The Highwire with Del Bigtree - DOCTOR SUES OREGON MEDICAL BOARD FOR $35 MILLION

Episode Date: September 13, 2022

Dr. Paul Thomas is under threat by the Oregon Medical Board for publishing eye-opening, real-world data on his thousands of vaccinated, and unvaccinated patients. But, Dr. Paul is fighting back.#DrDrew #DrPaulThomas #MedicalMisinformation #ORMedicalBoard #DrPaulsFight #OMBBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Throughout the pandemic, Hollywood seemed to be the propaganda machine for all the ridiculous laws and rules that were sort of thrown upon us. So I think it's particularly important when we start seeing Hollywood celebrities coming out against politics, especially the politics of California that seem to be the head of these draconian measures. And this time, it's a doctor, one of America's favorite doctors, coming out against a recently. past bill. Take a look at this. But I just want to explain how draconian this law is this 2098 in the state of California. Literally would be the case that if you were about, if I was evaluated

a patient, let's say you come in, you're my patient and you come in and you say the CDC is recommending that I get this new Omicron vaccine, this biobion vaccine. I'm concerned because what I'm reading suggests that it was only studied on mice. And if I say

anything other than standard what would it be? Standard empty slogans as specified by the academic and the bureaucratic structure, which would be you're over 60 years old. It's recommended that you get this booster. Follow the proto. If I said, for instance, you're right.

It was studied on mice. I'm probably going to recommend it my patients over 65, certainly over 75. I think it's worth the risk. There is antacetin, very, very similar vaccines in influenza. influenza, and this is sort of how we do it with influenza every year. We don't test it necessarily in humans every year. So there's a protocol out there. But if you were 30 years old, I would say, you know, there was just a study that came out in circulation last this week that suggested that in men under 40, the risk of myocarditis is five times higher from the Moderna vaccine than from COVID itself. Right there, that would qualify as misinformation, even though it's factually accurate. It's a merely meet discussing what's something. available in the medical literature with my patient. Let's say that patient was angry for some reason. That patient could make an anonymous complaint to the state. And he or she could go home and go, you know what, mom and dad and brother and sister, you guys, I'd like you to make the complaint too.

Here's what my complaint is. Why don't you modify a little bit? I heard something he said in the public the other day. I didn't like either. So add that to it. Each one of those complaints would be dealt with as though a police report had been filed for a criminal action. It will require a full response with citations and will take months and months and may require hiring an attorney for each case. That is what they are doing.

It is absolutely out of control. Now, I'm sure they're going to say, oh, no, no, we'd never use it like that. Of course they don't intend it. That's how these laws have unintended effect. It will be absolutely chilling on the practice of medicine. become almost impossible to practice medicine the way we are trained to, which is to use our objective reasoning, to share ideas with our patients, and to come up with the best possible

recommendation for that particular patient for that particular circumstance. Well, obviously, we discussed this last week. The bill AB 2098 has got Dr. Drew all pissed off. This is the bill that essentially is passed that allows the medical board. to go ahead and investigate anybody, any doctor that says anything that basically goes against the standard operating procedure coming from the CDC. This is it, California bill docs spreading misinformation is unprofessional conduct. And when we think about this, and I said this, I went off on this last week. At the same moment, the CDC is saying they basically got everything wrong.

They're releasing, you know, relaxing all of the regulations when it comes to social distancing and masks and even vaccinating or where you can go because none of it worked. They were dead wrong on all of it, but every doctor that came out against it had issues. But I think one of the points he's making, we should just drill down a little bit more. He's talking about the new booster shot that involves the Omicron virus. They decided to sort of update the booster shot with Omicron. And instead of like doing a human trial, they decided to just do a mouse trial. But it's even worse than that.

It wasn't just like a mouse trial deciding the fate of millions, if not billions of people around the world. It was eight freaking mice. This is what Dr. Drew is going to be shackled to. He's not going to be able to talk out about, you know, talk against this when he knows for a fact, just like many people that are tweeting out about this. Look at this. This is what some of the comments that were made about this trial. In 2020, this is Jay Batakaria.

In 2021, the Biden administration Fauci and the CDC made a bet on the basis of incomplete, randomized trial data that the Vax would stop COVID transmission. Not. Vax mandates and discrimination followed for the new. booster, some are making the same bet based on data from eight mice. This is Ian Miller. If intellectually honest media still existed, it would probably be a bigger story that a new booster dose was authorized and will be relentlessly promoted based entirely on data from eight mice.

And this is Representative Mary Miller. The Biden FDA has authorized a new COVID booster based on data from eight mice. The last time the FDA approved boosters, two senior FDA officials resigned. It's time for serious oversight and reform. at the FDA, you think? And then lastly, our favorite Dr. Erso today, the FDA approved bivalent BA5 booster

because of an unspecified emergency. The booster was tested on drum roll, eight mice. That's it. It will be given to millions of people next week. This is not Gallows humor, just gallows. I mean, it really is

outrageous. And what you have to think about is they're trying to say it's just like the flu shot. Well, the flu shot's been used for decades, And so when they update that, they decide they don't have to do safety trials and efficacy trials all over again. I think they should, actually. I've been arguing that for a long time. It's still a different product. I don't care what they say.

But in this circumstance, they never did the proper long-term safety trial because they put it out during an emergency use authorization. So we have no idea of long-term effects. We still have no idea of long-term effects. Always hear football players and soccer players and softball players slamming head first into the ground, stars and comedians and people dying suddenly in their sleep. Everywhere we look, we see a rise in excess mortality all over the planet Earth that cannot be explained, but definitely let's go with this science and just duplicate it without any further review. Well, we'll throw eight mice out there for you.

I mean, think how cheap that is. They can't even afford 50 mice or 100 mice or how about a thousand mice. And if you saw this study, it's a disaster. No mouse comes out the same. They literally are all being affected in different ways. But I want to say this to Dr. Drew, though it's really great that you're speaking the truth now. It's pretty much a day late and a dollar short. Where were you when all the people were gathering at the Capitol

over the last several weeks trying to fight this bill for you? Regular moms and dads out there trying to fight for you, the doctors. Where were you when you could have made a difference? Can you imagine Dr. Drew if you'd have walked into the politician's offices and said, you know, I'm one of America's favorite doctors on television and I'm totally against this bill? You know, I would love to see it if you would just decide to every once in a while, be brave!

Step off. Stand for what you actually care about, like your own career and the future of medicine as we know it. All right. Let me just calm down here a second because we have a huge show coming up. And I also want to talk about, you know, what it means to be a good doctor. Dr. Drew is afraid of sort of stepping out there and doing what's right. How about the doctors that have been stepping out there? I want to talk to one of them right now. I'm going to talk about Dr. Paul Thomas, who has been there on the front lines at state capitals, standing in front of medical boards, taking it on, bringing the truth out from his own practice on what's going on with children, and now he's got a lawsuit.

Take a look at this. You want to talk about taking it to the man? This is how you do it. Portland pediatrician files a $35 million defamation suit against state medical board members. I like that a heck of a lot better than whining about a law that you didn't do anything about when it mattered. So let's talk to Dr. Paul Thomas right now. He joins me. You know, first of all, there's a lot of people that don't know who you are. So just give me a sense of how you really got yourself in trouble very quickly with your Vax versus Unvax study. Hey, Del, it's great to be on the show with you. You're cracking me up with all this story.

But yeah, so here's what happens. 14 years ago, I started my practice, Integrated Pediatrics. I left a mainstream group practice because I was seeing kids were getting harmed by vaccines. It was pretty clear. It was just bam, bam. So I started a practice where we honored informed consent. Well, over time, the medical board got wind of this, I guess, or maybe it was the publication of my book,

the vaccine-friendly plan, whatever. They started coming after me just over and over. This book, by the way, folks, let me just point it out while we're here. Let's not go blowing through because you have to understand Dr. Paul, we have like millions more of followers every time you come on this show. So I want to just make sure everyone knows the work that you're doing. For those of you out there that are questioning your vaccines or want to dip your toes,

your book is a vaccine-friendly plan, which is sort of laying out a safer way to vaccinate, sort of spreading them out, and maybe a different schedule if you're interested in that approach. All right, so continue on. Okay. So that book was written with the best understanding I had back then, published in 2016. Two years later, the medical board starts coming with complaints. Now, these are not patient-generated complaints. I don't know where they're coming from.

It's just actually they were going after my data. They wanted the data that was in that book because that book shows, that the unvaccinated patients had far less autism. They basically had far less chronic health issues. So January of 2019, the medical board sends me a letter and says prove that the vaccine-friendly plan is as safe as the CDC schedule. I mean, I had to laugh. The CDC has never done any study comparing one year to the next. They've never compared the full vaccine schedule to no vaccines or to partial vaccine. They just don't do that. So they want me to do that for them. I thought,

That's impossible and then somebody had a brilliant idea. Hire an outside expert, get the data. So we did. We looked at every single patient born into my practice up to the point of that data set being closed. We had 10 and a half years of data. It was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

and this was the largest real world patient data vaxed unvaxed. And so again, how many kids altogether did you have in your practice? You have a huge practice there. I mean, the numbers? Well, yeah. It was probably at that time we had 15,000 patients, but this was looking at a data set of a little less than 4,000 because we were only looking at the ones actually born into my practice.

Oh, I see. Okay, so you're limited to being born in. And let's be clear, because I think this is quite brilliant. The CDC has never done a study. I've talked about this a lot of times. The Institute of Medicine verified this in an entire dissertation that they gave, that they've never compared the outcomes of like the full vaccine. So they asked you to go on a shadow boxing mission because how do you compare your safety to their safety when they've never established safety of this program? So then to be clear, what you decided to do was, okay, but I do have a large group of children in my practice that use the CDC schedule.

So I have all of the evidence that they provided. And then I have the other ones in my practice that didn't use the CDC schedule. And I can compare the two schedules that way. Is that basically what you decided to do? Well, close. So we were definitely looking at every single patient born in my practice. There was no cherry picking. There was no, we're going to exclude you for this or that. Every baby born was looked at and we looked at every single office visit. We stratified them according to the number of vaccines they had. Okay. So basically we had over 500 who had zero vaccines. And then we had another 3,700 and some who had some vaccines. And what we found Dell was actually even, mind-boggling for myself. I mean, I had a sense. I've had a practice now for 14 years where parents get to decide. The one thing I am absolute on is informed consent. You, the parent,

get to decide what gets injected into your baby, if anything. You should always insist on that or else walk out of that doctor's office. But because we do inform consent, we had a growing number of unvaccinated patients. And what I was clearly seeing was, these kids don't get sick. They don't get chronic conditions. Well, the data spoke for itself. And you're showing your viewers the grass. Those orange lines are over time, over that 10 and a half years, the more vaccines you had, the worse you were for whether we looked at infections, ADD, ADHD, neurodevelopmental issues, eczema, allergies.

It doesn't matter what we looked at, even just plain old anemia, skyrockets in the vaccinated when compared to the blue line, the unvaccinated. Wow. This data is so powerful that within five days of it, being available online, they yanked my license. December 3rd, 2020, the Oregon Medical Board had an emergency meeting, suspended my license. I was supposedly a threat to public health. It's amazing. I mean, really, like, they really should have come in and said, we'd love to see that data. This is very interesting information since we've never done this study ourselves, like we should

have. Can we look at the data? Can you walk us through it? They never, did they ever do that? Like, Can you walk us through where your data comes from? Let us sort of cross-reference it, maybe bring in some outside scientists to test, you know, whether or not, you know, this sort of repeats depending on who's looking at it, right? Did you have any offers like that? No, nothing at all. I mean, you're absolutely right. The Oregon Medical Board, if their interest is the health of the population,

they should have been spreading the news about this incredible difference in outcomes. I mean, it's absolutely amazing. So you've been battling back and forth for your license, you know, multiple times. Where are you currently at right now with your license? Are you licensed in Oregon? Yes. So six months later, my attorney realized, wait a minute, these folks didn't file. When you take someone's license emergently, you have to simultaneously or very soon after that file for why you're doing that.

Right. You cannot just yank somebody's livelihood and then, oh, too bad. Well, they forgot to do that or they neglected to do that or whatever. So they were kind of in trouble. And he got them to agree, I still signed this under duress, Del, because they restricted me from, I can't talk to patients about vaccines, I can't talk to my staff about vaccines, I can't see well children, and I can't do research on patients. I mean, that tells you what they're worried about.

Right, right, like all of those things. But you have your practice back. But so now, but you're taking this step further, right? You're not stopping there. This thing, and obviously, they're not going to stop, right? No. Every one of the doctors we've watched like you that's come on the show. You know, even Bob Sears, again, is back under review.

They just keep coming at you because until they have totally crushed you and destroyed your practice and kicked you out of the business, they don't seem to let up. So you've decided to do the opposite. Instead of being on the defensive, you're going on the offensive. So tell me about this case. Yeah. So, Del, since they took my license in 2020. they've had over 30 different requests of me. I mean, these letters come monthly, sometimes weekly.

You're absolutely right. They are intent on destroying you. I have a hearing coming up in November, but it's just kangaroo court. And every single legal mind, including Aaron Siri, who I know works for you, every single legal mind is saying it's a kangaroo court, you will be destroyed,

and you're going to run up a half a million dollar bill that they're going to force you to pay. So I kept looking for an attorney who would actually sue them, because what they have done is so illegal and so wrong. And thankfully, Steve Junkus appeared. And man, let me tell you, we have sued the medical board on violating freedom of speech, violating due process.

So they cannot take your individual property, be that my license or the destruction of my practice, by fabricating evidence. I mean, the utilization of government power to violate my due process is unparalleled. They have failed in their supervisory capacity. so where I'm actually individually suing each member of the board. And on, you know, the, the ridiculousness of what they've done is that they're basing almost every single allegation on the fact that I provide informed consent. They want doctors to follow the rules of the CDC.

I watched the beginning of your show and that's exactly what is happening in California. You just say what the CDC says and you're okay. Otherwise, we want your license. And, you know, informed consent is not the danger. The danger is people... It should be. I thought it was the law. Forget about the danger. I thought it was actually the law. I thought, you know, since we, like, hung a bunch of Nazi doctors, we recognize that the free informed consent of the patient was critical to modern health care.

So the idea that we are abandoning that and then attacking any doctor that wants to give you full informed consent, which is, here is all the benefits, here are all the negative things, here's what we don't know, which Dr. Drew beautifully laid out. Yes, there was only... ate my studies in this. I'm being told I have to recommend it to you. And maybe if you're in an age where it's such a high risk for him, he says, you know, I suppose I would recommend it. But if you're under the age of 40, I happen to know that it causes myocarditis at ridiculously increased rates. And as soon as I say that, I'm in trouble. And so, you know, here you are, but I want to make this

point. You know, people can just see this as a lawsuit or some sort of vendetta between you and your medical board. But right now, you're representing the world. You're representing Dr. Drew down in California. The precedence that needs to be set right now is so critical. We need to back these medical boards off and allow the doctor-patient relationship to stay intact to allow you guys to make decisions with your patient. Each patient has a totally different clinical history. Most of the time, you know their families, you know their children, you know their siblings, you know what's going on with them, you know weaknesses they have, you've done all of their blood tests, and so you should be able to evaluate them separately from what the CDC says from some backroom

bureaucrats that have never seen a patient in the last five decades. You know, I'm obviously very passionate about this, but how do we help you with this case? Because I think it's really critical. Thank you, Del. I am absolutely fighting for every kid in the world. We have got to get the power away from these boards that are actually changing, as you pointed out, the whole patient doctor relationship. It's being destroyed in front of our eyes.

So I've got a website for donations and prayers. It's Dr. Paul's Fight.com. And I just urge you to, you know, if you're a prayer warrior, do that. I could use all that support. And if you can support with some financial means, we are going to continue to take it to them until I am six feet under, man. I'm not giving up this one. Thank you all of you viewers who have supported my work so far.

We're in this together. Absolutely. You know, Dr. Paul, you have been a warrior, a crusader. I see you everywhere as we travel around together. and we end up, you know, speaking on many stages together. I'm so glad you're bringing this fight to them. I hated the look of you running in the moments that you had to, and so you're standing strong, we stand with you.

I support you 100% and this is a very important mission. So everybody definitely check out the website. Let's see it one more time. Here it is. If you want to send prayers or give a donation, Dr. Paul's Fight.com. That's where you go. This guy is really doing it, folks.

And boy, do we need more doctors like this as we move into this. crazy future we're living in two. All right, Dr. Paul Thomas, thank you for your time. Take care.