've done health research. I've done a literature review. I couldn't believe it. I read Paul Offutt's book, Peter Hotez's book. They literally separate it by that. And so when you're talking about vaccines and autism, the reality is that question has never totally been asked and answered. It's certainly, not debunked, if anything. There are some studies and some research that has come out, not always

the best research in the best journals, but it's out there. There are studies on MMR, but even those studies are epidemiologic studies. They're retrospective, so backwards in time, and they're looking at MMR versus no MMR in the setting of kids who got their other vaccines. That's not the question that parents have. The question that parents have is, if my kid is unvaccinated, do they have a lower risk of autism than if I get them vaccinated? MMR is the only one that we do have some research, So if you were to take the mainstream research, you could say, well, based on what we have, the MMR doesn't seem to increase their risk. But that's not the question.

I think it's about all vaccines. And I think that it's... Yeah, sorry. No, I was just saying, I think that's where we're talking about what the CDC changed recently on their website. They basically went back to say, it's not been debunked, it's not settled, we need to do this research. So let's... This is Lane Schoenberger, Chief Investment Officer and Founding Partner of Wye Reefefield. It has been an honor and a privilege to partner with Turning Point and for Charlie to endorse us.

His endorsement means the world to us, and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Turning Point for years to come. Now, hear Charlie in his own words tell you about Y-R-R-R-R-E-F-Y-F-Y. I'm going to tell you guys about Y-R-E-F-Y.com. Y-R-E-F-Y-F-I-R-E-F-Y-F-FY-FI is incredible. Private Student Loan debt in America total is about $300 billion. Y-Refi-Fi-Fi-I-Fi-E-Fi-E-FINCE. you can finally take control of your student loan situation with a plan that works for your monthly budget. Go to whyrefi.com. That is yrefi.com. Do you have a co-barrower? Why refi can get them released from the loan.

You're going to skip a payment up to 12 times without penalty. It may not be available in all 50 states. Go to yrefi.com. That is y-r-refy.com. Let's face it, if you have distress or default to student loans, it can be overwhelming. Because of private student loan debt, so many people feel stuck, go to why refi.com, that is y-re-f-f-y-fy-f-f. FY.com. Private student loan debt relief, y refi.com. On November 20th of this year, 2025, the CDC wording changed regarding vaccines and autism. So we have this here. They added this asterisk here. It says pursuant to the data. It says vaccines do not cause autism, but with an asterisk. So that's a pretty big deal. And then they added that line in yellow. Vaccines do not cause autism is not an evidence-based claim. This is a,

big old shot across the bow to the medical establishment on this issue and I'm sure there is massive amounts of debate within your your guys' communities, the medical community and the legal community on this on this topic because this is kind of what I guess you know some people feared what happened with an RFHS right. Why did they make this change? Do you support it? Do you have sort of a different perspective on it altogether? What's your take on it? You mean they were scared they would tell the truth? Ah, okay.

See, that's great. That's what I'm trying to dig out. Look, here, I'll give you, so on the autism question, Joel's exactly right. They have not ruled out that vaccine to not cause autism in any way. And I'll tell you why. First of all, the very first time that the question of whether vaccines and autism should be studied was in the 1986 Act, that federal law. Congress specifically told HHS, look at whether pertussis vaccine causes autism.

It was one of only 11 conditions they asked that the HHS look into. HHS being the U.S. Department Health and Human Services. That's the department in which CDC, FDNAH, all the health agent located. That's what Bobby's running right now. Okay. So it was nothing to do with MMR initially. It had to do with pertussis vaccine. Okay.

So that's where it started. Paul Wakefield thing didn't come up until the late 90s. I mean, that was way, way later. HHS commissioned the Institute of Medicine to look at this question of whether or not pertustis vaccine and is connected to autism. And you know what they published a report in 1921 and they said we can't find any study? Zero, none. You never looked at it.

Again, they were commissioned by the CDC, the Institute of Medicine and HERS, which is an agency in HHS that fights vaccine injury claims. Again, to study whether, is there any science to show pertussis vaccines don't cause autism? And again, they could not find any study to support. report that question. When IOM published its report in 2012, they found one study. They found one study that showed, actually there was an association, but they threw it out because it said didn't have an unvaccinated group and it was based on theirs data. So they threw out the study. So we're at 2012. On behalf of ICANN, that nonprofit I mentioned earlier, I sued the CDC for the

studies that rely upon to support that the vaccine is given in the first six months of of life, five different vaccines, three shots each, Hep B, Hib, DTAP, IPV, and PCV. So each of those are given three injections, each 15 injections. Why? When you look at parental surveys, 40 to 70% of parents still blame vaccines as causing their child's autism. And what vaccines do they point to? They point to those vaccines in the first six months of life, and they point to MMR.

That's what they point to. So if you're going to say vaccines don't cause autism, you better rule out those vaccines don't cause autism in the first six months of life because they can diagnose autism before they give the MMR, which doesn't get given until no earlier than 12 months of age, except for if you're traveling abroad, maybe they'll give it to you earlier. But almost never, okay? So we said CDC, give us the studies.

We foyered them, something called the Freedom Information Act. We ended up suing them in federal court, Southern District of New York. I didn't even go to Texas, okay? I went to Southern District of New York, right? not the friendliest territory. And the days before we had our initial conference, I got a call from the Department of Justice, and I got a list of studies from them, 20 studies.

Now, maybe the CDC thinks we can't read, I don't know, but I read them. I called back the DOJ attorney, and I said, hey, I read you list. I said, are you sure your client, the CDC wants to enter into a settlement saying these are the 20 studies rely upon to claim that the vaccine is given in the first six months don't close autism. I said because 19 of these studies have nothing to do with any of those vaccines.

They're almost all MMR vaccine studies, which are irrelevant, right? Because you're comparing basically kids who get 17 shots with 18 shots. That's silly, right? If you shoot 17 shots of whiskey and 18 shots whiskey and you're drunk, that doesn't mean anything both ways. And also there are all the MMR studies have helped user bias because the kids, who get injured in the first six months from vaccines, they stop getting vaccinated. They don't get MMR vaccine.

It throws off those studies. Putting that aside. And I said the 20th one on your list is the 2012 IOM report I just told you about. That only had that said the Institute of Medicine itself said, we can't find any study showing DTAP does not cause autism and one that showed an association. I said, so your whole list literally only has one study and it showed an association. They went ahead. they signed it. I signed it. DoJ signed on behalf of the CDC. I signed to behalf of the ICAN. Federal judge entered as a court order. I mean, I don't know where else to turn, meaning that, if, you know, they were held with guns to their head in federal court and they don't have the study. So the point is, so when that webpage is updated, yes, I completely agree. That's correct. We shouldn't be saying vaccines do not cause autism unless you have the studies to show it. Because we don't know. You don't have the studies, yeah.

So one of the things that's most interesting in the vaccine space when it comes to autism, and you can hear it when he deposes Dr. Edwards, which is one of the most interesting things you can listen to if you want to listen to vaccines and autism is you realize that basically all doctors are saying that vaccines don't cause autism because it hasn't been proven to cause autism. So it's this weird negative because it hasn't been studied. So therefore, if it hasn't been found to cause or not cause autism, they can say, oh, it's not proven to cause autism. that's where we're sitting. He said he's like, oh, so Hep B, do you have a study to show this? No, I don't. That is the theory.

The question is then, why do we not have more studies? And it's because, I mean, I'm looking at you. There is not a financial incentive to study. Who's got, who? You hit it right in the head. I didn't need to say it. Exactly. Who has the financial incentive to conduct the studies are expensive?

Who's going to do them? Well, the federal government should. Wouldn't you think that somebody would take the big databases that we have and study vaccinated versus unvaccinated kids, wouldn't you think that would exist? It's not a hard thing to do. Well, yeah, I mean, who is unvaccinated in the United States besides like the Amish? There are kids that are unvaccinated. According to the CDC data, there's around at least 700, around 650,000 kids in America today that are unvaccinated according to CDC's own data. So, okay. And certainly there are kids that are fully vaccinated versus having fewer vaccines

versus no vaccines. You can absolutely do that study. I'm talking about completely in vaccination. Yeah, and it's about 1%. You'd be. You'd be. You'd be. You'd be. You'd be. You'd be. You'd be surprised how many kids aren't vaccinated. And by the way, the last person to do that study is the federal government because remember I said earlier you can't sue vaccine manufacturers, but if you're injured by a vaccine and I've got over a dozen, I've got, you know, a lot of people on the firm that do this work, you can bring a claim for vaccine injury. You just bring it against the secretary of HHS. You bring it against the federal government. It's the only, and they fight you with DOJ attorneys. It's the only product they know of in America where the government defends the interest of the

industry against the injured consumer. Think about that. You're injured. You're, and that is because why? That's because the 1986 Act. No, but why were they in,

why was the Fed of the, is it just, it's big money? Is it, why are they not? So I brought up, I said, well,

the government should do the study then. We should, we should underwrite it. Yeah. So they have a structure. Dynamic. I'll give you the, the dynamic.

I'll give you the dynamic. So, for example, the Department of Transportation promotes aviation. More planes in the sky, right? That's a good thing.

More airports. More way to get. get around. But when you're already working with industry to have them do more, you can't also have them regulating them for safety. They're an inherent conflict. So they created the NTSB. It's totally separate. Same thing. Department of Energy promotes more nuclear power plants. But they don't, it's a completely separate agency is responsible for the safety of nuclear power plants. It's hard. I come to say, hey, build another power plant at the same time I'm smacking you for safety. It doesn't work so well. Okay. Regulate, it's a conflict for.

from a regulatory standpoint, so they separate those functions. When it comes to vaccines, the very same department, the Department of Health and Human Services, they're responsible for promoting vaccines statutorily, has to promote them, and has to defend them against any claims of injury, right, when families bring those claims. So that's one side of their duties. The other one is safety. They're in conflict. If they do a study that shows harm, what are the lawyers who represent vaccine injured family's going to do against the federal government?

So what's a shortcut? Don't do the study. Or don't do the study well. or, you know, so it's a, the federal health authorities are completely conflicted. Well, and isn't there sort of this idea of institutional capture as well, right, where you've got, you know, board members from, let's just say, Pfizer that ends up, you know, inside the government. You mean like Julie Gerberting was the head of the CDC for a decade during Merck's most controversial controversies around MMR vaccine and Gardasil vaccine and some of its other products?

And then went to head their vaccine division, it has made millions of dollars? You mean that? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Are there a lot of those instances? Yes. Okay.

But also vaccines are a religion, and he does such a great job. I was trying to get, I was like, what are you driving out with this? It feels like you're, you know, obviously I'm talking to you now, and I sense a lot of the skepticism, but, you know, vaccines amen. I was like, oh, okay, so I got the pro and I got, you know, no. So, but this is what you do. You snuff out these, these inconsistencies or, you know, let's just say, complicated. of interest or this presented as a religion and you're like, this is not a religion. This is a fact-based evidence-based area, and we're not dealing with it that way. Look, in a religion, people know

they're in a religion. When you go to church, you go to your house of worship, you believe, and you know you're taking a leap of faith to answer the unanswerables. Where do we go when we die? You know, where does life come from, right? You know you're in religion. These folks who run vaccinology, They think they're engaging in science. And what I'm telling you is they're not. So it's a perverted religion, but it is a religion because they'll say things like vaccines don't cause autism. But that's not true.

They don't know that. They say things like these are the most robustly trial products ever before they come to market. It's just false. But the crazy thing is they believe these things. They believe vaccines are safe a priori without any data. Yeah. Well, so you were talking about these clips that we need to show of you deposing different individuals. This is Dr. Plotkin. Who is Dr. Plotkin? So Dr. Stanley Plotkin is the world's leading

vaccinologist. The medical text was on vaccines is called Plotkin's vaccines. The gavel at ASIP is called Plotkin's gavel. That's the CDC Vaccine Committee. Where they's named the gavel after this guy? They lame the gavel after. Why? Because he attended every ACP meeting for decades. And as in their own words, he's probably had more influence on ASIP than anybody out there. He's probably had more of an influence in developing the current vaccine schedule in any living human being or dead how old is he by the way he's pretty old at this point he's in his 90s okay so when did you depose him I deposed him in 2018 okay so this clip I'm about yeah okay so it's I see it's from January 11 2018 I see it on here I'm just going to play the clip and then have you these are longer clips so we might

have cut out some of the context is important you can fill that in on the on the backside of this play cut 170 point is that there are no studies showing that it does cause autism except one study by two well-known anti-vaccination figures, Geyer and Geyer, who have no legitimacy whatsoever. Well, and it's, okay, so, and then it goes on. So what they're saying is that there's no evidence, and the important point from my point of view

is that there is no positive evidence, all right, to do a proper study. So that was the whole... That's the wrong clue. probably maybe I sent the wrong clip and I it was a one no no it's fine so I in a clip but this is this is what you were kind of talking about before though of the well the clip with the clip if you had the clip would show is this I he he eventually concedes there are no studies that show DTAB doesn't cause autism okay he also and he says well and I say but you have done

studies and you claim that do support the MMR vaccine doesn't cause autism right he goes yes I go so the study said that slower so oh that last part that that last part that I I said to him, you believe studies have been done to show that MMR vaccine does not cause autism? And he says yes. And so I said, okay, so studies are possible to rule out that a vaccine cause autism. And he said, yes. I said, great. We should do them.

But there are no studies that show that DETAP doesn't cause autism. And he said, and he had to eventually concede that there are not because the IOM Southern. And so I said to him, I said, Dr. Plock, shouldn't you wait? until you do, until you have the studies that show that D-TAP doesn't cause autism before you tell a parent that vaccines don't cause autism. So what did he say to that? He said, do I wait? No, because I have to take into account the health of child. And then I said, so for that reason, you're willing to tell a parent that vaccines don't cause autism, even though the science isn't there to support it. And he said, yes. Okay, so what he is saying, he is admitted what the CDC

web page now admits, which is we told people vaccines don't go to autism to avoid vaccine hesitancy, even we didn't have the studies to support it. Okay, so that takes us in some ways to our, I mean, you have some more here, we could play them this. You're deposing world

leading vaccinologist Dr. Catherine Edwards regarding vaccines and autism. So that's another we could play that clip. It's about 40 seconds a little longer. Let's go ahead and play it and see where it leads us. 171. In the expert disclosers for this case, it asserts that among other things, you will testify that, quote, the issue of whether

vaccines cause autism has been thoroughly researched and rejected, end quote. It's your testimony that MMR vaccine cannot cause autism. That's correct. It's your testimony that Head B vaccine cannot cause autism? That's correct. It's your testimony that iPod cannot cause autism? Yes. It's your testimony that hit vaccine cannot cause autism. Yes. Your testimony that Varicella vaccine cannot cause autism. Yes. It's your testimony that Previnar vaccine cannot cause autism? Yes. It's your testimony that DTAP vaccine cannot cause autism. Yes.

So she just goes through the list. Well, you're missing the important part of the clip. Well, these are very long clips. I just want to be. Then I say to her, do you have any study that shows Hep B vaccine doesn't cause autism? And she says, no. Do you have any that shows that I go through each one? You just go.

Okay. And then she says, get me the next 30 seconds. Get me the next 30 seconds. So you kind of need the part. That's a good part. You know, you got to set it up. They're just giving me the clips. That's okay.

The issue, these are longer clips. Anybody can watch them. Yeah, but so that's funny. So she goes through, you go, this is your testimony. These do not cause autism. She goes, yes, yes, yes, yes. And then you go, do you have science to back up this, this, this, this? She says no, no, no, no, no, no.

And she has to admit no. Because she knows the, she answered. And at that point, I've already been a few hours of me pounding her. This is infuriating on some level. Now, I don't, this, let me just say, this doesn't make me think that all vaccines are bad. I don't believe that. I genuinely don't believe that. That's not the way we've done our family. I would just say that this is infuriating because there has been so much mudslinging and name calling and like, you're an anti-I mean, listen, there was a whole era

when Charlie was fighting this COVID mandate where he started getting put like Charlie Kirk, anti-vaxxer, Charlie Kirk, like in the media clippings, because he was just like, I don't, this feels really wrong to me, bodily autonomy, this whole argument. And so we got smeared as anti-vaxxers on the show, which was like not true, first of all, but second of all, you know, we were simply asking a question we had never asked before. We had never even talked about it as a team, as a show. It was just like, hey, they're forcing this thing that you just came up with. Like, I know you haven't done the long-term studies about it because we just got it, right? And so you start asking all these new questions. And up until that point, I think most people in the country were like, yeah, I'm like pro vaccine.

You know, save countless lives, right? Right. So all of a sudden, COVID unleashes this new wave of question asking because we saw how we were dealt with and this. And then, but again, I wasn't even questioning the schedule. I wasn't questioning what I thought was, you know, essentially established science, right? And then to hear lead vaccinologists in the world going like, I mean, we didn't. hear it but you filled me in on the second half of the clip which is the most important clip studio but to hear that the answer was no no no no no we don't have science we don't have science

and we don't have the studies it actually to your point now i'm very happy that rfk's hHS and the cdc under him has updated the language saying let me get it let me get it specifically here because i want to make sure i have the exact wording right this 168 vaccines do not cause autism is not an evidence-based claim. And it appears, unless you're, read the next sentence. Scientific studies have not ruled out the possibility

that infant vaccines contribute to the development of autism. However, let me just keep going. The statement has historically been disseminated by the CDC and other federal health agencies within HHS to prevent vaccine hesitancy. Yes. Yeah.

Try being a doctor. This is, okay, this is on your federal government's website now. And I'm sure heads are exploding. And I'm sure you're just, just in the middle of this kind of. And is it fair to say that your role in this because you've been suing vaccine makers?

And I mean, you must be. Not suing vaccine makers. Remember, I can't see them. I would love to sue them for the injuries, but I can't. But you've been litigating these cases, civil rights cases. Right. Against federal government. And so you're probably not very popular among some circles within the medical establishment.

Is that? Understatement, right? Understatement, yeah. Yeah, exactly. understatement and okay so now it's it's i hope it's all coming but yeah i will say focus for you guys at home because i am starting to see where the lines are drawn and where the like where the where the battle lines are at i will tell you it's a mixed bag very unpopular in some circles very popular in others oh i don't doubt that those doc you and i'll tell you i'll tell you the community of the doctors

who actually who actually read the primary sources like joel right um i i think you know Joel doesn't have an emotional reaction to having a discussion with me. He has an intellectual reaction. The doctors who don't know the primary sources who just repeat mantras, they get worked up pretty quick. These doctors did know the primary sources. I'm going to play the second part of that clip. Well, they're a different little. Okay, so they are a vaccineologist.

They're a tiny little group of folks. They're more researchers, if you will, right? They're vaccine. They're vaccinologists. They are like the vaccine experts. When people think of doctors, they think, oh, the doctors, you know, they all know. about vaccines or the pediatricians at least know, or the immunologists know or the infectious disease doctors know.

They're taking their cues from these people. The vaccinologists. That's what people don't get. They do not know. We do not know. We did not learn this. Okay, when we go through our training, we are taught, here are the horrible diseases, here's how much lower we have them today.

Here's your schedule. Good luck. That's it. You don't really get into the details. You certainly don't get into the ingredients. You don't get into safety. You don't learn why we shouldn't trust pharma 101. You just are taught.

vaccines are good. And so you go do it. And it's not nefarious. It's not that any doctor or pediatrician is giving a vaccine because they think they're harming a kid or they want to harm a kid. They want to protect kids. That is what we are taught. And unless you go learn this yourself, unless you listen to testimony like Dr. Aywords, I didn't know any of this. I was in the integrated space and I still didn't know 99% of this.

You have to have these kinds of conversations and doctors need to hear it. And that is why I don't want to have a contentious, conversation with Paul Offent. I want to ask him these questions. I want to say, okay, here's what the research is. Why do you think that vaccines can't cut? I would love to know what they would say if they were questioned. They never get asked those questions because they only go on the things where they get the softball questions where they can say the pre-answered questions. Except for deposition when they have no... Except when they have a deposition, but this is what's frustrating, though, because I have only my own experience to go off of, but we got looked at, like we are crazy people, like, oh, you're those

people. We are probably in terms of our audience on the very moderate end of this. And all I wanted to do was delay certain shots so the kids would get older. That would be like less toxicity issues or whatever. I mean, it was basically like, hey, vaccines are still good, but I just want to kind of like space them out more. And we got looked at like we were absolute nut cases by so many of these pediatricians. And we were struggling to, you know, just get people to work with us. Like this is our comfort level. can you work with us on this? And then on top of that, you have the schools, even private Christian schools in California.

They're bound by the state as well, by the state schedule. It's a brand new year and a brand new opportunity to change the world for the better. This is one of our most important partners. It's easier than you might think you can save babies by providing ultrasounds with pre-born. Together during this sanctity of human life month, we're going to save babies right here on the Charlie Kirk Show to show to show the world that not only do we believe life is precious, but we're going to do something about it.

Your gift to pre-born will give a girl the truth about what's happening in her body so that she can make the right choice. What better way to start this new year than to join us in saving babies? And $28 a month will save a baby a month all year long. A $15,000, and I know there's some of you out there that can do this, a $15,000 gift will provide a complete ultrasound machine that will save thousands of babies for years and years to come. and will also save moms from a lifetime of regret.

So start this year right by being a hero for life. Call 833-850-2229. That's 833-850-229, or click on the pre-born banner at charliekirk.com today. So there's no religious exemption, which is one of the things I want to talk to you about. But before we get too far afield, here is the second half of that clip of the deposition, 175.

Let me just finish. Are there any studies one or another test for whether it does or doesn't cause autism? Part of MMR, but not as varicel of itself. No, sir. No studies that say it does or no studies that say it doesn't. Right. There have been studies that have found an association between hepatitis B vaccine and autism, correct? Not studies that I feel are credible. Okay. Which study are you referring to when you say that? Well, why don't you show me this study? And then I'll see whether I agree with it.

Still missing part of it. But we got a little bit of it right there. Dr. Edwards is one of the four editors of Plotkin's vaccine books. She's considered a world-leading vaccinologist. Okay. But there is a difference because the vaccinologists are the ones that are really, you know, they're the ones at the CDC, everybody else relies upon. You know, when I deposed pediatricians, infectious disease doctors, or immunologists, they don't

know almost anything about vaccines in my experience. The ones who know, who know, you know, are the vaccinologists, right? Dr. Warsh knows more about vaccines than virtually than any pediatrician immunologist or infectious doctor or vaccine that I've encountered. So, because he's looked at it. They don't look at it. That's a very nice thing to say. Yeah.

Yeah. And, you know, and I want to give you your due here as well. Doctor, I'm not hearing from you that you're anti these vaccines. I'm hearing that you want to make sure everybody has freedom, which is like a crazy idea. Now, I would be convinced potentially on this community immunity if you could make the case to me. Okay. Because there is a benefit. One of the main things I've ever heard from, you know, the benefit of vaccines is that you could immunize a whole population and therefore nobody dies.

Right. Okay. That is sort of the idea. But I love that you're saying at least if I, because my experience is I got looked at like I was a crazy person, I feel like I wouldn't be looked at like that in your office and you would give me a strategy and a plan of attack to do it. Yeah. I mean, if there was a magic pill and you could give that magic pill to your kids and they would never get sick and there would be no consequences, everybody would line up for that. That's not the reality of the world. The vaccine is not magic. It's a product. We have to weigh the risks versus the benefits. And the question is what are the risks we we have a pretty decent understanding of the benefits we don't have a full understanding of the risk and that's the question and why are we not able to talk about that why don't doctors want to know that i don't understand if if they do increase the risk of let's say asthma let's say have be increases your risk of asthma by 10 times wouldn't we want to know that wouldn't we want to say hey well but this is the question why won't prominent vaccine experts debate skeptics openly. Are we suggesting there's a financial incentive

to not do so for them personally or institutionally? Why won't Paul Offa to do it? He can't defend it. Now, Paul would not sit here and debate me. There's no question. I don't think he could. The primary, he's indefensible in my view. That's why he won't do it.

I would love to hear his opinion, though. I would love to be able to ask him these questions very nicely and say, convince me otherwise. I'm happy to give kids a million vaccines if they pretend. you from everything and don't cause any harm. But I don't ever hear the discussions about the harms. That's what happened with hepatitis B this last week. It was all the things you hear on the news are, we're going to kill kids. There are going to be people that are going to get liver cancer.

We're going to get more hepatitis B. But the question is at what cost? How many kids are being harmed by this vaccine when you're giving it to a one day old newborn? They say none. But they don't have the evidence to back that up. Because where are those studies? It was never done before the vaccine hit the market. So what can a patient do if their doctor refuses to discuss vaccine I mean, if they refuse to discuss vaccine options and you want to talk about it, then you should find a different doctor. I mean, that's the simple answer. Agreed. What if you find yourself like I was in the hospital room and I'm not given options?

You're talking about the newborn? You've got to step in, right? Just say no. You just say no. You can always refuse. You put your foot down and you say no. There are no mandates to get a vaccine. There are rules for school.

Yeah, I was going to say, so go back to California. You're in California, right? Correct. So sent my kids to a Christian school, thought we'd have more options, explore. religious freedoms there was none this is i remember being in shows telling charlie tell them to get religious freedom for california and and you know even hHS is saying well it's a state-based issue we can't do anything about it are you suing california for this kind of stuff please tell me i do have a lawsuit in california we restored the exemption of mississippi we got a federal

court decision that restored a religious exemption there we uh we just we're in the middle of doing it in west virginia please is that the answer though and i want to get you in because i know you're You've got something important here, but is that the answer, or is there a more wide, sweeping answer we need to pursue to this issue of medical autonomy, medical freedom? You want my little bit longer answer to that? Yes, please. Okay. Here's my little bit longer answer to that. The answer is that, yes, we should have freedom.

You know, this country was founded on the, as a rebellion against the idea that there's some central authority. some central government, a king, a dictator, whatever it was that should make the decisions for you. It was bounded on the idea that we should all have individual and civil rights, so those are an enabling rights given to us by our maker. And to be sure, freedoms come with dangers. Letting people have freedom of speech comes with danger and assemble who they want. You talk about cars. Religion who they want.

Freedom to have cars. Freedom to have cars. Everything comes with a risk. But we have struck the balance in this country that we should always err on the side of letting individuals make their choice over letting the government make the choice. Because the second you say somebody else should choose, it always ends up being the government. And that always creates problems in the long run, always. Okay.

And so, and when you also look at the long arc of history, okay, in my opinion, what's caused more harm, devastation to humanity than any pestilence or anything else, it is the idea that individuals shouldn't have rights and freedoms that the government should suppress and do what they want. And how do they do that typically? How does the government get what they want? coercion mandates exactly it starts slowly a little bit of coercion a little more and a little more and then it's in censorship because when the government has a policy then revoking licenses then you know

using the force yeah exactly and when do they do that they do that when they can't persuade you on the merits okay that's when they do it the government should try to persuade you on the merits of vaccines they spend billions of dollars a year promoting vaccines billions already promoting them okay they act like anti-vaxers whatever again that means or somehow this huge thing. It's not, it's not a, it's, it's the families you've injured. In my opinion, the reason Bobby's worried is because there are millions who have been negatively affected by vaccines and people always say to me, well, you know, vaccines cause harm, I would know it.

I'd say, do you know the last three drugs that came off the market? You don't. You know why? And do you know what harms are caused? Because it didn't affect you or your family. So good for you. And the vaccines didn't harm you, good for you. So you wouldn't know it.

But for those that it did, it did and and they're there now mandates are the use is is are what bullies turrets and dictators use and they can't get their way on persuasion on the merits and so I don't think there should be any mandates of these products period so to answer your question a religious exemption is a substitute so to speak but no there shouldn't be mandates at all persuade of the matter what Florida is doing by the way Denmark has no mandate Sweden has no manmarked Finland has no mandates most provinces Canada have no manly it's same thing in Australia and a lot of states here yeah there are

many states we're not seeing massive outbreaks even though they have religious freedom and personal belief exemptions check the box so check the box exemptions the only ones that don't right now are cali new york main and connecticut and west virginia is in the works that's it west virginia yeah interesting it's it's it's governor morse is totally on the side of restoring man of an exemption there so the point is that and and and just like uh jol just like uh jill just said 45 states we check the box exemptions that's worked just fine and let's not forget doctor is literally the word dosair it means to teach it's not to force right my job is not to force somebody to do anything that was never the job why are we here to force a vaccine on somebody that doesn't want

it our job is to educate if i believe so strongly in vaccines i should be able to give you that information that will convince you that this product is good for your child so i'm i'm cognizant of the fact. Sorry. I promise you that I'm like, sorry. Riley, by all means, if you have questions here. Go ahead. I'll... Okay. All right. Formulate your next one. What I don't want to do is to, on the show, is to

make people more confused. Maybe this is the wrong question, but directed as you will. You have kids, right? I do. Okay. Is there one or two vaccines that, like, or three or four that you're like, no, no, no, that's a good one. We were talking about vitamin K before we came on it.

You know, I just, things like that. That, like, don't, please don't get these things lost in the shuffle as we're talking about all these other, you know, conversations about medical autonomy and freedom of choice and doing what's in the best informed consent, all this. Is there stuff that they, like, please don't get, throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak? Right. So, I mean, that's the question I get asked the most is, what should I do? what's the best vaccines? And the answer is you have to go back and weigh the risks and the benefits. There isn't anything.

It's so hard, though, for parents, but they have to. We have full-time jobs. We are teaching baseball. We got, you know, we're just trying to survive. If you want to defer to the CDC schedule, you can do that. If you want to go outside of the CDC schedule. Is there good resources, though, like of other trusted voices? But the way that you do it is you have to look at, okay, what could kill my kid, what is

actually around, what's less likely for them to get, where are they probably not going to get? and then what are the known risks and what are the benefits? You have to weigh it like that. We know that there's measles around. We know that there is whooping cough around. Very unlikely to get very sick from rotavirus. Very unlikely to get very sick from hepatitis B. Very unlikely to get very sick from chickenpox.

Hamophos influenza can make you very sick, though it's very rare. Numococcus is a little bit more prevalent, but still could make you very sick. So you can weigh it like that, but ultimately any kid could get anything. If you're traveling, because it's a basic question. So we asked a bunch of the moms to send in questions, and it was like, does my child need any shots? It's simple, but it's a main one. If they don't travel outside the U.S., is that, like, point is like, can somebody be completely safe and fine and healthy if they don't get any shots? Yeah, of course.

I mean, most of these diseases are very rare, and even if you get them, you are very unlikely to get extremely sick. But it is possible. People die of the flu. People die of measles. People have kids have died of whooping cough. So you could be that one kid that gets very sick. it's very unlikely. If everybody stops vaccinating from measles, will it be more prevalent?

Yeah, that's probably true. There will be more people to get it. So we have to weigh that in context. They die from it. There will. There's a ratio there, right? So that's the same thing with Hep B. Like, for the new recommendation, will more kids get hepatitis be?

Probably. A few. Some of the data that you've looked at suggests that if you get measles or like normally in nature, that you might have other potential benefits, which is something people parents should look into. Yeah, it's the data directly on PubMed. And kids that have had measles and moms, okay, this data is, this is, there's no data that contradicts the study.

20% decline in cardiovascular deaths. Think about that. Cardiovascular disease kills 900,000 Americans a year. If it has a 20% decline, think about how many life years saved or a loss that is, even, you know, even when you compare it to, even if it's a, you know, even if it's a lot of, 1% even if it's 1% decline, right? Increase in cardiovascular deaths. Your public health benefit has gone upside down.

Let me tell you something. Pathogens over time come and gone, right, throughout the eons. They come and they go. Measles hasn't. It could be that maybe God didn't mess up. Maybe there was an evolutionary technological reason that measles around. I'm not saying there was. I'm just saying that that data appears to reflect that.

Also studies that show, for example, that kids that have had measles versus those that don't, okay, have a, I have a 66% reduction in Hodgkins lymphoma and 166% reduction in non-hachsophoma. That killed 20,000 people last year, a lot of them kids, okay? Again, if having measles reduces that rate, then again, your public health benefits upside down. Now, I'll point to one of the data points, and then I'll stop, and I'll just point to this. In the early 1980s, there's data that reflect the less than 10% of kids had a chronic health condition in America. today it's over 40% some data showing over 50 and often multiple times

and what are those chronic health conditions that have gone through the roof almost all of them have some basis on some form of immune system dysregulation where there's asthma and a topic issue even ADHD has its ideology if you look at the sun underlying science in biomarkers or show to some form of immune system dysfunction okay what has caused the immune system of our children to go Well, that's a multi-billion-dollar question.

Well, let me tell you, it's not that, let me put it this way, okay? Let me tell you where to start. I have to say, you are not a doctor, right? I just want to say, like, I'm not a doctor. I'm about to tell you a place to start based on logic, common sense. I think, okay, my 10-year-old give you this answer, okay? You don't need to have any degrees to give this answer. Why don't it just start with ruling out the products that you now inject 29 times,

specifically to modify the immune system by the first birthday. Rule those out. You know what the medical community can't tell you right now? They can't tell you what to cause and all that stuff for the most part. Can I pick it back? Because I think it's really important to go back to your question where you said about what should I do. To me, that is the most confusing part is the understanding of what are these long-term risks.

Are vaccines related to asthma, allergies, autoimmune condition, autism, all of these things matter because if they're not related to those in any way and we do all the research and we find that, that really changes the equation when you say, oh, well, we're preventing one hep B. Okay, that's good. But if it's creating all of these other problems, then we need to know that because that changes the risk-benefit calculation where you say, okay, well, now we're doing all these vaccines. What if we just prioritize the few and that can bring it down? It's not about not wanting to protect kids from disease.

You also want to protect them from chronic disease. And so you have to balance those two things. We don't want anybody to be sick. But if vaccines are related in some way to chronic disease, we need to know that. And there is no way right now that we are studying to figure that out. You have to follow kids forward. Well, it sounds like, vaccinated versus on vaccine. We need a lot more studies is what we need. We have to. We have to do that. We only have epidemiology. And epidemiology can be adjusted and massaged based on the person's predetermined beliefs. And that's why sometimes you see a very pro-vaccine person find very pro-vaccine findings and a pretty anti-vaccine person find something that's not. Because, you can adjust it to find what you're looking to find. The only way to answer the question, in my opinion, the only way for me to be able to tell you what you should do

is to know what are the risks. Then I can weigh those two things, and I can say your benefit from this vaccine outweighs your risk. Is there like a central database where like-minded doctors like yourself, you know, so example, so somebody might be listening to this. There are a few. Well, somebody might be listening to this and, you know, they might be living in Columbus, Ohio.

And they're like, well, I can't get out to L.A. or whatever, where you live. Could, is there like, could they find somebody that you would, you know, that you might be like-minded with in Columbus? But how do they find that? You ask the other parents that are holistic-minded. There's no real, like, easy way to find. You want to create a target list for them, for them, of the list of documents. Well, yeah, see, I feel. That's part of the problem.

Yeah, that's part of the problem. Okay. We have other questions from moms, though. So, yeah, another mom sent in this question. which kind of piggybacks based off what you were just talking about is many parents say that their child has changed after having vaccines, especially after, obviously, a vaccine. How should doctors respond in a way that respects the parent but is also evidence-based? Well, we should be listening to parents.

I mean, this is the craziest part of the whole vaccine autism world, which you bring that up and then doctors say, oh, there's no proof. We don't have proof that ice cream causes autism. And I'm like, well, okay, true. You don't have a study to prove that, but there are hundreds of thousands or at least tens of thousands of parents, probably hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, that have said, after my kid got a vaccine, this happened. That's important data. It's not some random piece of information. Parents say this.

This is not an anti-vaccine parent. This is literally a parent who went in to get a vaccine, and they swear their kid was acting one way the day before and different the day after. Why would we not listen to those parents? That's the data that we need. We have to figure out, are there some genetics? Is there something else that they're doing? Why are those kids having those reactions? Some of them are probably coincidental.

That's for sure. I mean, you get a vaccine this morning. You might have a heart attack this afternoon. But if millions of people have a heart attack on the same day they get a vaccine, shouldn't you just say, hmm, maybe it's the vaccine. Shouldn't we study that? But these moms don't feel like they're being listened to. They're not being listened to.

They haven't been. They haven't been. And that's hopefully what's going to change. Hopefully, if we continue to have these conversations, we're not going to look at a parent who thinks that a vaccine caused their child's problem and call them an anti-vaxor or call them crazy. They're not crazy. They have an experience. We need to listen to that experience, and we need to study it so that way we can figure out if it is true or not. If vaccines are related to autism, why don't we want to know that? It's not because we don't want to ever give a kid a vaccine again. Wouldn't you want to know so you could say, hey, well, that vaccine looks like it's increasing your risk of eczema by 20 times. Why? Is there an ingredient in there? Can we change that ingredient? Can we change the schedule? Can we do something different? We don't have to stop vaccinating ever again. We could change it. We've done that before.

So why can't we have those discussions? It's insane. We want to protect kids. We want them to be healthy. We want them not to get infections and not to have chronic conditions. So we need to start listening to these parents. And I hope that people are starting to connect and to understand that they're not the only ones. There are many, many people that feel this way.

He sees them all the time. I get, you know, some of them, but not as many as he probably sees. But it's important that we come together. Yeah. I just find, I mean, what I'm, hopeful that we are doing here is we're educating about some of the underlying science. I think that you guys have done brilliantly. But these, you know, we were just with Marina, who's our CMO. She's pregnant. She's the CMO of Turning Point USA. She stopped by. And she, obviously, she finds out you're here.

And she's like, well, I actually do have questions, you know. And they're trying to get her, to, her doctor, her pediatric, or her OB said, you've got, you have to get three shots. You have to get a flu shot, an RSV shot and was it whooping cough was it okay so and she was like oh wait what like I have to get these for my baby at this point like so what can I I know we're jumping around here we're doing a rapid fire before we close here but what is what should moms be knowledgeable about when they're being told they need to get in utero vaccines basically but like but when they're when they're still pregnant as opposed to for their baby well I think you need to be aware of what's recommended and why understand what protections you might get and what risks there might be.

And then you have to decide if you're comfortable with that. Some people are, some people aren't. But those are the recommendations. So I think it's important to know what the benefits might be. And then you have to have discussions with your doctor and decide if you want to do it. You also need to know that it's not forced. Nothing's forced. You don't have to do it.

You could do it after. You can give vaccines to your baby. You could do no vaccines. There's nothing that is forced. And I don't think people realize that it's not a mandate. They're just recommendations. So take that same question to you. are you litigating any cases when it's like the baby's still in utero with these vaccines?

I mean, because that's actually sort of, you know, I mean, maybe the more pertinent question. Are there risks that you've seen just as a litigator, as a lawyer on that front? Oh, yeah. Well, there are risks from every vaccine. Again, can't see the manufacturer, can't hold a company accountable. If you're injured by a vaccine and you call our firm, we will, we can file. typically only a claim in the vaccine your compensation program

where you don't get an Article 3 judge, you get a special master, you get no discovery of rights. This is so wild. It's wild. So it can't you get paper discovery. How is this constitutional?

It shouldn't be. I think it's totally unconstitutional, actually. I do. Yeah. And, you know, pain and suffering is capped at 250. Death is capped at 250. And you fight against a DOJ

with endless resources. I mean, so yes, there are no vaccines that we don't litigate that cause all kinds of issues. You've heard some of them earlier today, Jan Boray syndrome, transdris myelitis, which are your body's own immune system attacking the nerves in your body. You can cause paralysis, cause other issues, a whole host of other things. And then separate from that work on our,

you know, I'll also point out that there are a series of studies that have looked at kids with no vaccines and kids that are vaccinated. They do exist. Now, most of them are smaller, the retrospective, some of them are a little larger. Um, But they are consistent. And there's a lot, there's a bunch of them. I detail them. And they show that the kids who are vaccinated have, have multiple times the rate of all forms of chronic health issues, the ones that have gone up, also the ones that are often disclosed by the manufacturers and the package insert. Interesting.

So wrapping this kind of conversation up is, is difficult because I think that I'm probably. like a lot of parents out there where you just want somebody to tell you, do this, don't do this, don't do this, and do this. And it's just such a complicated conversation because it sounds like we don't have the studies that most people would assume we have, that there are risks in everything, and we have to weigh those one by one, meaning the individual has to do their own work, the parent has to do their own work. Motivated parents are going to do that. There's a lot of parents that are not maybe as educated, maybe they're not as informed, maybe they've even heard this kind of conversation before. It's going to be hard. It's just one of those topics where there just seems to be

so much outstanding that we don't know yet, and it seems like RFK is doing that. If you had to give, if you had to grade the HHS under Bobby Kennedy Jr., are you happy with what you're seeing? What could he do better? And maybe that's a good place where you'd like to see this conversation go in the months coming months ahead yeah i mean overall i'm very happy i think we're moving in an excellent direction in terms of opening up the floor to discussion and looking into some of these things i hope i really hope that individuals who have been in the vaccine space for a long time the mainstream doctors the paul offices of the world will be more involved i think that's really important i don't think things are going to change in any significant way until everybody comes to the table and sits together

and has these discussions and have debates and look at what we do have and what we don't have and where we can go from here and are actually honest about that. I think if we can have those discussions, if we can get everybody at the table, then everyone can realize it's not pro-vaccine people versus anti-vaccine people or HHS versus other people. It's everyone against pharma. We're all on the same team. We're all here for our kids. All I want is for kids to be healthy.

And I don't care if they get 1,000 vaccines or zero vaccines as long as they're healthier. And the only way we're going to get there is if we can talk about it, be honest about what we know, and then to keep doing the research and the studies and figure out whatever it is. I don't know what the answer is. And that's why when you ask me the question, should I do this or that vaccine, I don't know the answer on long-term risk. So I can't give you a definitive answer based on statistics. I can only say this is what the CDC recommends. So that's what's recommended.

And until we have that data, I don't think that you can honestly give a specific answer. You can have an opinion. You can believe vaccines are the worst thing ever when you should ever do it. believe the vaccines are the best thing ever and should get them all, but ultimately we have to follow the data. And I think we're missing that piece. Well, and I just want to say because we've had like Kramu, who's a, he calls himself a statistician or whatever. He's set on the show recently that he did not believe that autism rates were actually increasing. It was actually the way we were measuring it or opening the aperture, diagnosing more different. But you both believe that

empirically the data says autism is increasing. Definitely. That is what. That is what. what the stat, that is what the studies show. Better diagnosis accounts for some of it, but there is a real increase. I don't see how anybody. I think both both things are true, but there's a real increase and a massive increase. And we've got to find out why, which is what Bobby's doing at HHS. He's trying to determine, I mean, he said that was, he was trying to get to the bottom of why the increase was happening. And yeah, which that question bleeds into the first one I asked, How is the HHS under RFK? I think Secretary Kennedy is doing, I think he's, he's doing, he's doing, you know, he's working

and fighting every day to, to improve things. He's dealing with 65, over 65,000 career employees below him, you know, from a decade of litigating with those folks. I'm the close start of the vaccine issue, the more zealots they are. You know, I know that for millions of internal emails we've gotten through FOIA requests. So he's still got those folks to deal with. And then, of course, he's still above him as the White House who's, you know, they're supportive. They're supportive, but there's different personalities in the White House.

It's not one person. It's a lot of people. People fail to understand that sometimes. Yeah. So he's, you know, he's, and he doesn't get to pick all the people at HHS, even the political appointees, as you know, right? They got to go through PPO and, you know, the White House picks them. And it's not like, different considerations for each appointment. There's different favors you might have to.

You know, exactly. Exactly. It's complicated business. So within, you know, so he is fighting to, I mean, nobody, nobody that I know has given up more than Secretary Kennedy to fight on this issue or fright on, frankly, any issue. I mean, listen, he was a Kennedy. He was the darling. He was on the front page of magazines. He had a million positions, all paying him for basically sitting around and just using his name.

And when he saw kids injured from these products, he just didn't let it go. no matter how much they beat him. To this day, he won't let it go because he has seen what I've seen. He knows the injuries that it can cause. I will also just add one more point, which is that I know it's, you're like, oh, parents have to go and do their own research. Unfortunately, with vaccines, they do, because unlike every other product, the market self-corrects.

The market would take care of eliminating products that aren't safe that would force companies would naturally want. replace them. But they don't self-correct with this product. It is truly unique. I agree with you. We're very busy. Everybody's busy. But these products, though, unfortunately, you don't have, the industry is not, can't be held accountable in the same way in any way, almost. And the government, for the most part, and Bobby's trying to work on this, is, is not really there defending the consumer. They're fighting the consumers. So it's a unique space. I think it's a fascinating conversation, Again, I just want to make sure we get all of our plugs here, right?

So Dr. Joel Gator Warsh, you can go by Gator because that's your social media. Where'd that name come from? My wife's last name's Intelligator, so. Okay, because I'm saying Dr. Gator. Dr. Gator Warsh, MD, author of Between a Shot and a Hard Place. You can throw the artwork up, and you can find them on X and IG at Dr. Joel Gator. And then Aaron Siri, civil rights attorney, managing partner of Siri in Glimstad, right? LLP.

uh, Siri LLP.com and, uh, he's the author of vaccines amen. Uh, really fascinating conversation. And, uh, we could go on and on, but I think we've covered a lot of ground here. And so I just want to thank you both for making the time and, um, just coming to this conversation with good faith. And, uh, hopefully we can expand the circle and have some of these conversations that we, that we want to have as well. And you guys could come back for that. So we'll do our best to bring, uh, bring some of those voices into the next conversation. It would be great if you can bring some and I'll just bring Dr. Offutt.

Yeah, with you in the room, maybe not. I don't know how likely we're going to be to get them on. But thank you guys so much. Thank you. Great job, Riley, as well. Until next time, we'll see you soon. For more on many of these stories

and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.