The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 391: HEALTH REVOLUTION

Episode Date: September 27, 2024

Del Details His Experience At Senator Ron Johnson’s ‘American Health: A Second Opinion’ Roundtable Group Wins Federal Fluoride Battle; Jefferey Jaxen Reports on UN’s Global Digital Compact, and the EPA Issues an Emergency Ban on Common Weed Killer; Organizer of D.C. Viral Roundtable On American Health on the Issues America Faces, and the Way Out; ICAN-Obtained Documents Reveal Measles ‘outbreak’ reported by CDC wasn’t an outbreak, and was caused by the vaccine.Guests: Michael Connett, Esq.; Calley MeansBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Have you noticed that this show doesn't have any commercials? I'm not selling you diapers or vitamins or smoothies or gasoline. That's because I don't want any corporate sponsors telling me what I can investigate or what I can say. Instead, you are our sponsors. This is a production by our nonprofit, the Informed Consent Action Network. So if you want more investigations, if you want landmark legal wins, If you want hard-hitting news, if you want the truth, go to I Can Decide.org and donate now. All right, everyone, we ready?

Action. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you are out there in the world, it's time for us all to step out onto the high wire. You know, just about the beginning of 2017, we started the high wire and our nonprofit, the informed consent action network just at the end of 2016. with the goal of ending man-made disease. And we were just this tiny little show in a box in Hollywood, and slowly our following increased. And this goal started to be on the mouths of more and more people. I would say this week, I don't know if you can feel it,

wherever you are in the world, but the world is changing. There is a revolution taking place. And I think that was exemplified more than ever by the Senator Ron Johnson hearings on health and nutrition, a second opinion. If you did not see the live stream, which is currently going viral everywhere, thousands of clips from that live stream are being shared all across the internet because this is truly the most important conversation happening in America right now, and it descended upon Washington, D.C.

This is just a little excerpt from what that incredible event was like. The purpose of today's event is to, ask questions we haven't been allowed to ask, to provide a foundational and historical understanding of the changes that have occurred over the last century within public sanitation, agriculture, food processing, and healthcare industries that impact our current state of national health. Most people don't know that what they're consuming is making them sick. They know junk food is bad, but they don't realize it's causing chronic disease. And neither do their health care providers. of children is predicted to not outlive their parents if we continue on the trajectory that we are currently on.

When in human history has that ever been the case? The country is getting sicker. We cannot keep going down this path. We have the most over-medicated sickest population in the world, and no one is talking about the root causes. During the time that we've been given to speak with you today, roughly 800 people will die of an obesity related disease that was completely preventable. Where's the outrage? Where is the outrage? American health is getting destroyed.

It's being destroyed because of chronic illness. And if the current trends continue, we're going to be looking at a genocidal level health collapse in our country and the world. What happens to a doctor who puts her patient first and tries to practice outside the guideline? Well, increasingly now we have a misinformation police. Although the greatest perpetrator of misinformation has been the United States government with the food pyramid. Just look at the most recent food pyramid that was released. Lucky Trump Cereals is ranked higher than ground beef.

Coincidentally, 95% of the USDA Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee in 2020 was found of conflict of interest with big food and big pharma. Nine out of 10 killers of Americans, 90% of medical costs are from a weaponized food system. It's not that complicated. When I say weaponized, I mean that literally. You have the best scientists in the world creating this food to be palatable and to be addictive. This box of fruit loops is from Canada. It's colored naturally with watermelon, blueberry,

and carrot juice. This is the US version. It contains four different artificial food dyes with the preservative BHT, which is an endocrine disrupting chemical linked in cancer. This is the Canadian version. This is the brightness of the Canadian version. And this is the brightness of artificial food dyes.

American food companies are selling the same exact products overseas without these chemicals, but choose to continue serving us the most toxic version here. It's un-American. These compounds are laced into the very food-like products that line our grocery store shelves, and yet they remain under-discussed in public health conversations. In fact, legitimately concerned families are gaslit again and again reminded that, quote, everything is a chemical. All this adds up to the fact that today we are not simply living longer, we are dying longer.

85% of the food that you are consuming started from a patented seed sold by a chemical corporation that was responsible for creating Agent Orange in the Vietnam War. Why are chemical companies feeding America? In medical school, I didn't learn that 95% of the people people who created the recent USDA Food Guidelines for America had significant accomplice of interest with the food industry. I did not learn that one billion pounds of synthetic pesticides are being sprayed on our food every single year. Ninety-nine percent of the farmland in the United States. The medical education community is

largely controlled by pharmaceutical companies. One and a half billion dollars every year goes to support physician education. That's from pharmaceutical companies, one and a half billion from pharmaceutical companies. If a foreign nation did this to our country, we would consider an act of war. It is on America. These companies have been allowed through the profit motive to destroy everything that we value in America. Nutrition and mental health research are severely underfunded, with each of them getting less than 5% of the NIH budget. This, This is no accident. This is the concerted effort of lobbying by industry, food manufacturers, the healthcare industry.

They do not want root causes discovered. Why don't our federal health agencies seem to have any curiosity whatsoever? Just, I mean, I see Del Bigtree here who's done so much fabulous work and trying to raise public awareness. For the last 50 years, we have been running the largest uncontrolled science experiment ever done on humanity without their consent. Why should America, the greatest country on earth, be the last developed nation to protect its people? I just wanted to tell you, I'm immersed in your world right now.

I'm so happy you're here delivering this message, and I hope it's listened to all over the halls of Congress, and I hope to do my part when we get a chance to help that happen. We're not a naturally divided people. If we can use this as the example and move us forward, now only can we tackle this incredibly important problem and solve it, but in focusing on doing that in a completely nonpartisan way. What we are dealing with here is so much more

than a physical health crisis. This is a spiritual crisis. We are choosing death over life, Over life, we are choosing darkness over light for people and the planet, which are inextricably linked. We're having a spiritual crisis right now, and that partially entails the fact that we've lost our North Star. We have an over-reliance on scientific studies at the expense of common sense. We don't need 10 years of clinical-controlled studies to know that we shouldn't have plastic in our brains. This is not a Republican issue. This is not a Democrat issue. This is a humanity issue. If we really truly want to address the chronic disease crisis in this country, we have to start by preventing these diseases from occurring in the first place.

Our path out will be a renewed respect for the miracle of life and a renewed respect for nature. The powers that be are simply too powerful for us to take on alone. I implore the people here that shape the policy to take a scale. Dan, the buck must stop with you. Because if this current trend is allowed to persist, the stakes will be untenable. We are in the middle of an extinction level event. And I am really hopeful that by raising issues and letting people know about this health crisis,

that maybe we will get answers quickly. The FDA is asleep at the wheel. They've admitted they're not capable of regulating all these chemicals in our food. And the food companies are using the last of regulation to their advantage. We demand accountability for how the millennial generation was turned into a science experiment without our informed consent for the sake of enriching big pharma, big ag, and big food. We need to

fearlessly get back to science and start just asking and answering basic questions. Is glyphosate safe? Are these food coloring safe? Is it appropriate to give a child a shot three hours into life for an STD? Take off the blinders and look deeper. into ourselves, into our institutions, because we have a real opportunity to affect meaningful change. We can take our country back from these industries. Most important of all, we can begin restoring our children's health. I just want to thank all the panelists for all you've done in the past. You've made a difference.

You've helped improve, if not save people's lives. Thank you for doing that. Once again, I just want to thank Senator Ron Johnson, who is just a groundbreaking pioneer for medical health and freedom in this country. If you've been watching the highway, we've been streaming these incredible events, these roundtable events that Senator Johnson's been having. Of course, the other ones dealing with the COVID pandemic. Ultimately, he's gotten into vaccinations, even the childhood vaccine program. I've been a part of all those. This week, it was about the food industry, really, and all the toxic chemistry. And all the toxic

chemicals that are poisoning us. We are the sickest nation in the industrialized world. This is the sickest generation of children we've ever seen in America. And for anyone that thinks that, well, there's other issues, we've got to worry about war or those, you know, whatever you think is the ultimate issue for America, I don't see, and what was represented, how is it more important than the health of our kids? By the way, even if you want to think about war and protecting this country, They're now saying that over 70% of Americans cannot pass the tests to get into the military because they are so sick. Over 50% have chronic illness now in this country. Diabetes and, of course, obesity, massive parts of this issue.

And the question ends up being, is it really that suddenly all of a sudden the late or the early 1990s, late 1980s, Do we suddenly just get so lazy that we didn't care about our health that we'd sudden obesity exploded? Or was it all these endocrine disrupting chemicals and dyes and food subsidies, additives that are in our food? That was the conversation going on. And clearly, obviously, this is a conversation that is much easier for a lot of people to have than the vaccine issue, which is identical. It's all the same problem with regulatory capture. but this time at this hearing, the room was packed. In fact, I stepped out for one moment and there was a line out the door.

They were beyond capacity and they asked you, when you're leaving, are you going to stay out because there's other people that would like to take your seat? That's how incredible this hearing was. And to give you just a sense of what one of our biggest problems is, how about the media that has been on the sidelines, not reporting like the High Wire has all of these years, that these are real issues that are going on. Look at the Atlantic's headline said about this hearing.

The Wu-Wu Caucus meets. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s appearance at a health and nutrition event hosted by a Trump ally showcased the congruence of crunchy and cranky. Elaine Godfrey. Elaine, oh my God. How pathetic. I mean, how anyone could sit in that room. Woo-woo?

The fact that we're being poisoned with chemicals that have never been properly. safety tested, chemicals that don't exist in food in Europe, literally banned in every other nation that is not as sick as we are, but it's woo-woo to talk about the fact that we actually want our regulatory agencies to protect us. You know, may these people be forgiven by God in their final days. These reporters that should have been holding our government's feet to the fire instead are clearly shills for the very industries that are poisoning us. Elaine, I don't know why you want to Boys and children, do not know who's paying you, but you are a disgrace to journalism. All right.

As though that wasn't, you know, the only large, giant, massive, you know, seismic event happening this week. There's also a huge lawsuit win. I mean, you want to talk about winning, hashtag winning, we won federal court rules that fluoridation chemicals pose an unreasonable risk to help. This is a case, a court case that we have been following for. over a year now, and I am honored and pleased to be joined right now by the lead attorney on this case, Michael Connett. Michael, what did we win? What just happened? Hi, Del. Great to be here.

Thank you. It was a grand slam of a court decision. I could not have asked for a more thorough, more detailed, excellent opinion from the court, 80 pages, very detailed. The court concluded, that adding fluoride chemicals to drinking water presents an unreasonable risk of IQ loss in children. I'll repeat, an unreasonable risk of IQ loss in children. And this is not at high levels, Dell, the judge specifically said at the levels that we currently add to drinking water, our so-called optimal level of 0.7 ppm,

that that presents an unreasonable risk of IQ loss in children. That's what the federal court ruled this week after seven years, seven years of litigation involving extensive expert testimony on both sides, right? The judge heard from the best on both sides of the issue, right? The EPA, the government put up their best experts. We put up our best experts. The judge heard very strong viewpoints on both sides,

the full amount of evidence and reached this conclusion. So unreasonable risk to our children. And Del, you were just talking about the food supply here in the United States and about how the chemicals we add here are different and we have than other countries. Well, I would add to that, that, with fluoridation, over half of the people in this world who drink fluoridated water live here in the United States. We are the most fluoridated nation on earth. Wow. And it's not just the water.

We add fluoride to over 200 million people's water here in the U.S. But that is not just, doesn't just stay in the water. It's contaminating our processed foods. It's contaminating. It's contaminated. It's contaminating our processed beverages. So I think that when we think about the food supply, right? Yeah. Which is a very rightful concern and focus. Let us also keep in mind the water supply that feeds into the food supply. And fluoride chemicals are, you know, something that we really, really need to be getting

out of the water and following the lead of Europe, which for the most part has already done so. What's really unique about this case, I think, to me, Michael, is it fits into the world that I can, the work that we've done. So often when it comes to chemicals or poisoning, you find it's a lawsuit against, I don't know, Dow Chemical or Monsanto or something like that. This lawsuit is actually against the government agency, the EPA. Why go after, I mean, was there corporations that are responsible for this chloride in the water? but why the EPA? Why did you bring this case against the EPA? Well, we brought it because there's a federal statute

called Toxic Substances Control Act, TOSCA, and the EPA administers that act. This act gives the EPA the authority to ban the particular use of a chemical that presents an unreasonable risk to health. So we went to the EPA and asked the agency to exercise its authority to ban this particular, use of fluoride, namely fluoridation chemicals added to drinking water on the grounds that it presents

an unreasonable risk to the brain. And EPA declined our petition, denied the petition. And then we went to court. And the court has now ordered the agency to initiate a rulemaking proceeding to eliminate this risk to the brain from adding fluoride chemicals to drinking water. So that's now the next, The next phase of this, Dell, is for the EPA to go back and begin a proceeding where it needs to answer a very complicated question. How do you eliminate the risk posed by adding fluoride chemicals to drinking water? Del, do you have any guesses as to how we can accomplish that? I don't know. I mean, I guess, you know, somewhere on that list should be actually removing it from the water.

You know, well, and is there any limit to the amount of time they're allowed to take? I mean, if they stretch this case out for seven years, how long are they allowed to sort of deliberate on, you know, how they're going to make rules about this? I mean, we've watched this. I mean, we're all so tired of watching. They just just basically be what my whole show is about all the way through is just these regulatory agencies clearly are not working for citizens. At this moment, what we should expect is the EPA has now been forced by the court to recognize that this is damaging the brains of a member. American children, which, which, like, as Robert Kennedy Jr. said in the hearing, if this was happening, if another country is doing this to us, it would be an act of war. If you were purposely destroying the brains of our kids, our future, then it would be an act of war. How long does the EPA have to actually do something about this?

The good question, and there is not a set timeframe. Now, we will be very much following and we have, if they are dragging their feet, for too long, we do have legal remedies available to compel them to act in a more expedited fashion. But one thing I would say, Dell, is there is nothing stopping local municipalities, local towns and whatnot from acting now, right? We don't need to wait for the EPA to reach, to issue some regulation, although that's certainly going to be monumental when that happens. But really, we should be, and I do expect to see a significant uptick in the number of communities that begin removing this from their water supply. We're already seeing it happen now because when we started this program, fluoridation back in the 1940s, you know, affecting the brain, neurotoxicity was not part of the bargain.

this policy was supposed to be about the teeth and the teeth alone. So now that we know that this is a chemical that does affect the brain and doubt during the trial in this case, there was no dispute by EPA's experts, no dispute that fluoride is a neurotoxicant. Okay, like no one was disputing that. The only question was, well, what is the level where this affects? effect can be seen. And there was a dispute about that, right? But as to whether fluoride damages the brain,

it was, there was no dispute. And so the question that we really should be asking ourselves is, do we want to be adding a neurotoxicant, something that affects the brain, the developing brain, to our drinking water? Is that a wise thing to do? I mean, these are those conversations where you're just, it's just shocking.

we have to have this, you know, conversation. By the way, hopefully somewhere quickly along the road to making some rules, the CDC might decide to take down this moronic page. Look at this. Community Water Floorination, one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th century. Folks, everyone at the CDC needs to be fired. Anyone that allows that on the website beyond tomorrow that's in charge of the CDC immediate firing.

Like, you're done. It's over. You have absolutely no concern for the American public. So, I mean, this is going to be a very disruptive ruling in the end. I know you're going to see this through the end, but at some point, how many states are fluoridating their water right now in the United States of America? There's fluoridation programs in every single state. There's 18 states that mandate fluoridation. So every community that has like more than 5 or 10,000 hookups to a community water supply has to, by state law, fluoridate.

Now, thankfully, most states it is and remains a local decision. So if you are concerned about this, you should find out what the law is in your state and then find out, because there is the great thing here is people have an ability to affect change at the local level, speak to your city council, village council, and, you know, see what can be done. Because people can, and we've seen it hundreds and hundreds of times, communities do, stop this practice. They do stop adding fluoride to water. It can be done. Great. Well, I would recommend to everyone out there reach out to your local government, bring this case forward to them, go visit your representatives and say, get this stuff out of our water. We in whatever state,

here in Texas, I would say, we want to have children that are fully capable of having, you know, cognizance and the absolute greatest brains and ability to think there is. Why would we be putting a in our water that is reducing, you know, their mental capacity. And, Dale, could I add something, something that was admitted to in this case that I think is highly significant? Because one thing that everyone in the both sides recognized in this case is that the most vulnerable period of time in terms of fluoride's ability to affect the brain is in the early life stages when the child's in the womb

and the early months of infancy. That's when the brain is going to be most vulnerable to the effects of fluoride. And it is that time of life, Dell, where the CDC, in this case, under oath, admitted that there is no benefit from swallowing fluoride and having fluoride exposure.

when you are in the womb and the first six months of life. So the period of life, which has the greatest vulnerability for harm to the brain, is a period of life where there is absolutely no benefit at all. So if you think about it from a risk benefit point of view, why are we adding this to water when you have a risk but no benefit for the pregnant mom, the baby.

And that's something that policymakers really need to grapple with. You know, everyone should be able to drink the water supply. Pregnant moms should be able to drink the water. And if you're feeding a baby formula and you have to use tap water, you should be able to do so

without a concern that you might be affecting their brain. It's literally, what are we? 70, 80% water, forget what the numbing are our bodies. Everything in life is driven by water. You're poisoning. really the essence of life. I think Stanley Kubrick was probably ahead of his time back in the 1960s. And Dr. Strangelove, what he addressed is very issue?

Just take a look at this. It's a great just to reflect on this isn't the first time this has talked about. Man, Jake, have you never wondered why? I drink only distilled water or rainwater and only pure grain alcohol? Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes. Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation? fluoridation of water? Yes, I have heard of that, Jack. Yes.

Well, do you know what it is? No. Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face? I mean, you know, just watch it. I'm not saying it's a communist plot, but it sure feels

like it sometimes, right? I mean, why would we do this to our own? own people. Michael Conant, first of all, you're a hero, the fact that you have, you know, run this all the way through. Any thoughts, recommendations for what people can do beyond just reaching out to their official, you know, their government representatives? I mean, how do we make this a fast track issue? How do we put some fire behind what you've just achieved here? First, if I have to comment on that clip, classic piece of cinema, super funny, and also the bane of my existence is someone working on the fluoride issue. Okay. Everyone does it to you? Yeah. You know, so it makes things challenging.

Yeah. But, you know, I think that, you know, one thing I would say is, you know, what informed consent action network is doing, supporting this work, critical work on fluoride. Yeah. Is, you know, we really appreciate your support because it does make litigation like this possible. And so that's, I just want to say that, Dell. You know, we certainly. appreciate that. And but I really think at this point, you know, I think a lot of, I think getting this court's decision, this 80 page ruling into the hands of your local decision makers, I think that's really important next step here. And the national toxicology programs, you know, exquisite report from August of this year, the NTP, the federal expert agents,

on toxic substances, you know, concluded in August of this year that fluoride does lower IQ at certain levels of exposure. So I think, you know, these two things, the court's ruling and the NTP report should really bring about a rethink on this whole, this whole policy of fluoridation. And, you know, certainly, you know, we're going to be holding EPA's feet to the fire, making sure that they move in an expedited way to enact a risk. regulation. But while they're working on that, I think it's really important that we work locally and, you know, give this information to the decision makers so that we can remove it from, you know, town water and city water as much as we can. I do think, Del, I do think we're going

to see a significant increase in the number of communities putting this policy in the dustbin. Fantastic. I heard a rumor that you've become a partner over at Aaron, Siri, Glimstad. Is that true? It is true and it's it's been amazing working, you know, with the team of attorneys that we have and a team of just all around amazing people. So I'm thrilled to say, yes, I am now a partner at Siri and Glimstad working with Aaron and Elizabeth and the others. So yes, I'm very proud and honored to be part of the team. Well, that means we're going to get to work with you a lot more as that's, you know, the attorney body that we use for all the work that I can. of you, you know, just keep up the great work and we will continue to track this story.

And I'm sure we'll be bringing you on for other cases that we're bringing in the future, both in fluoride, food, water, all of it. We're going after all of it, Michael. It's time to have this country have the healthiest kids in the world, not the sickest ones. Thank you so much for your work. Thank you, Dahl. I appreciate it. All right, take care.

All right, we're going to be talking a lot about this stuff that's going on. And my guest coming up later on the show is Callie Means. He's actually, you know, he and his sister Casey just blew up this conversation just a few weeks ago, I guess it feels like, with a Tucker Carlson interview, and it's just taking the world by storm. He was also a critical part of putting together the Ron Johnson hearing this week. So we're going to talk all about that. But first, it's time for the Jackson Report. You know, I guess it feel like just we just keep getting more and more momentum, you know, just from so many, just more scientists, more specialists, more, more heroes and warriors and

lawyers are all really stepping in here now on a path that, you know, in some ways, it's just been, what, seven years or so of the high wire? And sure, there was those that came before us. But when we set our goals to try and change the conversation in this country, it's happening so fast in some ways it feels like it's been 50 years, but just seven years from being all alone on these conversations. And now it's literally sweeping the Internet worldwide. It's so exciting. And, Del, these ideas are ideas whose time have come.

They are things that people have held on to for a very long time. People are called conspiracy theorists to get the fluoride out. of water for so many years. I remember covering with you just a couple of years ago when the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics was talking about, the authors were talking about, I thought that was conspiracy theory, but now we find out it lowers IQ. So my gosh, this is crazy. And so you're seeing this just rapid turnaround. But, you know, one of the focuses are on these regulatory agencies, CDC, FDA, and then Environmental Protection Agency. And so what else has the Environmental Protection Agency been up to you besides defending a neurotoxin in our water supply

in court. Well, check this out. Now to an emergency order from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA issuing an emergency ban of a common weed killer. The EPA is demanding this weed killer be pulled from store shelves immediately. The Environmental Protection Agency has issued an emergency suspension of the common weed killer DCPA. It's also known as dactyl. The agency's risk assessment found handling DCPA products while pregnant could expose fetuses to between four to 20 times the chemical level considered safe. The EPA says exposure can alter fetal thyroid hormone levels, which is linked to low birth weight, impaired brain development, decreased IQ and impaired motor skills later in life. A lot of women that now have kids with special needs because they were

working while pregnant. They were directly impacted by pesticides. and so now their kids have learning disabilities. Dactyl is just one. I mean, there are more than 130 pesticides that are banned that are used in California every year. It's the first emergency action of its kind taken by the regulatory agency in 40 years. Wow, emergency. It's emergency for sure.

Yeah. Yeah, 40 years. So it's, the EPA is doing something and, you know, perhaps we should tell our counterparts over in the European Union, but they banned it in 2009. So this thing has been in our food supply for 15 years. Here's the actual order from the European Commission. 27 countries have banned this for plant protection products containing chlorothal dimethyl withdrawn by 23rd March 2010. And it also says there's no renewal from this publication date. So they banned it for the very same reasons the EPA is now grandstanding on that

they're banning it here in the United States with an emergency order they've only used once in 40 years. This is the state of the EPA. So I wanted to give the APA some credit here for doing something right. But then you start doing research on this. And so let's look at their press release. We go into their press release, this emergency order to stop the use of this pesticide. Why are they doing it? Well, it said a little bit in that news package there, but it says EPA has taken this action because unborn babies whose pregnant mothers are exposed to DCPA, sometimes without even knowing the exposure has occurred, could experience changes in fetal thyroid hormone levels, and these changes are generally linked to low birth weight impaired brain development, decreased IQ, and impaired motor skills later in life, some of

which may be irreversible. So remember that, decreased IQ, fetal thyroid hormone levels. These are big issues for the EPA all of a sudden. Well, let's go to the environmental working group. They did a fantastic write-up on this to give the whole story. And this is what really happened. They said in 1995, nearly 30 years ago, the agency, that's the EPA, Class classified DCPA as a possible carcinogens. They knew all the way back then. That decision was based on a study conducted by Dachville's manufacturer in 1993, which showed it caused thyroid tumors in animals suggesting similar potential threats to people.

Now get this. In 2013, the EPA required AMVAC, the sole DCPA manufacturer in the U.S. to submit an additional study showing the chemicals effect on the fetal thyroid, among other information. So it took them from 1995, basically. to 2013 to say, hey, could you turn in your homework on this whole, you know, fetal thyroid issue with kids? Because, you know, something may be going on there, so we'd like to see something else from you. It took them that long, but it gets even worse. It goes on to say, Ambex research, the actual company's own research, finally submitted to the EPA in 2022,

showed even low doses of DCPA exposure can harm the developing fetus. The manufacturer's own study. That's like giving the cheat sheet code to the EPA saying, here they are, we manufacture this, and it's kind of unhealthy. You want to do something about this? But they didn't. So it says during the nearly 10 years before it finally complied with the EPA's requirement, the company continued producing and selling DACPVIL. And AMBAC didn't submit other data requested.

So in August 2023, the agency suspended use of the pesticide, a de facto temporary ban. Yet three months later, the EPA lifted that suspension once again allowing Dackville's use until today. that's the EPA we've all grown up to know decades of this type of foot dragging no teeth to do anything about these pesticides and so before it was banned just you know just a couple weeks ago this is what the headlines look like how how ubiquitous was this in our environment well it says almost six out of 10 kale samples tainted by pesticide banned in europe 15 years ago we're talking kale broccoli sweet potatoes eggplants turnups mustard greens collard greens it's literally it's the list of superfoods, if you will, like things that people have really been switching over to for

health and now you find out it's the most poisoned product out there. I mean, it's just, it's a crime against humanity. There's no two ways to look at it. There's ways to mitigate that. We're going to get to that in a moment. So we go to a chart that was in that article and it shows the usage in the United States of this datchel, of this now banned pesticide. You can see here the purple line is the U.S. Geological

survey that's throughout the United States and California that both tracks similar. But you can see almost 1.4 million pounds per year at its height and that was in like 1992. But then you see this, we call it a precipitous decline all the way to 2000. And what happened at the bottom there? That was the advent of glyphosate and Roundup Ready seeds. So you can see on the cales, on the collard greens and things like that, these are basically, they're putting this pesticide on everything that glyphosate wasn't being put on. So the corn, the major cash crops, the canola, those are the ones that are getting all the glyphosate at that time because that was the big moneymaker. So why is this important? Well, we pull out for this,

you know, 10,000 foot view and we see continual studies like this. This is one by the nonprofit friends of the earth, and they're looking at target baby food. So again, babies are the most, you know, the most vulnerable to these type of toxins. Toxic pesticides found in targets baby food. What do they say? They said, we found a cocktail of 21 different pesticides, a term that includes insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides, and targets baby food, including neonicotinoids. We also found metabolites from a class of neurotoxic pesticides called organophosphate. Twelve of the pesticides we found are classified as highly hazardous to the environment

and or human health, and eight are banned in the European Union. And you can see an image here if you want to share this online. This is what we're looking at here. Anybody buying Target baby food, they may want to know this if they're giving it to their baby. And you can see there the breakdown of everything I just read in in those baby food products. I mean, and let's just, I just want to be clear because we can go, oh, my God, targets, baby food, folks, targets just putting a bunch of vegetables and fruits and giant, you know, factory, you know, cookers and blending it down into a baby food. It's the same vegetables we're buying.

You know, all that's telling us is not necessarily as far as I can tell that they're injecting pesticides into the little, you know, cans of baby food for your baby. It's just, just showing you that any company that uses our food supply, our, you know, our farm-grown vegetables and fruits are going to be poisoning you. I mean, that's what we get there. I mean, kale, I mean, everything, it's just really, it's amazing we're still sitting here, I guess, and having this conversation. And it's why that Rent Ron Johnson hearing was so important. I mean, actually, I'm going to jump ahead a little bit because I think around this is really something that came up in that hearing talking about.

How is it that America is getting chemicals that nobody else has? Take a look at this. Americans now live in a toxic soup of synthetic chemicals, plastics, and untenable pesticide loads that permeate our food, water, and air. Having studied the evolution of corporations, I believe the root cause of how we got here is an unintended consequence of the unchecked

and misguided industrialization of agriculture and food. I believe there are two key drivers behind how we got here. First, America has much looser regulatory approach to approving new ingredients and chemicals than comparable developed countries. Europe, for example, uses a guilty until proven innocent standard for the approval of new chemicals, which mandates that if an ingredient might pose a potential health risk, it should be restricted or banned for up to 10 years until it is proven safe. In complete contrast, our FDA uses an innocent until proven guilty approach for new chemicals or ingredients that's known as grass or generally recognized as safe.

This recklessly allows new chemicals into our food system until they are proven harmful. Shockingly, U.S. food companies can use their own independent experts to bring forth a new chemical without the approval of the FDA. It is a travesty that the majority of Americans don't even know they are constantly exposed to thousands of untested ingredients that are actually banned or regulated in other countries. To put it bluntly, for the last 50 years, we have been running the largest uncontrolled science experiment ever done on humanity without their consent. Why should America, the greatest country on earth, be the last developed nation to protect. its people. It's such an important question, but the point he's making is here in America, we say basically put any chemical on the food, spray it on anywhere, stick it in baby food. We don't care only till someone has the courage to get involved in a lawsuit that will probably

take them 15 more years while everyone's being poisoned to finally get on board with where the rest of the world was at and finally ban this product. I mean, it's absolutely, it's absolutely, and totally obscene and shocking for all of us Americans that had some sort of delusion of grandeur, that America is the greatest, that we have the greatest food supply and the, you know, the greatest government system. It's not working. And really one of the questions I have not to get in is just, you know, a lot of, as I said before, I was a, you know, a flower power, hippie, if you will, growing up, a liberal, but we were into organic food and clean food as I was growing up. but I never understood this hate on regulatory agencies.

Like, you know, every time conservators like, you know, down with the regulatory agencies, well, clearly corporations don't care for us, right? They're going to poison us anytime they get a chance. But then if you have regulatory agencies that are working for them, which these clearly are, then what good are they anyway? I mean, this whole thing is so, it's corrupt to the very bone in the marrow of this nation right now. And, you know, industry talking points.

I think, Del, so many people feel the way that you do. And this is why these issues are now front and center. These issues are now political, if you will, and sweeping across the United States. A lot of industry mouthpieces that are put up there and propped up there on the media to talk about. Things like this will say there's no difference between organic and conventional.

Well, a study out of Europe just said something different. So this is looking at the impact of organic foods on chronic diseases. This is a systematic review. Again, looking at a lot of studies. It says a significant inverse relationship between organic food consumption and cardiometabolic risk factors, including obesity, diabetes, malitis, hypertension, hypolipidemia, was observed in a majority of prospective studies.

Then it goes on to say the obvious clinical trials consistently indicated lower pesticide exposure in participants on organic diet suggesting potential health benefits. But just to put a finer point on that, this is a study out of frontiers of medicine, And it says pesticides potentially as bad as smoking for increased risk in certain cancers. And they talked to the lead author. He said, in our study, we found that for some cancers, the effect of agricultural pesticide usage is comparable in magnitude to the effect of smoking. Wow.

And the ones they found leukemia, non-Hodgians, lymphoma, bladder cancer. And so, you know, if government really wanted to do something and they can't reform the agencies, well, maybe throw some incentives on those organic foods to make them cheaper for people because people are having a really hard time buying. food right now. So how are they going to afford organic food? Make people pay for the bad food that they want to have. If they want to have food with all these bad ingredients in them, make it like a pack of cigarettes. They have to pay triple a price for it. Instead is the opposite. That's the food that's getting subsidized. There's so many of the speakers we're talking about at the Ron Johnson

hearing. That's the food that's in your food stamp programs. So really, if you can't afford organic food, you're just being poisoned. And now, you know, as we see here, organic food, my sister was just telling me this week that, you know, her cholesterol was going up, she was having some high blood pressure issues and just decided randomly to just switch over to just organic food. And in doing so, you know, a couple months later, doctors like, what did you do? I mean, your numbers were all down. What exactly did you do? She like, it just changed out and started eating organic food, the doctor was like, huh, that's interesting. He never heard of that before. I mean, amazing. And to your point, too, how is this taken out? Let's look at glyphosate.

Did the EPA step up and say, you know what, this glyphosate is causing non-hachshodicans, lymphoma, cancers. There's all, no, these were the lawyers. These were the legal issues being pushed by lawyers that were literally bankrupting the company. It was called the worst corporate takeover in history. And you see headlines like this, Barrett and glyphosate sales to U.S. consumers. So they had to pull glyphosate off the market in the United States because so if you go to, you know, Home Depot and try to get Roundup, it's not glyphosate based anymore. They took it out because of all these lawsuits. And so that that's a positive. There's still a long way to go, though, on glyphosate being used on the crops in the United States.

Yeah, because I mean, I mean, you literally took it out of Home Depot. I can't spray it in my yard, but it's on 80 to 90% of the crops I'm eating in my house. It's literally I'm eating this stuff. And again, where's the EPA? Where is the FDA? You lost the lawsuit. You're watching them pay out billions of dollars. This stuff clearly causes cancer. You watch it taken off the shelf so we can't spray it on our tulips out in the yard. But it'll be on all your food. It'll be desiccating and drying your wheat, which is going to go straight from there, ground up and turn into bread for you. And no one in our regulatory agents seems to think, well, I don't know. Let's put two plus two.

You know, if it's bad for me in my yard, probably bad for me in my bread. So wrapping this up, so we have the EPA grandstanders. Please wrap this up before I have a heart attack here. Okay. We have a 40-year emergency motion that it's used because all of a sudden they are very concerned about young children and they're very concerned about lower IQ and fetal thyroid functioning. But wait a minute, where have I heard that before? Well, here's the Hill just a couple months ago before this landmark fluoride decision.

U.S. agency links high fluoride exposure to lower IQ in kids. Well, what about thyroid function? Here's this, here's an updated review of all the studies looking at thyroid function and what's called developmental fluoride neurotoxicity. It says among the possible mechanisms of developmental neurotoxicity is toxicity to the thyroid glandant mechanism relevant in regard to several neurotoxicants. Thus, the NRC concluded that fluoride is an endocrine disruptor, can affect the thyroid, goes on and on about the dosages.

So here, I mean, we're talking about regulatory hypocrisy. They're going to this grandstand on this pesticide that, yeah, it's not. really use too much anymore but fluoride they're going to fight tooth and nail in court to keep this in your water supply it's amazing tell me how that makes sense i mean this is why people are outraged people are thinking it's it's conspiracy theorists online that are doing this or it's anti-vaxers no it's their own it's their what they're doing their own admissions their own movements and lack of lack of initiative to take these out so we're talking about revolutions you know we want to we want to reform these agencies, but public health in general, it needs to be looked at, completely reformed.

And right now, the United States and across most of the world, there's something even greater, and that's the ability for us to even communicate, free speech, something we've been covering for weeks and weeks here, has been increasingly under attack. And it seems like now some of the very familiar faces we've known from over the years are coming back into the fold and really starting to talk about how to curtail speech. One of them you may know. Take a look. They constantly raise the issue of freedom of speech.

Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk and the other people who now control maybe the most powerful media platforms in the world. And they say, we don't want to censor human users. But it's not about the human users. It's about the corporate algorithms. Right. Humans produce enormous amount of content on social media. They produce hate-filled conspiracy theories,

and they produce cooking lessons and biology lessons and funny cat videos and whatever. And I think I agree with them that we should be very, very careful before we censor and ban human beings. But the problem begins not with it when a human post some hateful conspiracy theory online, But when the Facebook algorithm or the Twitter algorithm chooses, makes a decision to recommend and promote and spread and autoplay this particularly hate-filled video in pursuit of user engagement. Right. And this is something that the corporations should be accountable for. All right. So he's giving kind of an academic view of why algorithms should curtail speech. One of the premises he forgot to start with is he's saying it's just people that are spreading this hate and this misinformation.

It's not talking about corporations. He's not talking about public health agencies, the governments themselves. What about them? What about when they do it? I mean, that's what's so troubling about this conversation is we are sitting here right here today, as we've reported every single week. Our government still not admitting that the COVID vaccine is down regulating the immune systems of everybody that's on their second or third shopping, covering that a lot of his last week, still not talking about the fact. fact that myocarditis, periarchiditis, is much more severe in children, much more severe than the disease itself, much more prevalent. All of this is now known science across the world, and still they are out there saying that what you and I are talking about, saying the things I just said, that that is the misinformation. As long as my government is the one lying to us, then I have a real

problem with them deciding how they're going to decide what, you know, hate speech, if you I mean, Dahl Bictree hates people because he doesn't want them taking a product that's so good for them. I mean, who cares if it's going to swell your heart and downregulate your immune system? I mean, this is how this language is being spun, right? That as soon as you're against the government, now you're causing hate, you're causing dissension. It's literally what, you know, the fourth state was supposed to be. We're supposed to be challenging government. Now if you challenge government, that's a problem.

It's really, really scary. This is very scary stuff. Absolutely. And we get lectured by agencies like the CDC on misinformation. This is an agency that thinks generationally lowering the IQ of children is better than just a couple of cavities, having a couple cavities with fluoride. So let's talk about what just happened over this past weekend in New York City. This was the summit of the future, this United Nations.

We reported on that last week. And what came out of that was what was called the Global Digital Compact. So this was not a legally binding agreement, but this is kind of a framework. work and member states and countries can sign on to this and say, hey, this looks like a pretty good idea. So let's go into this. It's kind of long, but there's a whole section on information integrity. And it says this, we recognize that digital and emerging technologies can facilitate the manipulation and interference with information in ways that are harmful to societies and individuals and negatively affect the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms as well

as the attainment of the sustainable development goals. So what are they saying there is basically saying, look, we need to curtail your speech because some people may find that it's harmful. It may, you know, come between the enjoyment of their human rights. And, oh, by the way, these sustainable development goals, we're trying to change society. It may stop those. So what they're basically saying right there is you have to toll the line of what we call climate change, of what we call misinformation, of what we call a pandemic and on and on because those are all in those sustainable development goals. And if you don't do that, we recognize that that is misinformation and that needs to be curtailed. But it goes on to say this, we will strengthen

international cooperation to address the challenge of misinformation and disinformation and hate speech, here we go, online, and mitigate the risks of information manipulation. So they're telling you, front facing, the UN is now, this is equally as important as this climate change scare, it's going to end the world we've been telling you about. And so you're seeing a lot of big governmental organizations, global organizations, they're all focusing, on this digital online conversation and how to whittle that down to words that they like

and conversations they like. But there are some bright spots. In Ireland, they had a hate speech law. This law, remember, was subjective. If someone felt they were being hated on for lack of a better term, there was literally prison terms, there was fines, totally subjective.

This, according to Reuters, Ireland drops plan for hate speech law, minister says. Fantastic. We have been showing videos of this insane. out there and people, you know, getting the doors knocked on by police. So this is a great step forward. Yeah, absolutely. And it's interesting because throughout the voting process, it was getting unanimous decision. Like almost everybody was voting for it to push it through their parliament. It was only a handful of activists and politicians and journalists that kept this, this drumby alive,

to say, this is not right. So the fact that this minister is saying this will be dropped, this is very good. And that they're following through with this is also good. But now we're seeing something different. different. We're seeing at the device level censorship's starting to be kind of baked into the cake. So the latest is Google Chrome. So what is that? That's a browsing kind of a dashboard that a lot of people probably are watching this show right now through a Google Chrome browser. It's the most used browser in the world. And this is the article here. Google meets digital ideas. Chrome pushes controversial tech. What are they talking about? Well, we go right to Google Chrome's actual website and they're talking to the developers here, talking about the application

program interface API. And these are digital credentials. And they say this, real world digital identity is becoming a reality with many public and private entities starting to issue device-bound digital credentials. Remember that. For example, mobile drivers licenses and IDs in select US states such as Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, and Maryland can now be provisioned to digital wallet apps such as Google wallet on mobile devices. regulations concerning the acceptance of digital credentials for certain online verifications are also merging. And so there's a video.

We can show you what that may look like now because this is starting to get onboarded onto Google Chrome. So you see here you go in there asking for these credentials. You want to share those and then authorizing with your thumbprint basically right there. So you have biometrics. I was just going to say, when you look at this, like I mean, I just think of these technologies now merging. If you can go to Whole Foods and they have the ability to be able to, And they have the ability for me to scan my palm. My palm is connected to my banking or my credit card.

Then I'm asking you this, Jeffrey, how long before you get pulled over by a police officer? Then they say, hold your hand out, please. And all they do is scan your hand. And there's your driver's license, right? It's attached to your palm. You know this biometrics. All this is where these companies, they already have the technology. I mean, I don't know.

Is that a bad thing? It's a bad thing that, you know who I am, wherever I go. People are like, what are you running from Dell? well, nothing yet, except maybe a stupid vaccine law that's trying to forcibly inject me with something I know is dangerous. I mean, just some things like that. Right. And it's not that we have something to hide. It's the people pushing this technology have shown time and time again not to be trustworthy, to be the last people to trust with this type of technology.

And California is where a lot of this is really starting. We're seeing it. This was one of the laws that was passed there. Digital IDs are coming to social media in California's crackdown, Governor Newsom, signed into law a bill that it was going to is going it's it starts in 2027 just to note that but it's to save kids from social media platforms so the harms that are being caused mental health and so on from social media platforms and one of the ways they're going to do that among others is to have digital ID verification before you sign on to any type of social media there's also a federal bill

at that level called the kids online safety act and that's parked in congress right now but very similar language in there. And so with California, you're seeing the digital space, you're seeing the internet and that that cyberspace, if you will, swallowing reality, swallowing the nuts and bolts of what make reality. So what am I mean by that? Well, California is rolling out a pilot program. It already has for a digital driver's license. So it may not sound too crazy, but that means you'll no longer have a paper driver's license or a plastic card in your wallet. This is all going to be on your phone and what's interesting about this is just recently you had apple sign on to this and say hey this looks like a good idea we're going to throw a full weight behind this you can put this in

apple wallet so this california driver's license and state IDs are now now uploadable into the apple wallet and that's where they'll live so now you you don't have to pull out your driver's license anymore in fact you don't even have to know you're being ided you could be walking and they could be scanning those things and what would that look like are people really talking about doing this? Well, let's look at billionaire Larry Ellison. Yeah, Larry Ellison, the creator, founder of Oracle. This is the headline coming out. Billionaire Larry Ellison says a vast AI fuel surveillance system can ensure citizens will be on their best behavior. What was he talking about? He said Ellison made the comments as he spoke to investors early this week during an Oracle

financial analyst meeting, you know, kind of a big deal, where he shared his thoughts on the future of AI-powered surveillance tools. Ellison said AI would be used in the future to constantly watch analyze vast surveillance systems like security cameras, police body cameras, doorbell cameras, and vehicle dashboard cameras. He said, we're going to have supervision, Ellison said. Every police officer is going to be supervised at all times. And if there's a problem, AI will report that problem or report it to the appropriate person. Citizens will be on their best behavior because we are constantly recording and reporting everything

that's going on. No problem with that. What could possibly go wrong. will be abused. Wow. Governments will never abuse this. And you know, a lot of people out there are saying, well, we have, we still have platforms, we can communicate freely on, we have X, we have Telegram.

Well, remember, just a couple weeks ago, X removed its entire service from Brazil because of court orders that were asking them to remove, basically remove accounts. They were asking them to remove these far right accounts, and they fired their representative, their legal representative in Brazil. Well, apparently Elon Musk has now backed down on that piece to regain access to the Brazilian market, which is estimated about 40 million people there are using that service. So Elon Musk backs down in Brazil. So that's interesting there.

But also now, remember Telegram that just a couple weeks ago, France arrested the CEO of Telegram, Pavl Duraf, and almost kind of ambushed him when he got off his plane. then basically leveled a series of charges at him for not what he did, but what people did on his platform. So this is a whole separate legal theory now that's being tried out on these platform CEOs. Well, all of a sudden he's been released and this is what the headlines are looking like. Telegram CEO Dirov says app to provide more data to government. So they're going to apply now.

And this is a big deal because this app's been around for over a decade. And unlike Twitter and X and Facebook, the Telegram app, actually the entire backbone was on secure messaging, encryption, end-to-end encryption. So for that to happen now, for that to be open to governments with legal requests, that's a really big deal. And none of us can say what we would do in those situations. They're literally threatening prison time for these people if they step foot in certain countries. And so what we should take away from this is the links that government is going to try to get at your speech, control your speech,

sense to your speech. This is where we're at right now. And these these governments are rabid trying to trying to control the online conversation and debate. So this is why we really need to listen to the trusted voices, listen to them directly, sign up for their newsletters. This is, we need to support the people that are really pointing this out. Wow, wow. Incredible reporting, Jeffrey, such a good point. For everyone watching right now, hope you just sign up to our newsletter. That means no matter what they try to do to censor us, maybe we'll have to email you the show at some points if they get really radical, we'll find a way to get you the information if we come under authoritarian rule. We're not going to stop. Hopefully I don't get thrown in jail just for trying

to bring the truth. And my heart goes out to, you know, the head of telegram. And I imagine Elon Musk is trying to, you know, make sure people can communicate on some level in Brazil. I don't know. I hope to get to talk to them at some point. But it is concerning when you just watch those people that are really standing for free speech, having it shut down and going along with it. Incredible reporting, Jeffrey. These are amazing times. Some really great developments. And on the other hand, such a corrupt government we have here in America. And I'm sure the rest of the world is like, yeah, us too. All right, Jeffrey, I'll look forward to speak with you next week. Keep up with good work. All right. Thank you. All right. Well, you know,

do you remember that giant outbreak of measles in Maine and they were screaming about the anti-baxes? It looks something like this. The Maine CDC says it has received a report of a positive measles result in a child from Maine. The state's center for disease control and prevention says the infected person is a child. They say the youngster was vaccinated against the measles, but the Maine CDC says it's considering the child to be a threat to spread the illness out of an abundance of caution. Well, as all things, they tried to create a panic measles back in America. Well, we had our legal team bring a FOIA request asking exactly what was with that case. Where did the measles come from? How many was it?

This is what we discovered. This is our legal update. Take a look. The CDC created this big scare with media rollout news articles saying measles is back. When you look historically at measles, it is not the terrifying disease that they claim that it is. It was treated like the chickenpox and it doesn't consider a big deal. And in fact, when you look statistically, leading up to 1963, there were around 1 in 500,000 Americans died of measles every year. That's an incredibly small number. And the mortality for measles between 1900 and 1962, the year before the first measles vaccine,

had declined by over 98%. It was on its way, like most other infectious diseases for which they were not able to develop a vaccine in the tribe. It was becoming less dangerous. was on its way out. There's a case in Maine freaking out the public. And so we wanted to understand what was this case of measles? What was the strain?

So we foiled on behalf of ICANN, the Maine Health Department and the CDC, and we have finally gotten the documents that showed about, gave the information about this purported case of measles. Well, it turns out it wasn't an actual case of wild measles. It was not a case of measles at all. It was a child who'd been vaccinated for measles, apparently, that had the measles strain from the vaccine and that caused the child to have a rash.

So there was no case of measles. And maybe the worst part about this is the health department of CDC never went and told the public that. They were fine with scaring the public with this made up fact, but then never bothered telling the public the truth that, oops, actually, there wasn't even a case of measles. Well, if you just started watching the high wire, this has been an experiment from the beginning. Could we bring you the news and information about what's happening in your world? And then by having you donate to get that news, use nearly half of that funding to go then and fight in courtrooms across America to stop whatever we're reporting about. I guess you could call it activist television. This is like no news network there is.

I don't know of anyone else that works this way and all of it's made possible by you. If you want to keep getting this reporting that they'll tell you as misinformation, as they poison you and your children to death. And by the way, I would say we're probably the most controversial show, certainly the most controversial show that is as accurate as we are. We still have yet to have to apologize about any of the things we've told you because we're backing it all with science. There's nothing like the high wire.

There's nobody winning more lawsuits. We just won, you know, the religious exemption for California University students. So starting next semester, all of the students in California are going to be able to opt out if they're going to college from the vaccine program, we won back to religious exemption in Mississippi. Nobody's doing this stuff, and nobody's doing it in more critical time than us. We're going to be fighting on floor.

We're going to be talking. We're going to be doing foias on food. We are going to personally work to stop all these issues. So please join us in this fight, become a recurring donor. All you have to do is go to the top of your screen, hit Donate to ICAN, and then travel down, choose the amount that really would love you to be

a recurring donor. That helps us know that we can stay in a court case for a year or two, if that's what's going to take. We're asking for $24 a month for $2024, but even $1 a month makes a difference. I want you to feel what it feels like to be a participant in this world. How about this idea of 100% participation? Don't you want to live in that world? Don't you want to feel like everybody cares? Everybody's trying to do the right thing. Well, why don't you make this the day that you join the everybody, whether it's just a dollar or not, we're trying to free the five, we're going to continue to work at a full exemption in California. I know it's around the corner with all the success we're having and all the other states that are forcibly vaccinating.

We are going and to continue to make a difference in this world with your help. Thank you for everybody that's donated and made this show and our work and all of our legal work possible. All right, I'm so excited about this next guest. You know, shows like the Highwire, like I said, for the last seven years, we have been talking about ending the chronic disease epidemic. in all the ways that occurs. We've been talking about pesticides and herbicides and food adders and fluoride and, of course, vaccines. But every once in a while, somebody comes along and then for whatever reason just has a meteoric impact upon the world that we're living in.

I think that's how you would have to describe my next guest. Callie Means and his sister Casey Means, of course, has been out there. The two of them, just powerhouse. If you don't, for some reason, you've been living under Iraq and missed all this, this is what's been looking like. I had the distinct pleasure of talking to Callie Means. Callie Means is literally going to change the world. Callie Means is a Stanford and Harvard Business School graduate. Early in his career, he was a consultant for food and pharma companies and is now exposing practices.

They used to weaponize our institutions of trust. He is the co-founder of Good Energy. He once worked for pharma. He definitely does not now. This year. In 2020, is the highest rate of cancer in world history, and particularly American history, is the highest rate of autism in American history, is the highest rate of autoimmune conditions in American history.

We are being lied to that cancer is random, that dementia is random, that kidney disease is random, that all these issues that are killing us are random. They're not. They're all exploding, and they're all tied essentially to food. We have clearly a metabolic health crisis in this country, an obesity crisis, a situation where kids are frankly being poisoned. When you look at ultra-processed food and see all those ingredients, that's a science experiment by tobacco industry scientists. Right? These, all these perfect flavors, all these perfect chemicals, they hijack our biology. Healthcare spends five times

more than the oil industry, multiples more than any other industry. There's five pharmaceutical lobbies for every member of Congress. You would expect our medical leaders to be speaking out about this. You would expect the head of the NIH, Dr. Fauci, to be on the steps of Congress saying that we are getting sicker because of food. This is all tied to food. But the devil's bargain is that every institution in the medical industry makes money when people are sick. There's no better profit generating force than chronic disease in the history of American capitalism. We must urgently remove corruption from the USDA, the CDC, the NIH, and prioritize root cause interventions and systems thinking to reverse the chronic

disease crisis. amazing is that news montage with just all the interviews that Callie did yesterday. This guy's, I'm kidding, of course, but this guy's doing more interviews than anyone. I'm so happy to have him on the show right now. Callie, thank you for joining me today on the High Wire. There's an amazing montage there, Tell, and just so, so grateful to be on this mission, you know, with leaders like you. Well, we are so happy to have you. I, um, you know, it, it's, It feels like you came out of nowhere. It's like Superman swooped in.

Your sister, Casey, of course. The two of you've written a book, I suppose, which is a part of this. I feel like the first time I saw you was on Tucker Carlson talking about OZMPIC, right? Is that where this, I'm just trying to figure out, like, what lit this fuse? Where did you come from? Like, you know, how did it take off? Well, you know, early, 12 years ago was working for food and pharma. I got more into startups.

You hadn't fully put the pieces together. I mean, this story really starts in 2017 when my sister shocked the whole family, you know, after working at the NIH, after top of her class to have her med school after being at the end of surgical residency and saying I'm done, there's something really, really dark happening. I didn't learn why people are getting sick. And I said she was a complete idiot for leaving, you know, the medical treadmill. I still didn't quite get it. But she radicalized me and this came together.

I mean, we started going on the warpath in early 2021 when my mom had a pain in her stomach, went into Stanford Medical School and was told she had pancreatic cancer. And the doctor said it was unlucky. And I knew enough by that time from Casey to know that the skyrocketing rates of every single chronic disease, like literally every single one is going up. And it's not unlucky. It's not a tough break. it's because we're being poisoned by the toxins, by food, by really a, by really a comprehensive set of issues that you talk about that, that other leaders are talking about. So we decided literally bearing our mom that we were going to talk about this issue,

you know, bring her medical perspective. But yeah, there's a picture of the most important moment in my life where we carried up my mom to the, to look over the ocean in her final hours of consciousness. And she embraced my dad and really had gratitude for her wife. And that moment would have been robbed from us if we looked at the medical system. You know, we were being pushed for a bunch of interventions and she was able to die with us because we ignored the medical system. So yeah, we felt righteous about this. We felt angry and we felt a need to carry my mom's legacy forward.

So we've been talking out, Tucker and other leaders in independent media have been amplifying this. Obviously, you and what Bobby Kennedy has been doing, you know, it just, there's a coalition coming together here from many different perspectives, and it's amazing to be a part of. It really is. And, you know, just the hearing this week with Senator Ron Johnson, I have been at, you know, the other, you know, second opinion hearings that he's had. But there's something electric. I mean, watching the politicians come through, this is what I haven't seen survived. Matt Gates came in for a while was. sitting down. You had the head of the finance committee in the room telling his own story of

weight loss and being lied to about the food supply. And then Ron Johnson as a part of that committee and you start thinking, is it possible we could actually have a government that cares about this for the first time in like, you know, half a century? I want to underline that. I mean, Senator Crapo from Idaho, you know, I think he's said this has not been his issue. And, And he talked about his testimonial. He actually looked across the table and saw Max Lugavir. He didn't know he was there and listened to Max's podcast and helped those podcasts and books helped him lose, he said, 50 pounds.

Yeah. And it transformed his life. That's what I'm seeing, Del. I mean, I'm new and maybe too idealistic here. But, you know, really the closed door meetings, I cannot tell you how many senators and members of Congress who looked at me and said, this has not been my issue, but something's happening with Bobby Kennedy. Something's happening with my constituents talking about their sick kids.

something's happening with my health, you know, and they're waking up to this. And I do think the corruption is that we've set these orthodoxies. You know, we've set these orthodoxies almost of Western civilization of that we can't question the medical system, that we can't question the fact that we're going to kind of hack our way out of our biology with all these drugs and progress. And, you know, hacked our way into this idea that we, you know, no expenses too high for pharmaceutical interventions, but lifestyle issues. are kind of fringe. This is all the result of just kind of like that that's what the influence

has done. It's led to this kind of kind of see where we're we're senators kind of they can't get out of this box on how they think about health care. I mean, I think the voices have done, frankly, propelled by independent media, is they're able to question that a little bit because something's untenable. You know, I don't think anyone is sitting in Congress really wanting kids to be sick. Sure. And I think what we saw with COVID and what we just, I think the emperor has no close moment is leading people to ask questions. So, so yeah, we got to keep pushing, but I think it's, it's a mix of what's happening on independent media.

You know, when Americans have left their own devices, they gravitate to this show. They're gravitating to Joe Rogan. They're gravitating to this. And to really people that are unpacking these questions. And then I'll be, you know, direct. And this isn't a political statement. It's just like we need strong executive leadership. I mean, that's an imperative.

This is a bipartisan issue. We need the president to be talking. about this issue. And I can't tell you, I'll just say this. So many members of Congress are like, I need that high-level leadership from the independent medium from the president because then it allows me to tell the lobbyist to get the hell out of my office. When there's not direct top-down focus, that's when the special interest can win. I mean, I think that that's one of the things that, you know, we always want to say to people, you know, change begins with yourself. Change begins with you. But in these situations, the work that you're doing, I know you've been, you know,

walking the halls of Washington, D.C. I've done my share of that. It's tiring. Those marble floors have a way of really just beating into your feet and like it's cold and it's dry and it's strange. But it's so important right now. And you're right. Our issue right now is these regulatory agencies. It's the government. The people, what do we have? I mean, you know, I've just, we just done two or three stories today on fluoride or, you know, pesticides. These are issues the EPA has known has been a problem for 15, 20, 30, 40 years and don't do anything about it until some group sues for 7 to 10 years. I want to actually get into a conversation. You mentioned something at the hearing that is something I'm really grappling with. I don't want to get political, but you talk about the nanny

state. I want to just watch this video clip really quick. We're going to get into that. Working for the food industry, we used to pay conservative lobbyists to go to every office and say that it was the nanny state to regulate food. And I think that's as a conservative myself, something that's resonated. I just cannot stress enough that as we're hopefully learned today, the food industry has rigged our systems beyond recognition. And addressing a rigged market is not an attack on the free market. It is a necessity for a free market to take this corruption out. So I just want to say that. This is, you know, and I always say on this show, I grew up a progressive liberal from Boulder, Colorado.

I'm an environmentalist. Now I consider myself politically marooned in most ways. All the parties seem to have their own issues. But this topic, like growing up a liberal, when I would watch conservatives, their attack on regulatory agencies, calling at the nanny state. And I would just sit there thinking, if you're, who is going to stop a coal mine from, poisoning a river or the work that Robert Kennedy Jr., you know, all of the things that are pouring in from Dow Chemical and stuff into the Hudson River, who is going to protect our food

supply? So where is the balance? Because clearly the regulatory agencies aren't doing that job. They're completely working for the industry. But what, as you're walking the halls of our government right now, what is the answer? Where is that balance to be found? So what I try to frame and what there's greater understanding of is like let's get out of any boxes right now. Let's just assess the problem. The problem is, and I've talked about, the cigarette industry became the largest food distributor in the world in the 1990s and shifted thousands of scientists to make our food addictive and lobbied and co-opted the USDA, just as a statement of fact, 19 out of the 20 people who make nutrition guidelines are paid for by the food companies. led to the food pyramid and led to a poisoning of Americans where they co-opted these agencies and put in chemicals to make our food cheap and addictive, you know, that is led to, and with the

regulatory captures led to an explosion of ultra-processed food consumption that is absolutely decimating our kids and leading to exploding rates of chronic conditions that's absolutely decimating our human capital and going to destroy our budget because it's the largest and fastest growing part of our budget. So like we have it like almost an extension level event because of clear industry co-opting our regulatory institutions. and are literally our food supply. I don't think anyone's really even debating that. So there is like this political question, a policy question, what to do about that.

Now, what I used to do as I was pointing out of that clip, is there's, especially on the conservative end of the spectrum, you know, and the libertarian left almost. I mean, it really, this idea of like hands off my food, hands off like no regulation, that's resonant. So we weaponize that argument. And I even saw today on Twitter with people were posting some of Bobby's clips and saying, don't let Bobby come in and regulate the food companies.

It's like our food industry and our food supply is corrupt beyond recognition. And what there is a greater awakening on it in the right is it's not a violation of free market principles to unrig a rigged market. The market has been rigged. You can't have that happen. And then, oh, no, it's regulation to stop that. Now, that could be a slippery slope. Sure.

Like we need to be very careful about this. But there is a positive dynamic. I'll just be, you know, on the right where there's been a greater distrust of institutions and of corporations. When I grew up as a young conservative in the D.C. 20 years ago, you know, trusting pharma without question and trusting the food system without question was a hallmark of that side. That has totally changed and that's a positive thing. So, yeah, you cannot have a free market with a rigged market. It is not conservative to be poisoning kids. it's not liberal. You know, this is an issue where we just as a policy goal need to not have a compromised food supply and to get the corruption out of our agriculture and medical guidelines.

This devil's bargain where the food industry has co-opted our food guidelines where the USDA says 93% ultra-processed food diet is safe for kids where added sugar is healthy for two-year-olds and then a healthcare system that profits from chronic disease caused by food. We just have to end this. So I try to just level it up to that, Dell. And, you know, I think that's breaking. I think, I think this idea has come where all sides need to need to make sure. It sure seems like, I mean, it sure seems like we, as was so brilliantly stated,

I think by Robert Kennedy saying there's no such thing as a Democratic child, there's no such thing as a Republican child. They're all just our children and we should all care about them and make sure that, I mean, this country, we should have the healthiest kids in the world. Absolutely. It should be the number one goal and number one priority or the entire purpose of this nation, which is to make a country that is better, you know, for the next generation than it was when we found it. And we are moving the direction for the first time in history, we are going to have a generation of, children that may not live as long as their own parents, which is shocking. You have, you're such, you've got so many great data points. What's your elevator pitch? When you walk into one of these

politicians, what do you think when you lay out like the crises we should be looking at? What is it you lay on them? What are the stats that you think really grabbed people's attention? Yeah, well, I'll be, I'll be blood with you, Del. My framework is always, if I'm in these rooms, the politics drive the policy. So what I first talk about is that this issue of our, kids being poisoned and drug for profit. You know, we can all agree on some policy issues and that that's bad. But I'll be, you know, this is politics. What these representatives, I think, correctly to some degree care about is what voters care about. So I point to the fact that this is a very resonantial on all sides, but that President Trump said when Bobby Kennedy walked out

on that stage and said, make America healthy again, it was the loudest of applause he's heard since 2016, that this is the leading issue on independent media, the best-selling books in the country, that this is a politically resonant issue. If they talk about this at rallies, they're going to really reach voters, particularly women in independence, because everyone's concerned about child and health. So to be honest, we start and do talk about the fact

that this is politically resonant, and this is a winner, and this is a jump ball. Really, it's a bipartisan opportunity. You know, I've been unapologetically speaking to any side that will listen, just as Bobby has. And, you know, as President Trump's talked more about it, I've met with I've had a good meeting with Nancy Pelosi and you know I disagree with a lot of her and I think him you know have some skepticism but this was a good meeting and she does not want

this to be sick I'll tell you that so so I'll talk to anyone so you start with that yeah and then it's two points and these are two bipartisan points let's agree on something unimpeachable which is that our government guidelines for health should be unbiased as is, you know, my recommendation, what I think is a political winner and how to solve this issue, is let's have a six-month period where we decouple pharma funding from the FDA. That makes no sense. Let's reset the goal of the NIH to be a foundational research institution. It doesn't need to get into food or vaccines or anything.

Let's just actually ask the question, why are people getting sick, fearlessly and unbiasedly? That's what I want. The NIH doesn't do that right now. The NIH expressly is an R&D pharma lab. Yeah. A farm R&D lab. They don't do population-wide studies. Let's take a group of Americans of various demographics and study them and look at variables

about what's driving chronic disease and overall mortality and sickness and let that data take us to policy. Yeah. So that's number one and that seems to resonate the anti-corruption initiative that, you know, many you're talking about. And then it's flexibility. And I think this resonates on the left and the right. You know, our government entitlement programs are one-size-fits-all. They mandate, basically, the drugs we need to take. If you're on a, if you're a kid on Medicaid that has high cholesterol, you're getting a statin rammed down your throat. If you're a kid on Medicaid

that's a little bit sad, you have a 15-minute appointment with psychiatrists and getting an antidepressment. If the science is correct, then it's opening up flexion. flexibility where, you know, with flexible spinning accounts, things like that, where a mom and her kid and, you know, Americans can work, understand the data, work with their doctor and have a personalized solution for them. If we can get the medical science unbiased and right and then just trust the American patient a little bit more to work with their doctors and medical providers to make the right decision for themselves, I think we'd be a transformed country.

So that general, that general policy framework does seem. seem to be resonating. One of the things that you've brought up, which I think is just, it just is so glaringly insane is as you came out, you spoke about OZemPEC early on, and then you've gotten into more detail on other subjects. But now, AZempic, you've brought light on the fact that they want to give this to, what is it, six-year-old children, I think, that are suffering from being overweight. Just take me through.

be the cost of that? I mean, forget about the health of those kids being on the drug, the rest of their lives. What's the cost to the American taxpayer for something like that? It's a great, so this, this is a representative of everything. Yeah. Like, I feel like one thing I've been trying to do is bring it down to the micro. So let's just walk through this and I think it represents so many other issues. So Zimpec costs $1,500 per patient per month. In Germany, it's $90. Wow. It's crazy. So this is another bipartisan thing. That is crazy. The U.S. government's the largest buyers of drugs in the country and by law. They can't even have a say. The pharma just dictates the price. So it's $1,500. And the number one bill farmer's lobbying for is to get it on Medicare. And I met

with the person who introduced the bill. And I met with many of the folks who are supporting this bill. They don't understand what's in the bill. I explained to them that the second it's on Medicare for old people, that's 80% target market, 80% of elderly people all the weight are obese. So there's going to be open season on them. And then every single person a doctor gets to to jab them for life, that's an annuity to farm up $1,500 per patient. And then the second a drug gets on Medicare, this is the game, then Medicaid, it goes to Medicaid.

Why would it be for elderly people, but not for lower income people? So it goes to Medicaid. What's happening on Medicaid? They're lobbying aggressively for six years and up. And 30% of six-year-olds are. overweight or obese. Wow. So the second it gets on Medicaid, every single lower income in American who has a child that's

a little bit overweight is going to be told that mom that they're anti-science unless they give their kid a lifetime O-ZIPIC job. They're going to use the same arguments they did during COVID. They literally slam you over the head and you're actually anti-science now if you say obesity's tied to lifestyle. That's literally what Harvard Medical School is saying. They're saying it's a geogenic condition. So you have all the research funded.

You have Novo Nordics with 420,000 individual payments last year to doctors, 420,000 bribes, not even research grants. They're finding the research. They're bribing doctors. This Danish company is one of the 10 largest media advertising buyers in the United States. They're one of actually the largest donators to the NACP, which is now a registered lobbyist for OZMPIC telling members of Congress that's racist not to pass this bill for Medicaid. Wow. They're, you know, it just goes down the, down the loop. So what's the problem here? I mean, there's obviously problems with just trying to ram this drug down the throat. But like, what does that bill do? It's one side. Nice fits all. That bill is not $1,600 to address obesity per obese American. It's they get a drug. You know, I grant drugs are potentially useful in some cases. I'm not fully anti-drug. But is it the standard of care? This bill enshrined just that answer. And, you know, we can all imagine what $1,600 per overweight or obese American would do if that was more flexible and could go to the root cause. I mean, what could we do with our farming system? What could we do with getting the top?

out of our food. Can you imagine if you could get the government to give $1,500 per, you know, family to buy organic food every month, right? I mean, if we're going to spend that kind of money, then watch what happens to our workforce. Watch what happens to our productivity. Watch what happens to the cost of health care. I mean, there are places where the government could actually, I know, like we're not crazy about giving money away, but while you're in the, you know, the, you know, in the world where you do that, why do we put some money to, you know, that's something that will bring all of our other costs down. Flexibility.

There's a slur happening, Del, which is that I think, you know, the medical system tells us Americans are lazy and wants to want to be sick. I don't think that's right. I don't think so. My mom was following the food pyramid guidance, right? Yeah. She had high cholesterol before the cancer and took that stat. And she was told it was fine.

She went to the Mayo Clinic and Stanford Medical School Hospital and she was getting the best. She was traveling. She wanted to be healthy. She was following the science. the guidelines. So yeah, if you can open up flexibility. Let's talk about that really quick, the food pyramid. Just, you know, who funded that? Like, who actually went, you know, are these the best nutritious? I mean, look, you could have taken every one of that panel, I'm sure. The other day, you got Jillian Michaels who spent her life in, you know, in fitness and just other people that

have just, like, worked in nutrition their whole lives. Is that, is there a panel like that that's coming up with the food pyramid? Because I know, you know, remember when the Obamas were like, Oh, we're going to get healthy. Who is like it's right behind. I guess it's right behind me. That's it right there. Look at that bread. Like the number one source, I guess, right now is cereal bread, grain,

all of which is going to be covered in glyphosate, by the way. Oh, of course. Of course, which they didn't even realize at the time of the food pyramid that not only, you know, is the ingredients itself really problematic, but the glyphosate is, you know, really destroying our microbiome in cells in ways we don't fully even understand. Del, I push this a lot. I cannot, I will, I'm going to repeat this a million times to anyone who will listen, so this gets out.

The USDA Nutrition Guidelines Committee that sets these standards like the food pyramid are outside experts where there's no conflicts of interest. 19 out of 20 of the current members today take money from processed food companies. 30% of the current USDA Nutrition Guidelines Committee members take direct money from Nobino Nordics or some other GLP1 drug maker. It is beyond, it is just beyond the capacity for most Americans to even understand how bad this is. So the food pyramid, what happened? Let's just look at the facts.

The two largest food companies, as I said, at that time, were Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds, cigarette companies. They bought out of food companies in the 1980s as cigarette smoking was declining. And by 1990, these two cigarette companies were the largest producers of food for Americans. They took their lobbyists and they used the cigarette playbook for food. And they paid off the USDA Nutrition Guideline Committee members. So the people that made the food pyramid were directly paid for by cigarette companies. What was the foundational document underlying the food pyramid?

It was Harvard. This is all Googled. It was Harvard research. So for the food pyramid, they held up Harvard research. If you go to the bottom of that Harvard research and see who was funded by, it was funded by the Sugar Research Council, which was a front group for sugar. They didn't even try to hide it back then. The Sugar Research Council paid Harvard, the lead nutritionist researcher at Harvard, created

the research saying carbs and sugar, you know, were fine. And that led to the food pyramid. Now, when the food pyramid came out, and we, you understand this, Della, and I think, think we all need to understand this. You know, there's a war with research because what our enemies have realized is that Americans trust scientific research more than anything. So the food diet of Americans changed dramatically with the food pyramid. I mean, I grew up in the 90s.

My mom thought she was doing the right thing by buying us the low fat crackers and all the processed food, and she was eating that, right? That was what parents were doing. We were following the government guidelines. So carbs is a percentage of the American diet increased 20%. We dramatically followed that. You know, when the Surgeon General in the 80s, you know, leading the food, the cigarette companies to buy food companies and is smoking declined, people listen to

the surgeon general. And for better or for worse, most people follow the vaccine guidelines and listen to Dr. Fauci, right? It's just like, it's just we need to learn that lesson. Right. I think it's 90% of Americans got at least one COVID shot. So, so, so that's the co-opting of the trusted leaders for better or worse, right, is something that's known by the medical industry. So I don't want to co-op the medical research. I just want uncorrupted medical research because I'll tell you, if the head of the NIH, the head of the FDA, the head of the Secretary of Defense, because we're 77% of Americans aren't able to join the military because of their metabolic health right now, the Secretary of

the Treasury, because we're going bankrupt from health care costs, if there was an all-out front from our trusted leaders in medicine and other avenues saying that we needed to harden up our immune systems and get back to basics on, you know, eating whole food, we would do it. Like that's why I'm kind of optimistic, Dell. It's like, this can happen very, very quickly. And it takes, it takes just leadership, frankly. So no brain. Are you closed out the Ron Johnson hearing that I just want to take a look at this video really quick. We cannot go on existing as a species if our largest institutions, our largest industries have co-opted our institutions of trust, our regulatory authorities, our government itself, and continue to profit. trillions and trillions of dollars from us being addicted, from us being in fear, from us being sick. We have to have top-down change. We need to fearlessly get back to science and start

just asking and answering basic questions. Is glyphosate safe? Are these food coloring safe? Is it appropriate to give a child a shot three hours into life for an STD? Senator, thank you so much for convening this incredible discussion. What other country allows people into hollowed halls like this to absolutely savage the institution itself and big industries. This does not happen in China. This is part of the process. The seemingly monolithic structures we're going against, I think can change very quickly with leadership here and leadership from outside. Thank you everyone so much for being here. Do you ever run into, you know, a politician or someone that says, I totally disagree with this.

synthetic food and chemicals and dyes are healthy yeah no this is it's actually makes me really i've gotten heated i mean i'm not i'm not pulling punches in these meetings still as you might hopefully you can yeah maybe see from my vibe um the only time i get the time i get a little heated is no they don't do that the person the people who are propping up the ozipic bill look at me and look you know i'm coming i'm going with health leaders and you know um CEO of CrossFit and like sweet green like healthy food company we're just bringing a coalition of of health leaders like we had the panel to these meetings they look at us in the eye and they say gosh we got to get kids healthy um we got to the person who introduced the is a big bill literally said to me

um we got to get kids off these drugs and i actually think he meant it like i actually think we overestimate how smart these people are, how in charge they are. Like the person who introduced the Ozypic bill is a podiatrist, not that there's anything wrong without a foot doctor. He's been kind of playing the game for years, received millions from pharma. And they come in, the lobbyists who kind of pay for everything and they say, can you introduce this bill? He didn't understand that Ozypics a lifetime drug.

He didn't understand that they're trying to push it on kids. He literally told me that it was a short-term solve. So, you know, I think almost. it's in their heads they think they're doing their but this is a multi-trillion dollar bill that's going to steer trillions to drugs instead of regenerative agriculture and you know research on what what's what's poisoning us so um no the evil hides behind the kind of agreement they can all you know if if the side of of the health care industry that's profiting from sick kids you know if that's the status quo they don't need to engage in any argument they can just agree and then the the um complexity of our

process can take care of the rest. That's why I do say, you know, non-politically, just I think this is just my framework. It's got to be three parts to true transformational change. Strong executive focus in leadership, strong personnel, and then a strong legislative, frankly, bipartisan action on this, which I think can happen from strong executive leadership. So without those three, we're going to just continue to have status quo and incremental progress quite frankly why i'm optimistic dell and you talk about the top down the bottoms up yeah there's a bottoms up revolution happening obviously and that impacts uh politics and impacts um the politician so i think if we keep it up it's going to happen but um but yeah that's what's needed you know i i when we people watching right now

so much of what you're doing is behind closed doors, you know, working on the top down. What is your message to just your everyday consumer, have kids in the house, probably thinking, oh, my God. I mean, I did it. I'll be honest. Like, I think we eat pretty healthy, but I got back from the hearing with Senator Ron Johnson saying, all right, these health crackers, like, oh, my God, seed oil, you know what I mean? Like, it's out, it's out.

You know, we all have to do that and go into our cupboards and make sure that we, We've cleaned out our food supply for our kids. But what else can we do to put pressure towards the top? What is just your thoughts? What do you want my audience to do right now to help you get this job done? Yeah, we're going to be talking more and more about this, but I'll be blunt. You always hear people saying call your member of Congress. I've never done it, like up until now.

I'm just going to tell your audience what I hear from member of Congress after member of Congress. They say, I care about this issue, but my number of Congress. my phone's a running, a ringing off the hook for abortion, for guns, for other issues. They're ringing off the phone from pharma because pharma pays tens of million. A lot of that lobbying and a lot of that money that we talk about, it's marshalling old people to call the office and say, don't take away my drugs, like, you're going to kill me, like, you know, that matters. The grassroots matters. So we've got the hearing, right?

We've got Joe Rogan and you talking about it, and many leaders in independent media. It's creating this ecosystem, right, where it's becoming clear if the phones are ringing off the hook, if they're hearing about this in rallies. That's how decisions are made. That kind of vibe, it's actually beautiful. It's this kind of amoeba of American politics with these hundreds of members of Congress. They kind of hear things and pick things up, and that kind of slowly melts policy. And you can combat the money with the grassroots. Now, all of us, I think, feel that grassroots fire.

We got a channel like the gun lobby does, like the abortions lobbies do. channel that so it's heard. So I would say we've got incrotic disease.org, which is, which is something I'm working on. It's just, you know, it's a side thing. I and these other leaders, this coalition coming together. You can actually sign up and get your member of Congress. Literally call them and say, hey, why is the FDA funded by pharma? Can you, can you stop? Can you stop that corruption, particularly why the FDA is funded by pharma? Mention that. That'll register. And we're at Incronic Disease. If you sign up, we're going to have more action to take. But that does matter going and talking to your member of congress at a rally or you know when they do a town hall

um does matter i'd also just say um the most radical act we can take is independent thinking and i i i just i'm kind of feel like this is a spiritual journey but like i just hear from so many people and i know you do dell but people going on a path of independent thinking of health for their families i just cannot stress this enough when it comes to chronic conditions when it comes to something that's not going to kill your kid right away or you right away step back from the medical system you know we've got this book we've got many others um just go on a path of curiosity as many of your viewers are doing and you know we're told right now it's fine for kids to get soda but they could go to jail for drinking raw milk you know there we're told that you know kids being processed puffs you know

i'm being on a rigid uh schedule of 72 shots but you know oh we can't be we can't be uh clear on on childhood nutrition, you know, oh, some treats are out. You know, it's like the medical system is just very, it's very interesting what they're non-negotiables are, what they're not. It's like it's wrong on everything. Like the children are being designated by chronic conditions right now. Chronic conditions tied to food. And just backing up as much as possible and doing independent thinking for yourself when it comes

to your child's health is really, really important. And you're scared not to do that. parents are scared not to do that. The record of success is devastating for the industry. Like, you cannot do worse than what's currently happening. The industry is not deserve the benefit of the doubt. It's just that simple. That's just empirical fact. I want to be clear, if your child has an acute issue or you, if you have an infection or about to have something that's going to kill you or an emergency, you know, childbirth issue, the medical system is a miracle. I just want to say that again and again and again. It's acute versus chronic. If you have something that's going to kill you,

right away, you should listen to your doctor, most likely. If you have a chronic condition where they're putting out a prescription path for a pharmaceutical for something that's not going to kill you right away, or depression or anxiety or dietary advice, they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Amen. Callie Means, I know you're doing, you're everywhere, you're working so hard. I've run into you in multiple locations. It just feels like a full court press right now.

We've got the attention. I feel like Goliath is rocked back on his heels. We've got to finish this fight. You're a hero. You're a rock star, wherever you came from. I'm just happy that you're here. And we'll continue to tune in with you and do everything we can to support the work that you're doing. And that Casey's doing it.

And everybody, make sure you check out the book, good energy, great book, super important. You're doing God's work. This is a spirit's war. And just happy to be side by side with you. Thank you for taking the time to join us today. So proud to be on this mission with you, Del. Let's keep pushing. All right, we'll do.

All right. I'll see you out there on the front lines. All right. Well, you know, unfortunately, couldn't get Callie in studio today because he's so incredibly busy. We're going to make that happen. But that means there won't be an off the record today with Callie Means. But we are getting so many rave reviews from all of you for the, you know, the way that we're having a conversation, a little bit more podcast. like after the show, getting into more personal details

of where they came from, their personal life, for things that they really care about. If you missed off the record last week with Cheryl Atkinson was off the chart, so many of you are excited. All you have to do is become a recurring donor and it's available to you, all of the programming coming with High Wire Plus

for a taste of just what happened last week with Cheryl Adkinson and off the record. Take a look at this. When you started doing this work, did you think that maybe as a... journalists that could help fix this problem. Absolutely. I just thought if more people had the information that already existed, there would be an

action plan because it would be hard to cover up and people are seeking the information. The other side have instituted the best propaganda campaign and most effective one of our time to convince people not to go there, not to ask the question, all vaccines are safe, the autism link has been debunked. The propaganda campaign is so well thought out like a psychological operations with experts who understand what words and phrases and strategies will pluck the emotions of people so that they're afraid to talk about it. That was all created, I believe, because they knew years in advance this giant wave of autism and brain damage was coming. I want to thank all of you

that are sponsors for the high wire. There are no corporations funding this. I think we've pissed way too many of them off anyway, but you are making this possible. We are going to continue to be on the cutting edge. We're going to be relentless in the work that we do. Why, you know, when people come up to me and, you know, they're like, it's amazing, you know, how much truth you've gotten out there. Thank you for your courageous. Look, I love the fact that, you know, so many of you come up and say, you give me a sense of hope. Like, there's something to be done. Folks, you should be hopeful. You should absolutely be hopeful. There is a movement happening in this country, and we're about to lead the world in a health revolution. Why is that important? Because the people that are

making the decisions right now in this country. It was supposed to be for the people, by the people, not by the, you know, health orgies are of New York. What am I talking about? Jay Varma, another video is out. If you want to know how your leaders think about you, the ones that are making the rules and making the laws, this guy's just one that got caught on tape. I'll bet you if you caught them all on tape, you'd be this discussion. But check out this conversation about how he's going to push monkey pox to make money for a company. unbelievable. We're going to a drug for a lot of these numbers.

It's being outweighed a couple years ago, but it's not going to spread among the general population. It's almost certainly going to stay primarily with gay men. Honestly, in the United States, the risk is very low. It's only primarily transmitted among gay men. It basically got into the sexual networks of gay men, and a lot of gay men have tons and tons of sexual partners and often don't use condoms, and so as a result, it spreads more what's the drug called?

It's called Tico-Varamat or T-Pox, is the name of it. We also need to keep up the people's belief that the drug works, so that's why spinning it in the media is often. So we want the Food and Drug Administration, the FDA, to approve our drugs specifically for Monkey Fox, and right now it's only considered experimental. And they won't approve it based on this study. You can spin them so that people won't like dump the stock, thinking that the company's worthless. World Health Organization did an announcement about a public health emergency. Oh, yeah.

over the news and stuff. They could give us something called an emergency authorization. This is what they did to do COVID, like the vaccines and everything. They actually had to submit the data, but they took the preliminary data. They didn't wait till the data was followed out for three or six months because it was an emergency.

Because basically what we're trying to get the media to say is, oh, the drug didn't work because it was designed the wrong way. So they're gonna do another study and it'll probably work. And in the meantime, you know, people should prescribe it for that reason as an emergency drug. That's what we want to start.

story to be. The problem is we're stuck with like, our drug, it definitely looks like it works, but the people that we need to buy it are not going to be as confident in it because the data doesn't look as strong as it would have if it's designed in a different way. So sometimes you do a study and this, nothing works at all. Or people get really sick from it. Problem is if you do another study, you don't think a year or two to do it because you got to like get ethics approval, you get money, you got to get patients come in.

I mean, is it a money maker? the emergency use? Well, it depends. It's not that many patients have the disease, which is why my CEO has to decide isn't worth it. Because if there's only a few thousand cases in the United States, does it really make sense to do another study that's going to cost $10 million or to do? You're not going to make that much money, on the other hand. And so my boss is trying to figure out that she's the money person. I'm supposed to be the thinker. It was like on phone calls and work stuff all day and getting interviewed by media from different angles and things like that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So I know the reporters.

I love that. That's probably the greatest line of the week. She's the money person. I'm supposed to be the thinker. Boy, they got a good one there. Bring you the thought police. First of all, the way this guy flaps, his mouth is absolutely incredible. A lot of me, just this is how the people that rise to the top through government agencies think. This is how they think about. you last week we showed the video where we talked about, you know, all the little orgies he was having during COVID while he was locking down New York City and pressuring them, taking away the rights so that they would vaccinate. And clearly here, he's now working for a drug company. He wishes that drug would get emergency use authorization. But at one point something out. You know what the problem with that drug is, is that it's a drug. Right now he's dealing with a drug. They're like, there's just not that many cases. We're trying to decide if there's enough money to be made. If it was a vaccine, totally different story. See, a vaccine. everybody has to take in case they might get sick. That's why that is the booming side of this industry. If you just have a drug and you only have a couple hundred people getting the disease like

monkeypox, which is all that it is, there's no money to be made. But if we could scare the country, if this guy could get to be ahead of a vaccine company, then I could scare the country. I'll tell the WHO called an emergency. We'll call an emergency use authorization. And then everybody in the nation will have to get this vaccine, even though only a hundred of them would have ever had this disease. That's how the game works, folks, and we have all been pawns in it, not for a day longer, not have been watching the high wire. You've known about this from the very

first day you started watching the highwire. For all of us, it's a different period of time, whether it was before COVID or during COVID or after COVID, but welcome. And please share this show with everyone you know so we can stop your friends from poisoning themselves and their children too. This is an exciting day because you are seeing a movement. A real movement is now rising up. It is covering all sorts of different conversations. There's the vaccine conversation. There's the food conversation. There's the pesticide conversation. There's the water conversation. But what it all leads to is the conversation your government is killing you right now, especially the United States of America. More than Europe and every other country, we're the worst. So I guess we might

have to do something about that. We'll keep bringing the truth on the high wire, and I'll see you next week.