The Highwire with Del Bigtree - DR. SUZANNE HUMPHRIES ON MEASLES MYTHS AND MANIPULATED DATA

Episode Date: April 1, 2025

Internist and Co-Author of “Dissolving Illusions”, Suzanne Humphries, MD discusses her awakening to the catastrophic dangers of vaccination and walks Del through the data of how severe illness and death from disease declined rapidly across the board years before the introduction of vaccines. Hear how data continues to be manipulated and cherry picked even today to strike public fear in outbreaks from diseases that were once commonplace. She joins The HighWire on the heels of her interview with Joe Rogan, and dispels the myth that measles can erase your immune system’s memory. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Check it out. The Joe Rogan, Experience. Your book's called Dissolving Illusions. I know I've talked about on the podcast a bunch of times. It's a page turner. You know, it's, I listened to it in my car, too, and I listened to it in the sauna. It's one of those books that you kind of have to go over it a couple of times just to sort of digest it. I never expected to be here.

I just wanted to be a healer. I just wanted to be a doctor. I wanted to be a nephrologist and teach medical students and make the world a better place for people. That's all I ever wanted. This is a nightmare for me. Actually, no doctor wants to be put in a position where their integrity is doubted, their sanity is doubted. I didn't have skin in the game. I didn't have vaccine injured kids.

I couldn't have cared less about it, essentially, except that it was something in front of me and it didn't make sense. So I thought, wherever the truth falls, that's what I'm going to talk about. When you look at the historical timeline of polio, what do you think caused it to go? it's essentially not be a problem anymore. Okay. You don't think vaccinations had anything to do with that. Polio was still here. Polio was still alive and well.

Back in the 1940s, 1950s, the criteria for diagnosing polio were completely different to the year that the vaccine was introduced. The playing field, the goalpost, everything was changed. I read this crazy statistic, and I still can't believe it's real, that 95 to 99% of all polio is asymptomatic. That's exactly right. So polio virus is what we call a commensal, just like you have staff on your skin and strep on your skin and it actually serves a purpose. It keeps other microbes in check as long as you don't get it cut and have not a good immune system to deal from the inside out. And polio virus is a normal commensal. It used to be until we obliterated it with oral vaccines and replaced it with vaccine strain, but the wild strains are normal human commensals. So there's vaccine strain polio that just comes from a vaccine.

and is transmissible? Absolutely. If you were to drop a vaccine at a vaccine clinic onto the floor, the hazmat guys would come in. You're not allowed to just pick it up if it's a mercury-containing vaccine. The hazmat people have to come and take that away. Yet we're okay to take a portion of that vial and inject it into a child, a three-month-old child.

How does that work? It doesn't sound logical. If you look at what happened with COVID, let's just look at that. Like how did they pass this? this off. Look at the media today. Do you know that they're giving COVID vaccines to six-month-old children now? That sounds like a religion. And it's been gone on. It sounds like a cult. It sounds like a crazy cult that the whole world's been sucked into. Giving a COVID shot to a baby today is insane. Three of them. They get three by the certain. You'd have to look up the schedule, but I believe it

starts at six months and they get three of them kind of boom, boom, boom. I think for a lot of people, it's too horrible to believe, especially if they have an autistic child that this was caused by a vaccine. Every autistic parent, parent of an autistic child will tell you this. Everyone that's tried to lobby and get to the truth with autism will tell you that the brick walls and the plexiglass and the lead walls that went down were intense and still are intense. And the lying studies that they use to uphold vaccines don't cause autism are so easy to dismantle. But isn't it fascinating that they've done such a good job promoting this, that people are going to get outraged at what you're saying? They've done such a good job.

to my life. And you've got a lot of courage. I don't want to commend you for that because writing that book and being here talking about it takes a lot of courage. Welcome to my life. Suzanne Humphrey says, well, as though she didn't or Joe Rogan didn't need to help, even Elon Musk has re-shared this incredible interview. There it is, my opinion on the subject. If forced to choose between greatly improved sanitation and vaccine sanitation matters much more. But vaccines essentially training your immune system for battle. Do what We're fell for addressing many diseases. The essence of science is continuously looking at evidence to lessen the air between your understanding of reality and reality itself.

But there he is sharing it, which means now you are going to be absolutely viral. Suzanne Humphrey's come a long way. Yes. Well, we have, haven't we? Yeah. Yeah, we really have. You know, I don't think, let me just like, you know, first of all, everybody, we've got new editions of the most important book you will ever read, dissolving illusions and the companion reference book that you need really both.

If you really want, if you want to get to the bottom of this, you will understand this issue. What's so important about the work that you've done is you take on the hard question. Well, what about polio? What about smallpox? And you just addressed it once again with Joe Rogan. How was it received? Mostly, I think it's been received well. While I haven't gone back and watched the video because I have the cringe factor watching myself,

I have gone and looked at the comments. And I'd say 90 to 95% positive, and then you have the expected person that says I'm a quack and that there's no foundation for what I'm saying. So, you know, whatever. It's pretty good, I think. And thank goodness for Joe Rogan to do that. And, you know, we're all very grateful for that.

You know, you and I were on the Vax bus. It feels like an eternity ago. Yes. You know, traveling the country with Vax, which was the film that sort of, you know, catapulted me into the middle of this conversation. And then you've watched as, I would say this movement has grown. I mean, clearly we've gone from, you know, little, you know,

we had our little phones out and we were videotaping people being interviewed on the bus right after watching Vax, which would be tens of thousands of views. And now today, I mean, I think within 24 hours, you were at millions and millions and millions of views on this conversation. And we have Robert Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of HHS, someone that you also know well through this journey. Did you imagine when you were sort of all alone writing this book about this crazy idea that vaccines might have an issue? Did you think we'd get here? Did you, did you know, see that we would eventually be this effective that we could take over the U.S. government? at least the health departments.

I have to admit that I don't think into the future that way, that way. But if someone had asked me back then, I would have said it's probably a fat chance on that. Yeah, like good luck everybody. Like we're such a minority and we're being pummeled so badly and the rhetoric and the sound bites that make their way around the earth while we sit and try to tell the truth with great detail because you can't just do, we can't get away with the sound bites that the vaccine zealots can get away with. So it seemed like an uphill battle, like a Sisyphus kind of situation. So I am surprised. I am pleasantly surprised that we are where we are today. And truthfully, we've all had a learning curve, haven't we?

Like, I couldn't have spoken the way I spoke on Joe Rogan. If he had invited me seven years ago, I would have fell apart at the seams because I didn't have the kind of seniority and experience and being able to look at the big picture over the, how many years is it now, 15 years that I've been looking into this. So I think the timing does seem, quite good. Yeah.

It's amazing too, and I think about this, because it's something that I've been, you know, people ask questions like, what is it I'm supposed to do? Or, you know, I have a dream to create a new hospital system, or I have a dream to this. And they come up to me as though, like somehow I saw that we could get RFK Jr. into the White House run to HHS. And the truth is, it's what you said. Something motivated, it's just telling the truth, how it ends up, you know, you know, and it's just telling You know, if you, I think if we set out to achieve something this big, that one day I'll be doing interviews that will be seen by 10 million people, it would be so intimidating that would be hard to take that first step.

True. Instead, there's something about just taking the step. That's right. So, and I've interviewed you many times, but what made you take the first step, even that this is a journey? I mean, that is a book. I mean, what made you put it all in the line and take a first step with no hope of taking over a White House or changing a political system? Well, I have total naivety. Had I known, like you said, had I known what that would entail to create that book and then do the next edition of it, I never would have done it. So ignorance is sometimes a good thing. I didn't know that the fierceness of the vaccine zealots,

that would come at me, had no clue. So what drove me back in the beginning was that I started seeing a reality that was occurring in front of my face with my own patients. And then I was told by hospital administration that it didn't matter and they were making excuses like they do so well. The vaccine didn't have a chance to act yet, that it didn't have anything to do with the vaccine. It was just bad luck even it was just a few days after a vaccine.

The same thing parents with autism were told. So it was happening to me and I didn't. know anything about autism at the time. I'm here dealing with people with hypertension, with kidney insufficiency. So you're nephrologist, you're giving the flu shot to patients, right? I know you've told the story a million times. I must feel like it's been told, but for people that are brand new. There are so many brand new people that have no idea who I even am, so that's fine. Yeah. So you were a nephrologist, great doctor, treating people, and part of the protocol was when they get in the hospital, give them a flu shot. Whether or not I wanted it. That was

the kicker for me. Because I got, I was admitting a patient. We said, to do our own biopsies, our own admissions. So I admitted a patient for a kidney biopsy, which if you want to know what's really going on in a kidney, you have to get a piece of tissue. It's very helpful. And so I got up to the floor. It was an elder woman who had an inflammatory kidney condition, so already she's in inflammation. And I see that there's an order on the chart for H1N1 vaccine and the seasonal influenza

vaccines and that she had been already given it before I even got there to do the admission paperwork. And I thought, first I thought, this isn't the right chart. I was like, nope, that's her chart. And then I said to the nurse, there must be a mistake. Does this belong in someone else's chart? And she said, no, this is the new policy where the pharmacist comes up, counsels your patient with one of those little pink sheets, single-sided paper on the propaganda

of the wonderfulness of the flu vaccines. And if the patient agrees, then the nurses now ordered to give the shot with my name as the ordering physician. So I complained to the administration and they said, we'll fix this for you. we'll put the chief of medicine's name as a physician. I was like, no, no, no, you don't get this. That's part of the problem, but my patient has an inflammatory kidney condition, yada, yada, and long story. Did it just seem nonsensical to vaccinate somebody that was that unhealthy?

Was that the simple perspective you were having? Why were you against it at all? Okay, well, the first thing, okay, so that was like the really bad situation. But before that, I had a patient sitting in front of me. I had been off for the weekend. And I came in, I lived in Maine, it's a tourist state. So you have people coming up for temporary dialysis because they have a house out in Bar Harbor or wherever.

So I had a patient sitting there and I said, how long have you been on dialysis? And he said, I've never been on dialysis before. No one's listening to me. You know, my kidneys were fine. I was healthy. I was fine until I had that shot. And I was like, okay, all right, let's back up for a second, what shot? And he said, which shot it was?

And I thought, all right, well, as a nephrologist, if I have a patient that had a statin or an like gentomycin who had kidney failure or a myriad of other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents. Stop it. Everyone says, yes, doctor, we will stop it because that's what has to be done. So I went and looked and sure enough, I found it first time in my entire career that I looked at the relationship between vaccines and kidney failure. And I found that it does happen. It happens often.

There are dozens of case reports back then and that there was some sort of understanding of the pathophysiology. So look, flu vaccines are inflammatory. That's how they work. That's not controversial. Right. So do you want to put something inflammatory in a patient that already has such inflammation that you're going to have them on high doses of prednisone and immune suppressing drugs that suppress their white blood cells and leave them open to all kinds of serious infections? Do I want to add to that?

No. And I also knew that vaccines, I learned during that time, that they alter your coagulation profile. And there's been a lot of research into that. And then after that, I had some patients get biopsied that bled afterwards and had big hematomas around their kidneys and required transfusions. And so after that, I started to look at the vaccine histories when I was called up on the floor.

And the more you look, the more you see. And the more I saw, the more I just couldn't believe, I'd missed it all these years, A, number one. Number two is that if all doctors took a vaccine history, they would make the same associations I would make. But it happened to be that the patient told me what happened. And why nobody else listens when a patient tells them that happened? I don't know. I think that's stupid because most of the time an adult patient can even tell you

what's wrong with them. And a parents can tell you what's wrong with their kid. They can lead you on, they can save you a lot of work. So I was ridiculed. I was told I was wrong. And so I wrote a white paper with like over 40 medical references. It's still out there on the internet. It's on my website. And I submitted it to all of the heads of the departments and the and they didn't know how to deal with me at that point. So they hired somebody from New Hampshire, a vaccine senior guy, who wrote me a letter. And his, how should I say, his reassurance to me about why it's safe to give my patients flu shots when they're in kidney failure is because they give flu shots to people with

AIDS and HIV and they mount antibodies. And this is all, I have the actual letter to me in a video called Honesty versus Policy that you can find on Odyssey. So everything I'm saying, we can't get away with making stuff up, can we tell? Right. So everything that I say, I have to back up in black and white,

and it's out there. So that was kind of my initiation into the lunacy of the battle that we were in back then and that we're here today. Yeah. And amazing. And that, of course,

leads you on to a journey and you are, I think what's amazing about the work that you've done is you're so well researched and you won't talk about things until you've really, You dive deep into it.

I've always really respect and appreciated that. We could talk for days. You just covered polio brilliantly with Joe Rogan, so I don't need to get into that. And of course, you were already part of the great polio documentary, Part 1 and 2. Yeah, that really came out beautiful, didn't it? Yeah, it really came out great.

But I wanted to talk about measles. Okay. Which, you know, surprising that Joe Rogan didn't cover it. I'm glad we have something to talk about because it's really important. It's, this has always been sort of the hot button issue. I feel like in many ways, and maybe you know more, it seems this measles vaccine really is the heart of the childhood vaccine program. Is that a correct assumption? It seems like it all sort of pins onto that being this critical advancement in health for children.

Sure. And that's because of the era that we're living in. Like if we were back in the 1800s, it would have been smallpox. If you were in the early 1900s to mid-1900s, it would have been polio because the foundations and the security of the vaccination programs are based upon us having full belief on any doubts, whether or not well-founded, not being able to exist, as I say, over and over again from the Federal Register from 1984. That is the background. So today we're faced with measles and we're faced with a generation who had measles as children and who were going, wait a minute, what's up with that? And so whenever there is, look, there have been measles, you know this, there have been measles outbreaks in 2019. You know how many cases of measles that were in this country?

Like little less than 2000, I think. Yeah. So whenever there's, and 2015 is kind of when I started looking into it. We had a measles outbreak then where we had Kathleen Sebelius and the cast of characters lying to the public and scaring everybody into getting vaccinated. So it seems to crop up every now and again. My belief is that because there are so many people with children with autism who have said, it happened after the MMR. And we had Andy Wakefield, who of course, you know, they,

as character assassinated and villainized and brought up on every interview we ever did as why we're not credible because Andy Wakefield. Now we have because Robert Kennedy. You know, they always have to have their guy that they put up as the wrong person that makes us all wrong. Yeah. And I think it has to do with that, I think personally, I never thought about this before until just now, but that's why they're probably doing, um, it's the one that's point. They can't win the mumps argument. That's, that mumps argument is so lost. And the Rubella argument, still, not a good one. They're going to try to win the measles argument because it is a vaccine that has seemingly decreased the transmission of measles. Although, as you said, I saw your toy soldiers that you've done in the past. You know, what's really happened is that we're all paying

the price for that today. And, yeah. At the heart of the argument that they make, the sort of, you know, I say we come at them and then they've, they have their final position, you know, their final position, on autism as it's always been here, we're just diagnosing it better. Genetic. Yeah, it's genetic, which is the dumbest argument. But to me, it's always... They got away with it. Well, but we're seconds away from winning it. If that's the last piece of land you're holding on to, I'd lose for you, your days or not. Yeah, there's genetic epidemic. Because that is very easy to refute. It seems like in this measles vaccine space, they're going back to this talking point that you don't want the measles. Because, you know,

there's most of these outbreaks, like the one here in Texas, is people having measles party. Let's just be honest, you know, the men and nights are having measles parties. When it was up in New York, the Hasidic Jewish community was having measles parties. They wanted it. They know how panicked everyone is about it. And they know once their kids have had this once, the government will be out of their hair the rest of their lives because they're never going to have to get anything. They're going to have lifelong immunity, something the vaccine cannot actually confer. But the argument is, well, live measles, when you think, catch it erases all of your immunity.

It erases all of your other immunity. So all those illnesses you might have had as a kid that you have immunity to, now it's just wiped out by measles. This is something that I, it's come up. And by the way, it's one of those I don't have an answer for. When that has come up, I was like, ooh, they finally found, you know, Astell Anything. Oh, no.

Where I don't really own that. So I wonder if you could help me own this. What is it with this measles, you know, erasing memory? looked into that? Yeah, I might have looked into that a little bit. Okay. Yeah. And isn't it funny that there are doctors that are like 70, 80, 90 years old?

And what a slap in the face to all those doctors in the past that, you know, there's no way. If that actually happened, they would have seen it. For this, I have to put my glasses on. Okay. And because we can't get away with just shooting the breeze here about this, I want to put up PMID numbers, that's PubMed, you go, you put in the exact numbers that I put up, you will get the, at least the abstract.

article. If you can't get it, I'm going to give you guys all the articles. We also, everyone, just so you know, one of the best things that we do here on the high wire is we call it the high wire protocol, which is we show you our, we show you our math, as it were. By Monday, every single week, we will give you links to every single thing you see on the show. If it's a link to a video, if it's an article, if it's in this case a PubMed article that Susan Humphreys, you don't have to memorize the numbers because if you are signed up, it will be in your inbox and you will have it right there totally for free. This is one of the things that we offer to you.

So just scroll down if you're on the high wire or I can. You just scroll down to the middle of the page where it asks you, I think it says brave, bold news. You just type in your email and we will get you all of the science that we're about to walk through right now with Suzanne Humphreys. All right. Yes. And because it's very complicated and I have a decent memory to really remember these nuances.

I have to do a little bit of reading, and I've tried to limit it as much as I can. Your people have all my slides, and so they'll be able to put them up. So yeah, so we just talked about that this, 2015 was when, since you and I have been in this situation, we saw that outbreak that started in Disneyland. Right.

And the world was suddenly informed that measles infection was worse than anyone had ever noticed before, that it resulted in immune amnesia and can take the immune system of the person with measles back to newborn status, okay? Okay. So this article that I'm going to talk about, yeah, we don't have a copy of it here, but they'll have, they'll show you. This article wasn't, it wasn't some spontaneous epiphany, okay? It was part of, the long-term measles induced immune, no modulation increases of all-child infectious disease mortality. Yeah, science. Yeah. And so it was a very carefully orchestrated plan to create that article. Okay. And it piggybacked the whole Disneyland situation. And Forbes magazine put out a lot of cluster bombs, very highly organized using an organization, MUGA,

that took a whole cast of characters from around the globe. And the message to parents was, it was very, very simple. It was that measles resets the immune system to baby-like state. Like they like to keep it simple, right? It resets your immune system, right? Your baby's gonna die. We know about all these sound bites. So to get my head around the study, I had to read the original article by a medical student named Michael Mina.

And he was backed by Bill Gates and DARPA. Okay. And an infamous, I call him a spook named Ab Osterhaus out of the Netherlands. And so I read every single reference in the original paper, and it was a pile probably about that tall. It was daunting. I hated it. And I'm not a first-time reader that I absorbed things. So I had to read them several times.

Okay, so I read the works of the other related authors as well. I looked at the historical data because that's what Roman and I do, of not just measles, but other infections, the ones everyone was supposed to be dying of. And so I accessed the Denmark database that he selectively chose. So Mina and the gang selectively chose Denmark and only certain years that suited themselves. And they ignored the entire swath of data that would have resulted in a totally different result. Really? Okay?

So the facts from pre-2015 medical literature, historical death, and infection trends do not support his hypothesis. So in 2015, in Denmark, I was there. I toured all of Scandinavia in 2015. amazing. And I discussed the primary paper, all of the references in a two-hour video. And I discussed the role of his co-author, Osterhaus, and I attempted to unravel the motives of the authors and the historical medical facts that really do exist on the issue. And the original paper, we'll get to in a minute, but the manufactured consent is the video. So these amazing people came over from Finland, and they videotape the whole thing. They were called Canal Second Opinion.

I think it means channel and finish, second opinion. And they have it somewhere, but I couldn't find it. So my apologies to them, I put it on my Odyssey channel. I don't get any money for people clicking or anything like that. So if they're out here listening to me, I'll happily give you a shout out on my social media. But these people did a beautiful video of all, I think it was three parts, and it was over two hours long. So you can go and watch that afterward if anyone's interested in doing an even deeper dive on this. And so there's this medical student that wrote the article.

that you just had up with that very impressive title. You even stumbled a little over that in a modulation, right? And they want you to do that. Trust me. They just want, they want doctors to look at it and go, it must be right. Trust you. Yeah.

So the study, like I said, was partially funded by the Gates Foundation. They were advanced Microsoft graphics that were absolutely visually stunning, but they were so complex and intimidating that even people that I know that know statistics and should be able to understand this kind of stuff were at a bit of a loss with that. Yeah. So like I said, the lead author was a medical student. I mean, to be fair to him, he was also studying for PhD. So he was one of those MD PhD kids, right?

And he certainly, in my opinion, seemed to know very little bit about measles in any real world context or even the carefully designed immunological blueprint of our bodies and how cellular immunity functions and why that's important. If he really wanted to look at this. So by his own admission, he says, and I put a picture of him on one of the slides because I thought it was pretty apt that he got taken with a chicken hat. But by his own admission, he loves fiddling with stats using mathematical modeling. And so let's just have a look at this.

So it's very clear that the author's target, when you really look at the paper, and I've underlined that there, they were non-vaccinating parents. It starts with it, it ends with it, vaccine hesitation, blah, blah, blah. They're the ones that are putting us all at risk. Not only that, but they're so silly, they don't even know that they're setting their own children's immune system back. So like it sets out with an agenda, not just to see. Well, it certainly seems that way. That's the actual paper there. So yeah. So the important thing to the authors was to give parents a very simple explanation. We know the sound bite. So this is what

the public was told. It was told that measles infection ablates all previous immunity and is the cause of non-measles infectious disease deaths for three years after the measles. And that the measles vaccines prevent this. Okay. So that that was kind of the the overarching hypothesis and their fancy data that they had to hunt to just the right segment to look at in order to prove that is all in there. Okay, so the problem with their hypothesis is that someone you're familiar with Dr. Peter Abbe, so is that long-term immune suppression after measles disease was never a real problem. And we know that. The world's leading authority on non-specific effects of vaccine. So non-specific effects can be good and they can be bad.

Okay, so we'll talk more about that in the minute. It tells us where this idea came from. And it rose from a vaccine crisis that occurred after a very high-dose measles vaccine was given to four-month-old infants in Africa because they thought, well, we can make this better if we just give them even higher, tighter, we can override the mother's maternal antibodies. That didn't go very well. So the vaccine was associated with a twice higher death rate in those babies in the years that followed. So people thought, okay, well, the vaccine.

suppressed the immune system for that long time. That must be the cause of their higher death. And then they thought maybe the disease does the same thing. Interesting. So it was a vaccinated problem, a high-dose vaccine that caused an issue that wiped out the immune system of children, made them vulnerable to other diseases. And so they said, let's turn that and see if we can show that the virus itself does that. That's right.

And fair enough, like Dr. Abbe, you know, I have some good things to say about him and I have some real hesitations on them. But it turns very interesting. I use him in a lot of my talks. He's, and what I like about him is he's totally unbiased, right? I mean, I think, I think he shows, I mean, what I mean is he clearly comes out against vaccines. He doesn't think are working and stands for ones that he believes he's proven are working. I think we can challenge.

He's the best of a bad batch. Yeah, okay. Well, all right, we'll go with that. I can say that. Maybe you can. Okay. I can say whatever I want. I just have watched you.

You can? Yeah. So it turned out that the high-dose measles vaccine was not completely responsible for all those long-term deaths. It had something to do with it, but it was also that there were D-P-T, back in the D-P-T, not the D-T-A-P vaccines that were given after the high-dose measles vaccines, which altered the children's immune systems and made them more susceptible to potentially fatal infections. So what Abbe did find was that the measles infection itself does not relate to the disease. to higher long-term mortality. Okay, he found that.

And he was actually a reviewer of this article, and I think I'm not happy with his review. It's okay, but I think he could have come out a bit stronger. They ignored his review, by the way. So he might as well have said whatever he wanted. So he basically proved that it does not relate to higher long-term mortality. And so here's Abby's original conclusion. This is from the paper.

I've got three slides on this particular paper. And his conclusion, several of his studies showed how much, much better children who had had measles survived over the few years following infection compared to the uninfected controls. Okay. And the quote is, no, sorry, I didn't, the quote's coming up in a minute, but children who Mina purported, Mina, that original paper that we were just talking about, would have had an immune system set back to babyhood actually did better than children's whose immune systems

were just regular, okay? Not affected by a vaccine or a measles infection. Interesting. Right. So the study looked at long-term mortality over a four-year period in measles exposed children after an epidemic. And they based it on blood testing, and they were categorized as either measles cases, subclinical measles cases, or uninfected contacts. Measles survivors did better long-term than children who didn't get measles at all. And most of those measles cases who did better were not vaccinated.

Wow. There were no deaths from measles in this study. Let me just go back and make sure there's nothing. Yeah, I think I don't want to miss anything. So the study is called low mortality after mild measles infection compared to uninfected children in rural West Africa. They found that measles infected children did better during the four years. Only one out of 66 of the children of the cases died.

I guess that was during the acute infection. and there were 10.1% 15 out 149 in the uninfected. So that was the long term and that there were no acute, sorry, there were no acute deaths. No acute deaths, but there was one case death that died, one out of 66. Okay, but now we've got some more data, so don't get hung up on that one person. So this graph shows you the higher survival probability for having measles or subclinical measles. And so that's seen on the top line. Yeah.

So we're looking at survival over on the Y or the left side, compared. to those who had been exposed but had no or only a slight immunity boost on the bottom line. Okay. And the difference between them was actually huge as reflected in the mortality ratios of 0.14 for children with clinical measles. Now what does mortality ratio mean? If you have a mortality ratio of 1.0, that would mean there was no difference between the groups. If you had a mortality ratio higher than 1.0, that would mean that more children were dying that had measles. You had a mortality ratio lower than 1.

It was 0.14. So it's way down there. Hugely way down there. So that's a very low number. It infers a huge benefit of infection. So Dr. Abbey realized that not just measles vaccines, but measles infection has a robust positive effect on the immune system and that surviving measles was not associated with a higher long-term death rate.

So according to Abbe, even in the poorest places, children who survived infection, which in this study was all of them because we're dealing with these poor African countries, that they did not have a higher death rate from other diseases later. Okay, so that's, that's, you know, Mina's out the window already, right? But we can kick them out even farther out into the next town. Yeah. Okay. So right here, Roman and I and lots of other people, we are not the first people to come

along and look at this data, but we've shown that the acute measles death rate in developed countries was near zero before the vaccine came into use. But even in impoverished African countries like Senegal, Dr. Peter Abbe found that there was no long-term mortality following measles disease in yet another paper. The mortality ratio was 0.27 in the infected index cases. So that slides there now. So that pretty much says what I just said. And in another paper called Is Measels Good for Something, Abbe said the above, quote, he said, contrary to current assumptions, children who survive the acute phase of measles infection may have a survival advantage compared with unimmunized,

uninfected children, hence both disease and immunization may be associated with non-specific beneficial effects, presumably due to some form of immunostimulation. Right. Okay? So Denmark and all the other countries that Meena studied would be the countries where survival of the acute infection would be nearly universal. That one in 66 wouldn't have happened in Denmark and these other countries. And all these studies were deliberate-

To point out in America when we've done this stat, but it's roughly one in 10,000 and infected would die in America, one in 500,000 of the population, that the population level is the stats that we see prior to the vaccine arriving in America. Sure. And that's even when people didn't really know how to treat measles as far as I'm concerned. Right. We'll get to that too. Yeah. So all these studies were absolutely ignored by Mina's people because the report was to unveil. Well, why let a fact get in a way of a good story? That's, well, and the propaganda, which I'm going to show you right now, because this was the propaganda, the new concept that after you have a measles infection, you are no longer immune to all the deadly diseases you were previously immune to, right?

So I think the authors looked at each other and they said, well, what the public doesn't know won't matter. No one's going to bother and go read all those references, except some lunatic that left nephrology or any of Abbe's other work. We know the media will print whatever we say, so that's pretty much what happened. In my other talk, I get into Deborah McKenzie and how she's related to the whole M-U-G-A-S. She was with a hired-hand reporter. I'd love to look at her bank account. But the focus wasn't just to doctors because doctors just do as they're told. They say, oh, what are we supposed to do?

How do we pass the exam? What's the standard of care? What's the gold standard? We don't have to worry about doctors. They're easy. Okay, it says parents, those pesky parents that start reading. So the focus of the article was towards scaring the wits out of parents. And in particular, parents who didn't vaccinate their children.

So the problem was quickly identified, as you can see in this shot right here, this slide 17. This is often painted as a trivial disease by the anti-vaccination movement. People have watched me do that on this show very specifically. It is not. It kills or causes brain damage in two or three out of every 1,000 cases, even in wealthy countries. Here's another reason it isn't trivial. Having measles destroys your immunity to other diseases, and some of those are far more deadly. The measles virus is known to kill the white blood cells that have a memory of past infections.

All right. Nice, right? Yeah. Yeah, good. It's effective. Good for a reporter to have that deep understanding. Yeah. She understood the paper, apparently. Why I couldn't?

So they used figures that were taken from some imaginary source, like I said, because anyone who studied the case numbers, the complications and the deaths from measles in any single high-income country, knows that the death rate, they quoted, would only have been seen in the 1800s or maybe the Great Depression or the Mississippi Delta. So with tainted water, with no sanitation, food deprivation, vitamin C and A, deficiencies and working 13 hours a day in coal mines in that's right in chemical laundering factories yeah all that with the London fog and population dislocation like war where we also see measles come up strangely enough right so I've studied measles cases and deaths in different countries in the world both poor and wealthy and it's very clear in both medical journals and documents written to government by health officials that in the Western world measles was clinically far less severe by the 1930s and and considered relatively trivial by 1960, and I think most of the parents watching,

that have been in this for a while, we'll know about this British Medical Journal article from 1959 right there. You can see it showing that. In the majority of children, the whole episode has been well and truly over in a week. From the pro-dromal phase to the disappearance of the rash, and many mothers have remarked

how much good the attack has done their children as they seem so much better after the measles. Over the past 10 years, there have been few serious complications at any age. And all children have made complete recoveries. As a result of this reasoning, no special attempts have been made to prevention even in young infants in whom the disease has not been found to be especially serious. Right.

And we're going to address why perhaps we're seeing more serious cases today, but we're going to get to that after we're done here. So MENA used Denmark as one of the three countries in the analysis. So I think let's look at Denmark's data, right? So this is their pre-vaccine mortality chart that we're looking at here. Now the death is the black bars there and the disease incidence, not disease death, the disease incidence is in red. Okay.

So note that even as incidents of registered cases of measles rose, the death rate was plummeting after the 1940s. Wow. Okay. So Michael Mina and friends ignored the low acute measles deaths because his hypothesis is that those red measles cases led to immune system ablation and an increase in other deaths up to three years after infection. So let's transfer those measles cases.

to the Danish death-declined data for some of the diseases which mean a singled out. Shall we? Yeah. Okay. Next slide, we're looking at pneumonia. So there you have the red. There's the measles cases. So the red is actually the measles cases.

Right. And the other lines are deaths, deaths, not cases, but death from pneumonia and other infectious disease rates and children. So assuming they're correct with all these other diseases, every time we see a spike up, we should be seeing a spike up in those other illnesses. That's right. they consistently keep crashing down even in the face of large, clearly, measles outbreaks. That's right. And we should start seeing it even because it's three years after. So we should really be seeing some blips there, not there.

So plainly measles didn't increase the death rates. Right. Other infectious disease deaths, you know this, for which there were never any vaccines or which there were vaccines that were dangerous and ineffective were also declining. Those death rates were also declining. And in a lot of cases, the diseases were actually declining. you know, like malaria was declining. We know that rheumatic fever, which there was a terribly dangerous toxoid vaccine for that,

rheumatic fever went down. You want to talk about cripples. Like polio doesn't hold a candle to rheumatic fever crippling that happened. Really? Oh, yeah. I mean, there's a whole story on that. Fred Klener called them the cripples, the cardiac cripples. So they're the cripples that they can walk, whose legs work.

That's what he said. And they were thousands of times higher than anything you would have seen during polio. Tuberculosis, diarrhea. Do you know diarrhea killed more soldiers than? than pretty much any other, you know, in the early days, the Civil War, than any other circulating disease. And then bullets, actually, it killed more than bullets killed. Wow.

That's what the quote is in our book there. And we've got this source for that as well. So, okay, I think we're getting to being a bit settled on this. But where is the huge exponential increase in other infection deaths that should have happened to these people after they had measles? Yeah. Where is the supposed decline in those deaths after the introduction of the measles vaccine? And how does that stack up with official Danish data,

shown here and it's completely ludicrous and unsubstantiated and historically you can apply the same analysis to every western country and here's the Danish data for measles incidents alongside infectious disease deaths using all ages of children which Mina specified in his article so we Roman did this you know she was Roman bistriannic my co-author we asked him that when this was happening and I was preparing to go to to Denmark because I always try to prepare something relevant to the particular country yeah so it was kind of poetic justice that we did this in Denmark. So we got someone, a Danish speaking person, to get us the data, and this is what he did. And what's easy to see here is a landslide fall in childhood infectious disease

death, which is shown in the dark blue line. Even when the measles was rampant, that's the red line. So in dissolving illusions, we give the history behind that phenomenon, and it had nothing to do with vaccines, and it had nothing to do with antibiotics, and it had nothing to do with broncholators, and had nothing to do with steroids, okay? There's no way to go back in time and try to single out a tiny sub-segment of the childhood measles population to look for a hidden pattern of death two to three years after children had measles. Mina and his friends are just simply dreaming up ghosts here. In order to scare everyone, today even, they're still pulling this out on social, on all kinds of media, you know, the regular mainstream media as well. So the point I want to

convey is that the first time Mina ran his data with his first set of assumptions didn't work out for him. So he admits one of his other co-authors in the next slide here, there's some quotes there that talk about, if you want to read those quotes there. They ran a basic association test comparing measles, incidents, and deaths. The initial analysis came back statistically significant but weaker than expected, not showing a strong connection between the two. At this point, Mina and his collaborators decided to evaluate the data making different assumptions about how long the possible immune amnesia effects of measles may last. This exploration uncovered a very strong correlation between measles incidents and deaths from other infectious diseases. So it's almost like they said, well, that didn't work. Right, they went out and they just changed the, okay.

So how's that for science for you? Right. This is the result we want. Let's keep mixing and matching the data until we get it. So that's pretty much what they did. They finally got the result they wanted, and we'll talk about that in a second here. But the real question of credibility of this study for those who aren't mathematicians doesn't actually lie in the data manipulation at all. The big flaw in the study lies in the immunology assumptions, which was another of the hypotheses,

which stated that measles infection reduces the immune system memory to an empty shell, implying that all diseases, and we've been through this again, I'm repeating myself. But in order to sustain a hypothesis, you have to prove biological plausibility, right? Yeah. Okay. So they couldn't do that because according to the most in-depth research that had ever been done, which Mina did cherry-pick from when it suited him, There was no persistent T lymphocyte immunosuppression in infected children two months after infection.

So there's the study right there. It's a different one. It was a five-year follow-up study looking at vaccinated and unvaccinated, uninfected controls, and vaccinated and unvaccinated infected cases. So that's that white blood cell suppression they were saying was happening. The memory cells, yes. So by then, everything was back to normal after two months. and after five years the children who had measles had, guess what, better survival.

So here's the quote from the article. You want to read that? Yeah, results. Compared with controls, there were no significant differences in white blood cell count, absolute lymphocyte count, CD4 percentage, CD4 percentage, total CD4 count, and total CD8 count. Although measles' cases examined more than two months after infection had slightly higher CD4 counts than controls, Adjusted for age, sex, and immunization status, post-measles cases had a mortality rate ratio of 0.50 compared with control so lower. Like they were doing better. Half.

Half. Yeah, doing twice as good. That's right. So that proved there was no lethal suppression. And Mina would say, oh, well, you know, these kids' T-cell counts, while they're normal, they had amnesia and they just couldn't protect them. I've actually had a little dialogue with him, to be fair. But that can't be true, because I'm going to show you right now why that can't be true. So the next slide shows us the survival rate was two times as high in the children who had measles.

Those are the cases. Sometimes the pictures worth a thousand words, right? Compared to their more vaccinated, uninfected, controlled counterparts. Vaccinated, uninfected controls had more vaccines and had a higher death rate. Okay? All right. That doesn't mean a vaccine's going to kill you. So bring that up again.

So both of these groups were vaccinated I'm looking at. What is the difference between the two? One says vaccinated. One was infected and one wasn't. So one was infected? Which one was the one that was infected? Measles are the cases. So the ones that had measles are the top ones. Okay, got it. So, okay, they're all vaccinated. Some of them contracted measles. That's the top line.

Some of them didn't contract measles and that's the controls. I read these with fine-tooth comb. Doesn't mean I remember every detail afterwards. So that's what's showing you there. And does that mean that the ones that got infected did better, like having had the infection? Yes, that's the point. Interesting. So even even if you've been vaccinated, actually contracting the disease, gave you a longer life like health. How did they contract a disease when they were vaccinated?

I know. Amazing. That's kind of mysterious as well. Yeah. So, yeah. So again, Abby contradicts Mina's hypothesis, commenting that four other studies in other countries, here's another good quote for us, four other studies. Of measles epidemic in Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and Bangladesh, unpublished organizations and Burundi have also failed to find excess mortality and most

found lower mortality in the post-measels period. contrast with previous reports of higher-posed measles mortality is only an apparent one. Yeah. Yeah. So measles and Mina and friends claim that measles sets the child's body back to newborn status, and that's the cause of their death in the three years afterwards. So how was this presented to non-vaccinating parents in the public? Co-author Aba Osterhaus told the press in the next slide that if their detap vaccinated child got measles,

the measles infection would destroy immunity from the former vaccines they had been given. So does that mean that any established vaccine or natural immunity to disease that was achieved before measles vaccine came on the market was neutralized by any measles infection that came after? If that was true, then huge amounts of the pre-measles vaccine-era children would have lost their vaccine and natural immunity. And diphtheria, hooping cough, tetanus should have been rampant. Yes, it's skyrocketing. Right, but that didn't happen. And what Mina and Osterhouse hypothesis actually demonstrated is that their understanding of the newborn immune system and the development of neonatal immunity is deficient because it's actually not possible to set a child's immune system back to newborn status.

And if it was, it would have applied to every child born until a measles vaccine was introduced. And what they're saying could happen didn't happen. Yeah, I mean, all of the Brady Bunch generation that was, you know, having the measles, they would have been wiped out. They would have been dying of everything in sight. season wouldn't have been possible. And none of us would be alive today because every one of our relatives, ancestors, grandparents all had this. So why weren't they dying of every other infectious disease? How did we get here? Yeah, but we have to give it in great detail here, though, don't we? So the thing is, I've done a lot of work on the infant immune system because, look, I was an adult nephrologist. So when I woke up, I, everyone wanted

to know about childhood vaccines. I was like, okay, let me just deal with polio first because of the what about polio question. After I was done, it was like, okay. Okay, I tackled each disease, every disease. And after that, I thought, let me study up on infant immunity. Let me just see what happens. How does the immune system develop? What happens in utero? How does the mother's immune system affect it?

How does breast milk affect it? And I did a very long, I think it's a four or five part series called infant immunity. Again, it's on my Odyssey channel. And very important for parents to be because I call it the three-year pregnancy. when, you know, just before the woman gets pregnant, during her pregnancy, and then the two years afterward, which also there's this thing going on between the mother's immune system, the breast milk, et cetera, that actually makes that child's gut develop normally. It makes their immune system in their gut and in their lymph nodes.

We know this for a fact. And everything's defined in there, okay? So the fact that they could say that someone was set back to newborn status, it just shows that they have no clue what an infinite immune system works, and that it's actually meant to be, and an infant immune system is meant to be dampened down while it's learning what to tolerate and what to not. It's more important that that immune system knows what not to react to.

Right. You want an overly sensitive child that's going to basically have an allergic reaction to everything it comes in contact with. Which is why when the mother's eating, she's introducing antigens. While it's dampened down, she's introducing protective molecules that the oncology industry uses to fight cancer.

And they use measles virus as well to fight cancer. Amazing. Yeah. So their hypothesis is only believable because the work that was needed to clarify Abby's concerns was never done. And he's calling for it. So to give him credit, he has called for it over the years. And so these are the considerations that were overlooked due to lack of study.

Measles' infections having beneficial effects was proven. And those are three quotes from... However, the possibility that infections could have benefited effects raise those questions about the value of eradication strategies. this account of measles research and immunization policies for developing countries. There are a number of apparently erroneous assumptions. It has been possible to maintain these assumptions because there has been no tradition of community studies examining the total impact of health interventions, allowing the reality

a possibility of contradicting our ideas. The assumptions were considered true and not in need of verification. This is a lot of what Abe has done and whether or not he's come all the way up to the task in your mind. I appreciate any doctor or scientist that is able to challenge the orthodoxy with which they came into you being. I mean, you've put the bar pretty high. But Abe, a huge vaccinator in third world countries, at least had the guts to go back to Guinea-Bissau Africa and say, hold on a second. I did a polio vaccine program that only half the kids got and started showing that we were seeing higher rates of death in the D-TAP group.

Right, yep. Actually, polio, I think he found protective. Is that right? It was any live viral vaccines. He likes live viral vaccines. He thinks attenuated virus vaccines are actually causing. And to be clear, what he points out, which is very important, is what Robert Kennedy Jr. has to do right now, which is all we've ever studied is does this vaccine create protection to this disease in some way? Most of the time, it's not necessarily blocking it, but certainly reducing symptoms.

And somehow that's affected. But what it's never done is said, okay, it protects against it's a disease. but it didn't make you vulnerable to all these other diseases, which is sort of the argument they're trying to make about a measles infection. But the truth is, is many of these vaccines flu shot. Four times the rate, in a big study out of Japan, four times a rate of other upper respiratory disease if you got a flu shot. So no, did you get flu?

No, but you were dying at higher rates from other issues, exactly what Abe has proven in many of these studies. That our problem is we're only looking at the disease we vaccinated for and not overall mortality. Did it actually make you live longer and no it didn't. Kids were dying. I think on that Guinea-Bissau Africa study, the DTP was 10 times the rate of death amongst those that received the vaccine versus those that did. It was very high. I can't tell you the exact. Super duper high and then different rates around polio. So. But I got to tell you something. Yeah. Dr. Abe wants measles vaccines to continue to be given even after measles is eradicated.

That's where it falls. Well, he's going to wait a long. time because we don't seem capable of eradicating measles and this vaccine has not been capable which is but that's the argument and and as we know they've they've totally screwed up herd immunity so that you know our adults are not immune our pregnant women are not immune our babies are vulnerable so the solution is to keep giving the thing that caused the problem right like that's where for me it just fall I agree with you I agree with you yeah thank you for that yes yes he has done good work that look I'm citing it yeah so do I yeah I mean yeah I mean you

You know, and I guess in a way we cherry-picked the things we like about what he's saying, and then he has these other issues, but that's science. I get to look at the things, and I think that he does make some incorrect errors in, you know, and a lot of it, really, a lot of it is some of the scientists that are waking up are recognized, well, we're screwed. We messed up with this vaccine program, so now we just got to stick with it because we can't get back to natural herd immunity. And we think that that's a real concern, and something that I brought up on the show that got me in a lot of trouble,

Andy Wakefield, when I was making vaxed, would say, we can't just stop this measles vaccine program, or we could see a rise in infection that could affect the infants. I kind of am starting to, like, even though I even stated that a couple weeks ago on the show, and I want to ask your opinion, but if the vaccine's leaky anyway, and if you see these and they show the vaccinated who got the infection, then what protection do we really have? I mean, aren't those infants vulnerable from vaccinated as much as they would be unvaccinated people? And you just pointed out a study I wasn't aware of that showed that infants did just fine. It's just like COVID where they say if you've had the jab that you're going to have a lesser case of it or you're going to not be as infectious.

That's not true. I mean, we know of a whole series in Illinois where 100% of the students that were infected were vaccinated, up to date vaccinated. And so they keep adding. So when this all started to become obvious that there was leaky vaccines, they added another vaccine in 1989, right, when I was entering medical school. And now they want you, I don't know if you had measles, but they want me to have another set of jabs. And they're talking about every 10 years. And now they're going to start combining it into, oh, I mean, there's a vaccine out there now, which we're going to get to later, which is a hybrid. It's a newly synthesized Frankenstein virus that's got part measles and part COVID spike on it.

And there's already a vaccine for it. So rest assured, it's not going to be a problem. So the MMR, the messenger RNA vaccines are going to be the solution. Come on, you see the writing on the wall. Oh, these failed. So we've got something better for you. The new golden age of vaccination is going to happen. So getting back, can we just stop measles, cold turkey just like that?

Yeah. Well, if you give parents the right to choose, you will be stopping it to some degree. So the question is, how will we be prepared for, yes, look, the fact of the matter is that when you inject live measles into somebody, they're going to have a case of measles, and then they'll be somewhat immune and transmission will be less. That doesn't, you didn't do anything magical to them. You entered their body in the wrong way, created immune system and immunity horrible, not even the right kind of immunity. TH2, not cellular immunity, not lung immunity, which leaves them susceptible years into the future. So you've done something that's not so great. If you do it during an immune globulin injection, you've actually set them backwards in terms of their overall immunity.

If you do it to a child that's being breastfed, that her mom is still given some immunity, you're doing something bad to that child that you won't notice for 20 or 30 years. And I only know that because somebody actually looked, one person actually looked in the past. So in the olden days, we had infectious disease hospitals, right? And so that was separate from the maternity hospital, and it was separate from your cardio. they didn't have probably cardiac hospitals, but your cancer hospitals, certainly. You would have an infectious disease hospital, and you would have government agencies that you could trust regarding quarantine, because quarantine was one of the most important interventions when smallpox, right?

Yeah. But that back then, it was like, oh, you're here to help me. And they did help people. Right. You know, people went in and they cleaned your sheets because your sheets were the biggest foamite, you know, thing to spread. They made sure that you had sunshine, fresh air, good nutrition, good nutrients. We can't trust people quarantining today. So I think what the new government has to look at is how we can get a trustworthy government again

that's not trying to harm us essentially, you know, because they're getting rewards from who knows where. I'm not going to even go down there like why it happens. But we need a trustworthy government that can support us if we were to collectively decide that we want to get back to where we were, which was to have perfectly good herd immunity where the death rate was almost unheard of, where the virus was very mild, where it was being on a comedy show. So it would take a thoughtful process because we would need to make sure that pregnant women were somehow immune. But like you said, yes, of course there are cases of newborns and infants who would survive, but it's much better for that when the mother is able to give them that.

There's something called transfer factor that was actually used, and it's a whole other thing we can get into later if you want. But that's a very big part of breast milk that actually is able, they're using immune globulin now for these little babies. Well, there's something called transfer factor that you can extract out of a leukocyte that will actually give you TH1 immunity that's durable. It's amazing. And they use it in oncology to protect children after they've had chemotherapy. They use it to protect them from chickenpox, which means that we could be using, if we wanted to go down the pharmaceutical for that particular group of people. But what's going to happen is, oh, then everyone should get trans-perfect. So there's a pharmaceutical way out to wean us out, is what you're saying.

There's a product we can make. If we can trust the pharmaceutical industry to not try to cap like they did with cholesterol drugs, which are only designed for familial hyper-cholesterolemy. You know how the thin end of the wedge is. So that's always the question. Then you get a new administration in that just... So I think we have a problem on our hands. And certainly the simplest way to deal with it is just to say vaccines are great.

They stop transmission. Let's just keep doing them, even after measles is supposedly eradicated because it's only a plane right away. So no, I cannot accept that. I'm sorry. I can't accept it. I understand the rationale behind it, but I think that we're smarter than that. I think we're better than that.

I think we have really good people that could help us through this to get herd immunity back. And that's where my heart's at. Fantastic. Well, we don't have a lot of time, and that was incredibly thorough, but I do want to get into a search around this measles thing because it was breaking. Polly Tommy, CHD did a great job, getting the family that had the one child that passed away. and several people have weighed in on it. I want to talk about what Pierre Corrie, the doctor, said about this. Let's take a look at this video right here.

This case was tragic and really had nothing. I shouldn't say nothing to do with measles, but she did not die of measles by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she died of a pneumonia, but it gets worse than that because she didn't really die of pneumonia. She died of a medical error. And that error was a completely inappropriate antibiotic. It was an insufficient antibiotic.

When you admit someone to the hospital for pneumonia, what you need to do is you treat what's called empirically, meaning you put them on antibiotics that you think will cover the most common organism. And that's why this case is absolutely enraging. It's infuriating because she died because she got an inappropriate antibiotic. I mean, this is like Medicine 101. That's an unbelievable statement. I'm assuming it's true because I think Pierre Corey knows that his career would forever be over to misstate that.

I know you've got some of the records in your hand, you're just starting to look at it, but it does appear. And this is sort of like a complaint during COVID, that it was mismanagement. I've made this complaint, you know, incorrectly diagnosing, but also treating. I mean, if you just treat it, they can't breathe,

give them something that helps them breathe. They can't be given some oxygen. They were denied oxygen. Talking about COVID, of course. And in this case, he's saying simple use of antibiotics would have cleared this up, right away and you would not have had a death. In your cursory look at the materials, are you leaning in that same direction?

Oh, I mean, you can't add to what he said, and he is the perfect person to be looking at it. He's a pulmonologist, a lung specialist, an intensive care unit specialist. You have to do special study and residency to do that. So he's the guy that's going to research that. Even better than I, like I did a lot of consultations in ICU for kidney failure, but managing a ventilator and stuff, that's not my wheelhouse at all. That's his wheelhouse. And absolutely he's right because when people get admitted with unknown pneumonia, we always cover for what's called atypicals. One of the atypicals is called mycoplasma pneumonia,

which you might know is walking pneumonia. Because you can walk around with it for a long time before you really crap out with it. This girl was doing better on day two, stabilized on day three and went downhill on day four because nobody hit this. And we also know that when people go into the hospital, they're skating on vitamin C deficiency after they've been in hospital for a few days with the stress, with the lack of her parents around, with the horrible food, with her dehydration, with the drugs that they were giving. Her vitamin C levels would have been so far down. And I have treated measles with intravenous vitamin C. I can tell you it changes in front of your eyes.

So I'm not saying that that's a medical error that they didn't do that, but it is a medical error that they didn't consider the atypical, the mycoplasma pneumonia, which is known to be a toxin producer, very strong toxin producer. And we know Morin's who is a Fauci's buddy who wrote an article recently talking about the 1917 measles epidemic and why it was so bad because there were co-infections. And he goes through this whole thing about co-infections when they are toxin producing make measles absolutely lethal. So we can't say she died of measles because she was already recovering from measles.

In fact, parents say there were no spots left on her. yet the medical records say she had a maculopapular rash. Something's not jiving here. Something's not adding up. But she was already past the acute phase. They keep writing measles pneumonia. Well, that's not even a thing. Right, I just say that.

Measles pneumonia is not even a thing. So it would have been mycoplasma pneumonia for which she could have developed an abscess or toxin producing lack of vitamin C so that she couldn't fight it. The wrong antibiotic. She had everything stabbed up because mommy's told to go home. What do you think that does to a little kid?

I'm so thirsty. Can I please have a drink? No, I can't you can't have a drink like that's all been public The nurse says she doesn't need a breathing treatment because it's not going to help like who does that? Right like that's the first thing. Nurses just love to slap that thing right on and start doing the broncholidilators But not on this one yeah and then I just feel like look Peter Corey's right it was a mycoplasma pneumonia It's so common I looked this up recently it's either 100 or 200,000 cases per year in the United States. Okay Wow and some 10,000 of them are admitted so we're well equipped with mycoplasma pneumonia, even I am as an adult. And this girl didn't get the proper treatment for that.

No, no, the coverage they gave her didn't cover for it. And then when they found out, and this is, he said this, so this is not me stealing his thunder. He said that they waited 10 hours after they knew the microbe wasn't the right one to actually get the, get the proper antibiotic into her. That should have been like, call the nurse right now, but somebody should have got stat taken from the pharmacy and given to that child. Amazing. So. I want to get off the record with you, but let me go ahead and close out this show. Coming up on off the record, I'm going to get into another more important conversation.

Some that's got me into heat with my interview with Dr. Richard Bartlett, is this measles strain now more dangerous? Are there more kids? Because it looks like more being hospitalized. Suzanne Humphrey has even looked at the Samoa incident, which has gotten Robert Kennedy Jr. in a lot of trouble. Lots of deaths there. How did that happen?

those details and maybe how do you treat it should you come upon this issue all of that on off the record what's off the record it's our way to give back to those of you that donate to the high wire