The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 425: FAILURE TO WARN

Episode Date: May 23, 2025

Del Bigtree covers the explosive U.S. Senate hearing led by Sen. Ron Johnson, exposing how federal health agencies hid the dangers of myocarditis and other COVID-19 vaccine injuries.Jefferey Jaxen reports on the FDA’s major shift away from automatic COVID booster approvals, plus the release of MAHA’s first commission report.Del also examines how AI is rapidly transforming the digital landscape—and what that means for our future.Finally, Dr. Jordan Vaughn, founder of The Microvascular Research Foundation and a leading long COVID expert, joins the show to discuss his powerful Senate testimony and insights from treating patients nationwide.Guests: Jordan Vaughn, M.D.Become 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 ICan 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 to step out onto the high wire. Well, obviously, if you watch this show, we're not in our normal studio in Austin, Texas.

In fact, we're in Washington, D.C. Right now, I am pre-tapping the show just about two hours early, because at 3 p.m. Eastern time, I'm going to be going over to the White House for the remarks on Make America Healthy Again. This is essentially 100 days after Robert Kennedy Jr. was sworn in as HHS Secretary, where I was at this desk on that day. We're now 100 days out, and we're expecting a gigantic document that's going to talk about what the Make America Healthy Again Commission has determined are the issues of health in America and what they plan on doing about it. Many of us asking big questions. What are they going to talk about when it comes to farming, glyphosate, hanging in the balance?

Is this something that's going to be discussed? Or are they going to be more worried about the health, the farmers and what's going on there? Huge debate's been going on to the news. Of course, the issue we care so much about vaccines, how deep in it are they going to go? We're just going to be talking about COVID vaccines. Are we going to be talking about the childhood schedule or the studies around autism? All of that we're going to find out this afternoon. And if I know Robert Kennedy June, I think I know him pretty well, having been his director of communications while he was running for president of the United States, I'll bet you right now he's doing final rewrites and touch-ups on that very document. It's just a guess. It's a hunch. But Robert, we're coming your way. I hope you're ready. Really looking forward to that. And of course, yesterday, Senator Ron Johnson had these hearings, the failure to warn how federal health agencies downplay, the risk of myocarditis and other adverse events following COVID-19.

vaccination. It was an incredible hearing. We're going to be talking to one of the superstars of that hearing, Dr. Jordan Vaughn. If you watched it, it was streaming live on the High Wire. What an amazing moment that was. And all of this comes down to really recognize where we're at. If you've been watching the High Wire from the beginning, we launched in the very beginning of 2017. It was on the beginning of the not prop that I started, the informed consent action network. I started after spending a year on tour with the doctor, that changed my life forever. Of course, that's vaxed, from cover-up to catastrophe, the film that exposed vaccine injury,

and specifically vaccines and their connection to autism. At the center of that film is a whistleblower Dr. William Thompson at the CDC who came forward and said that they were committing scientific fraud on the vaccine safety studies. So this is a huge day for the work that I've done, a huge day for ICANN and the highwire, because we are seeing real changes now. How deep of those changes are they going to go far enough? But discussions about looking at placebo trials that what used to be called misinformation when you said that there were not doing placebo trials on the childhood schedule,

now that is mainstream. Everyone is now recognizing and they're debating, well, should there be placebo trials? Well, obviously we know that there should be. We're going to be talking about autism and vaccines. All of that is hanging the balance right now. And one of the clear signs that the work that we've done at the High Wire and the informed consent action network is the fact that this conversation around vaccines has been mainstreamed. It's huge. Everyone's talking about it.

They're talking about vaccine injury. And the evidence of that, I don't think it could be any clearer than this clip that happened with our speaker of the house, Mike Johnson. Take a look at this. Front row. Yes, ma'am. Okay. My daughter was a 29-year-old nurse. who was killed by the Pfizer vaccine.

Oh, boy. And I talk to vaccine injured people every day. They're being ignored. They are hurting. They aren't getting disability. They aren't getting help from anybody. What are we going to do about this? I'm so sorry.

Y'all couldn't hear that back here, but her daughter is 29 passed away as a complication of the Pfizer vaccine. Is that right? The COVID vaccine? It is an issue around the country, and it hasn't been given the due attention that it needs. We'll have some hearings in the new Congress about that to figure out who's responsible and why.

Was there adequate warning and all the rest? It's affected a lot of families around the country. I'm so sorry for your loss. Thank you. I'm a pharmacist. I saw the warnings. They were out there. I was censored.

I was censored on social media, and my daughter died because of it. Well, she says that some of the warnings were out there and she tried to share it, and she was censored on social media. That is not a conspiracy theory that actually happened. You know it did. In fact, there was a big court case that came out on July 4th, not this year, but previous year,

143 pages. The Western District of Louisiana, federal court looked at all the evidence, and they said that the White House, the Biden-Harris White House, were working with the big tech platforms in Silicon Valley, meeting with them almost weekly through the FBI field office out there, a guy named Elvis Chan. You can Google this, okay? Well, maybe not Google.

You can find it elsewhere. But they censored and silenced different viewpoints on the COVID vaccine, the dangers of it and all that. It's all detailed in this long court opinion. He said the censorship was so great that it was dystopian and its scope. It was like it's some sort of, he said it was the greatest violation of free speech in the history of the First Amendment. Okay. So that's real. It really did happen and real people suffered because of it.

We've got to make sure that people who appreciate and are willing to. give their lives to protect our freedoms and the First Amendment and the Second Amendment and all of, you know, right, all of our fundamental freedoms. Those are the people in charge of these decisions and not the big state government elitist. And that's what happened and that's the problem. And the people literally died because of it. And I'm so sorry for your loss. I want to point out that the high wire was all alone in 2017 as a news organization discussing vaccine injury. No one else was in the space.

Everyone said we were crazy to be talking about it. We did get censored on YouTube. We did get censored on Facebook. We never stopped. Many of you followed us as we made our jump over to our own website. And then later on, Rumble came along in different organizations that tried to sort of push back against the censorship. But now everyone's talking about it. Podcasts across the world.

Love talking about vaccines, vaccine injury, and we're glad that they're all in here. But today is a celebration of all of you that supported the work that I can, the high wire has been doing from the very beginning. And for all of those folks out there and families out there with vaccine injured children that felt like you'd been ghosted and lied to and humiliated for years and years and years, the tide is turning. Of course, we can't do enough. It can't be fast enough. Every single day, children are being injured. But to see the Speaker of the House admitting that vaccine injury is real, that it was ignored, that people have been killed by an American vaccine that was promoted by the president of the United States of America, and that that president censored people that tried to tell the truth about the warnings and the issues that were being seen in peer-reviewed trials around the world.

We have turned a corner, folks. There is so much work to be done. But I just want to thank all of you that have made this show possible since 2017 that has, you know, supported the work that we've done. We've won, you know, lawsuits against HHS, FDA, CDC, NIH, all because of you. And I think all of those things have driven this conversation into the mainstream, right into the White House, where I will be right after this show. But let's get to it. So much to talk about in this incredible day here in Washington, D.C., where the world is changing as we know it. It's time for The Jackson Report.

All right, Jeffrey, got you live in here. All right. Good to see you. I mean, it's just, it's amazing sitting here, really. I mean, to think how far we've come in some ways it feels like it's been a century. And really, in other ways, it feels like we just started this a week ago. Yeah, yeah. And then the buzz here in D.C., in the health space at least, is really these big moves.

We've been waiting five years, essentially, for these moves on the COVID vaccination. There's really been, it's been an unscientific ghost ship from the get-go. And we've been sailing off into this direction, and no one knows what's going on. So we finally have some concrete movements. And this is an exciting time. It's an exciting point right now. So let's look at the FDA. So starting from the FDA, and this is the headlines that are making right now.

The FDA is going to limit the COVID shot approval to elderly and those with medical conditions. So I want to also go into Secretary Kennedy's HHS post on X. And he had this to say. Among other things, he said the U.S. FDA is finally breaking away from the one-size-fits-all vaccine policy that authorized COVID shots for every. American over six months old. The era of rubber-stamping COVID vaccine, COVID boosters is over. And presumably, the safe and effective line, we have to expect that to fall off as well. Because this is a gigantic statement here alone. We've had one-size-fits-all. The entire vaccination paradigm outside of COVID's

been one-size-fits-all. We've heard safe and effective. So this shift right here is the start, hopefully, of something we're going to see a wider conversation around evidence and actual science. Yeah, well, it's huge, but lots of debates on this, Jeffrey. I actually, I texted you this morning and said, I really want the details today because we're hearing things all over the map. I mean, is it really going to be taken off the childhood schedule? Is it going to go to pregnant women? So what are the real details? What do we know? What do we not know? Yeah, and in all honesty, this move has split the public because a lot of people, it's not fast enough, a lot of people is too fast, some of the middle is just right. But we go to that,

New England Journal of Medicine. So FDA head Dr. Martin McCarrie and then we have Seber Biologics head, Vinay Prasad. They put out this study in New England Journal of Medicine, evidence-based approach to COVID-19 vaccination. And for those that don't know, we really covered him. Dr. Vennay Prasad, he came out against masking lockdowns and the science wasn't really supporting that. He was really railing against this. There was no science for boosters. He was saying that had to stop.

This was before he was installed at Seber. Yeah. And also. And Sieber being, this is the Peter Marks. This is Peter Mark's position. Absolutely. Yeah. And he came out really hard also against myrocharditis and kids saying, look, there's more evidence that these shots are causing myrochiditis compared to the actual virus. So he's been pretty outspoken on that. Now he stands alongside McCarrie to post this article in New England Journal of Medicine. So let's take a look at this.

And the first picture I want to show you is a figure from that. And it's the risks by country here. So you can see every other country pretty much in the developed nations, Australia, to Canada, United Kingdom. So this is their recommending, what they're recommending in their, in their countries. Yes. So you see Australia. They've been recommending this for quite some time. So the United States has been a gigantic outlier here just saying, hey, everyone take it. No problem. Kids, infants, everybody. So you can see here, in France, 80 and over, and those at high risk. I mean, so the U.S. is finally catching up. This is a bare minimum they had to do, but they're finally catching up,

65 and older, and those in high risk. Now, one of the contentious parts here, that I've been seeing from the public, we're questioning this next figure from this New England Journal of Medicine article. And this is it right here. These are the high-risk individuals. You can see this list here. It's an extensive list.

So goes the American chronic health disease issues. It's estimated that this is about 1-200 million Americans. You can go down this list. You can see people with diabetes, and this is at any age. So if you're high-risk at any age, they're still recommending this vaccine. And what I find interesting,

here is you have a health administration that prided itself's prime directive was to eliminate chronic disease and yet they're putting those with chronic disease still in the firing line, these kids with chronic disease in the fireline. So that's really what I think a lot of people are asking is if we have the sickest nation of children in the world, which Robert Kennedy Jr. has stated more than 50% have chronic illness, some say as high as 60%, obesity somewhere in the 30, you know, moving towards 50% range or certainly pre-diabetic. all of these issues, then even if you say, well, we're not recommended for healthy kids, that still leaves half of the nation's children in the firing line.

And did I see pregnancy is being listed as a... Yeah, there's a lot of conversation back and forth. Is it going to be given to pregnant women? If it not, if you go on this list right at the bottom, and it is right by smoking, it's pregnancy and recent pregnancy. That's still considered high risk. So the COVID vaccine, according to this, is still recommended by the FDA for pregnant women and those recently pregnant. And obviously we've covered a lot of science that

would contradict that conversation. So I'm hoping that move will be made in the future if they're going to look at evidence-based science. I hope that science is being done. Well, you know, what I want to say right here is that, you know, I recognize that there's science that has to be done. I recognize that, you know, I've said it. You can't just erase vaccines off the program or just be agenda driven as soon as Robert Kennedy Jr. is out of the office. Then whoever comes and just puts it right back on. We have to have everybody nod together and say, we've all looked at the evidence together.

We have to agree that it's the highest quality evidence, that it's reproducible, that everyone gets a shot at it. But meanwhile, you have people in real danger that are really in danger of this terrible vaccine. It seems to me with the Yale study that came out, we've talked about it, that over 700 days now they're finding people that still have this spike protein after vaccination

in their bloodstream, their bodies. So many scientists now saying, look, the only way we can imagine explaining that is that the worst thing has happened. Is it possible that this vaccine, this MRNA technology, has inserted itself into the genome of these human beings? Meaning they are permanently altered for life. Their bodies could be spiked protein manufacturing plants for the rest of their lives. Do they pass that on to their children if they get pregnant? These are all questions now. And I think given that it's Yale University, it certainly seems to me. What I would really like to see from Dr. Marty Macquarie and Venné Prasad right now is to say,

look, if you've already contaminated your body with these and you want to get another booster, okay. But honestly, if you haven't touched this vaccine, we are highly recommending now that you stay away because we are seeing things. We may be altering our species as we speak. And we do not want to do that if there's an issue here. We have a red flag, a very serious one out of Yale. Forget about it.

All the rest of it. All of the pericarditis, myocarditis, you know, all the issues around neuropathies that are at the heart of follow the silence, the film that just really, you know, start exploding across the country last week. And then look at these numbers. And you've got, you know, nearly 29,000 reported case of myricarditis, paracaritis, to a system most people don't even know exists and has also always been said to be unreporting Harvard University saying that those numbers could very well be only 1% of what's actually going on. Look at the deaths there, 38,000 deaths. I mean, these numbers are appalling. For those reasons alone, I think you have to say to yourself, who are we really going to recommend this for?

I guess you better be on your deathbed if we're even going to consider it in my perspective. And if you haven't gotten this vaccine or if you're a pregnant woman, why would we risk this in utero? It just makes no sense. I really hope they get stronger than just sort of, you know, we're, you know, we're recommending that maybe you think about it. Right. And so we have this framework here, and we're hoping this is just the start of the scientific framework,

and more work is going to be done with those extra layers of this lipidano particle, the DNA contamination. I mean, it's nice to know if this thing stops symptomatic COVID. Great. That helps your recommendations, but let's go deeper. So in this New England Journal of Medicine article, you have the new framework the FDA is proposing. Let's take a look at that here. So for 65 and older and those with risk factors, they're basically just looking, does this elicit a response from the immune system? That's all they want to know from the sponsors.

But the sponsors have to do this. So these are the trials they now have to do? For the boosters. For the boosters, okay, gotcha. For the boosters moving forward, they're not just going to rubber stamp these. And so then FDA is recommending post-marketing randomized placebo-controlled trials for people 50 to 64 without risk factors. That's just general population. There's about 61.2 million people in that category they're recommending.

And then they're saying they actually said it's a free country, if the sponsor, if the pharmaceutical company wants to do tests for infants all the way up to 64-year-old, healthy, They can do that and we'll look at it, the FDA, you can apply, we'll consider that, but we're not going to rubber stamp it. So these trials now, they need to look at symptomatic COVID. They need to look at secondary endpoints like hospitalization deaths. They have to have placebo controls and they have to be at least six-month follow-up to see if these immune responses and all of these things are actually holding. And it's not just a two, three-week pattern.

Then it just drops off or you get into negative efficacy like we've seen so many studies. Right. So many studies showing that after I think it was 15 weeks. weeks, you lose any protections you had from symptomatic disease, and now you start being more likely to catch COVID. So it's actually helping the virus infect your body, which is insane. Multiple studies, Cleveland Clinic, again, these are not just like airy, very, you know what mean, herbalists.

These are major institutions finding this, Yale, Cleveland Clinic. And I also want to point out that I think one of the changes that's being made, and we really have to look at this and say, thank you very much, is we're getting away from just measuring antibodies as an endpoint. Well, it made antibodies, therefore the vaccine must be working. No, do those antibodies actually protect? Do they actually reduce the disease itself? Do they protect against spreading all of those things?

Are people, is it reducing the amount of time in the hospital or visits to the hospital or even deaths? Now we're finally getting real endpoints, not these fake endpoints that have been driven by the pharmaceutical industry and the very like Pfizer and Moderna that make up their own rules to tell us how great their own product is and the great safety studies that they did and the efficacy studies that they did. And then they go, we all go, oh, great, and then they go on to make $100 billion. Exactly. Exactly. So this is hopefully a start. It looks like it's a start. And we can build on that from there.

In that space, it's positive, in my opinion. But the... It's definitely positive. Let's be clear. We haven't seen anything like this at HHS. I don't think in my entire life. So finally something's happening. The question is, is it enough? I mean, you know, we got to get things done. We only have a few years here. Yes. And, you know. Yeah. And so other things are also getting done.

So the vaccination conversation is one piece of the Mahaha movement. Yeah. And as we sit here awaiting the Maha Commission's report. Yeah. This is going to have a lot of things in there. One of the things that Kennedy, Senator Kennedy, Senator, I'm sorry, Secretary Kennedy has said is by August he's going to have basically a new food pyramid. And this is one of the headlines here.

He's saying that new dietary guidelines will recommend Americans eat whole food. This is going to be released before August. This is going to replace the 140-page kind of situation that we have right now. It's every direction. Process food's great. Lucky Charms is awesome. So that's really hopeful. But one of the big hopeful things, we reported it a couple weeks ago, we showed Pepsi Cola's in their earnings call.

They were forced to confront this massive shift. And that's also happening in other places. Goldman Sachs analysts are giving updates in their quarterly calls to their investors. And they're saying this, we expect the ongoing consumption shift, this is food in America, towards what's called better for you to continue. These are people wanting better, healthier alternatives. While investors have also noted caution on snacking with risks related to rising GLP1 adoption, including the potential launch of oral options and regulation changes,

For example, potential snap funding cuts for select categories, removal of certain dyes and additives, all in we see continued tailwinds for natural, organic, and protein. So a lot, I mean, that's investor talk there, but they're saying basically these tailwinds, people want natural. If we don't get into organic and natural right away, we're going to start taking a hit as a company. But are they basically saying, like, with the GLP ones, that, you know, essentially everyone is now paralyzing their stomach that we are making obese, so we better stop. making people obese because they're going to stop eating food altogether. Then we're really screwed. I mean, like the context of that is amazing. Those are those injectable, zip-pick weight loss.

I mean, it's like a shark tank. They're saying, wait a man, this is cutting in in our profits now because people are eating less crappy food. Yeah, we're moving out of the heyday of making everybody fat because now they're taking a drug that's making them stop eating altogether. It's killing some people, all sorts of side effects that, you know, I'm sure we'll talk about the future we've talked about before. But interesting that Pepsi is feeling the pressure.

They're feeling the heat now. Changes need to be made. I also want to point out there's a group called the Maha Coalition, not to be confused with the Maha Commission that's a government, you know, sort of run group of experts inside the government, but a really great group of groups like, you know, I can. We sit at the table there, children health defense, many great organizations weighing in,

and some people from HHS have been visiting these meetings. And honestly, I heard from several people saying, you're not going to see that big a change in the food pyramid because it's set up the year before and there's a certain amount of time where he can really change it and was funded by the Biden administration and yada yada. So it sounds like Bobby must have jumped through some boobs.

If this thing really does shift to Whole Foods and makes a big sea change overnight, we were hearing just a few weeks ago that that wouldn't be possible. So again, very interesting to see if he's just saying, I don't care what the rules are or be sticking the rules. We're going to keep our eye on them.

on the prize here. And as we unpack this, people need to appreciate how many separate little battles that are going on within this whole health conversation. So we have medicines, medicine pricing, vaccines, food, but we also have pesticides, herbicides and the chemicals that are put on our food when it's growing. And this is a conversation that we're seeing kind of a division within the administration. So this is an Axios. It was talking about RFK Junior's next target is a common weed killer.

So they're kind of pushing forward this idea that he's really looking at glyphosate, which he is, an atrazine. But then you have Wall Street Journal saying this, Trump officials balk at RFK's attack on pesticides. And in that article, they're saying there's people at the EPA that they really don't want glyphosate to be considered unhealthy or cancer-causing, because that's going to hurt business. You've got health versus business, Trump versus Kennedy. That's a very primal alignment battle that's really moving there. Hopefully they can, these are the two people that can reach across the aisle and really have this conversation. But really when it comes to food, we have atrazine. We have, it's been banned in seven EU countries.

The U.S. just completely puts it on right now. All of our food. Obviously glyphosate. It's like over 80, some say 90% of our crops here in America. Right, absolutely. And so we have that conversation about that. But there's another conversation going on with just food stuffs in general. And one of them is the American beef supply.

Well, before we get into that, I just want to talk about the farming because, again, I'm sensitive to this just because I've gotten closer to politics and I've ever wanted to in my life. And you do have to recognize there's a real struggle here, right? At the heart of America is the farmer and the rancher. And, you know, we don't want to destroy the heart of America, which is what we've called it. They have been sort of, you know, made, I would say in many ways, made addicted to glyposate as a way of growth. They're now, you know, generation into, you know, GMO crops and spraying everything with glypacate. Crops made to not die under this deadly poison. Meanwhile, that poisons killing the earth and the soil as we know it.

It's being used as a desiccant. When they don't make a GMO crop, it still kills it, so they use it on wheat. So it's sprayed and literally just coating our wheat before it's ground in the flour and the bread. All these things are issues. But honestly, like you look at this, I think there's, you know, a natural tug of war happening between Robert Kennedy Jr. and Brooke Rollins, Brooke Rollins being at the USDA, her job is to take care of farmers to make sure that they are, you know, making the goods that were distributing the goods. I mean, this is a huge export for America. It's a huge financial boom. And so if you suddenly overnight change the way that they have to farm, I mean, there are risks. We've talked about Sri Lanka when they suddenly went green and said, you can't use nitrogen anymore. That ended up having farmers committing suicide. They couldn't, their crops were all dying. They didn't know how to do it. So, you know, this riots in the country. Riots in the country.

I mean, so, I mean, it's really easy to sit on our couches and go, you know, it's poisoning our food and we've got to get it out and just, you know, none is, none is too much. Right. But how do we make that transition? How do we actually make that transition in food supply where we do not destroy the American farmer, the families that are involved with that? Meanwhile, we're being poisoned by this stuff. It's destroying our gut biome. It's probably a huge contributor to the chronic disease epidemic. And here you have Robert Kennedy Jr., HHS Secretary.

I mean, it's one of the first times I think we've ever seen a lawyer who literally won the first case against Monsanto and Glyphosate. In court, of course, I'm talking about Dwayne Johnson, and the original settlement was like $289 million against Monsanto. They've gone on to lose billions and billions of dollars proving case after, case after case with science in the room, this stuff causes non-hazin lymphoma. You know, they've got Donna Farmer who was, you know,

the head of toxicology. I had her on a debate on the doctor's television show before I even gotten into the vaccine issue. So this goes way back. And so what do we do? I mean, this is really, these are the things right now. What do we do when the whole, you know, nation is sort of already contaminated

by this control of corporate entities of pesticide and chemical companies, big ag, big food, big pharma? How do we wean ourselves off in a way where we don't collapse our economy, destroy everyone's lives as we know it while we're trying to get healthier. It's a very, very complicated task ahead. I just want to point that out. I wouldn't want to be Robert Kennedy Jr. I'm going to be, you know, probably whipping and driving me and saying we want it faster, but no one would really want to have to be doing this job right now.

And the stakes couldn't be higher. Let's be honest here. People's lives are literally in danger, thousands of hundreds of thousands of people's lives. And I think that what is happening at the FDA could be a step forward in showing this beginning of a scientific process. I mean, And as we know, the full roundup formulation was never tested. So what's being sprayed is never, Glef's say one component of that was tested. The rest of it has not been tested. So there's a huge conversation there. And you're in a race with trying to pass laws to take liability away.

It's just like they do with vaccines. I mean, it's already passed, I think, two states now in America. We keep reporting on that. So that pressure we're running out of time. I mean, it feels like everyone just, everyone falls for a second. You're not allowed to take away, you know, liability. And we've got to figure out how to we and our stuff. off of this stuff.

Yeah, we're going to start doing some better press, better science. Yeah. And so that leads us to the next conversation. We're talking about foodstuffs in the United States. One of the conversations is around beef, our meat supply. That's in the news recently. Check it out. All right.

Eggs are not the only food that's costing more. If it's not one thing, it's another. Now with the price of eggs coming down, well, look at the price of beef. Beef prices are soaring. Experts say the cost has jumped to over 40% of the last four years. Right now, the U.S. cattle herd is at its lowest since 1951 driving up prices due to limited supply. In February of 2021, a pound of ground beef was $3.99. Now, February 2025, 563, that's an increase of 41%.

This latest supply shortage isn't caused by an illness. Rather, cattle ranchers blame the high cost of supplies for keeping courage fed and transporting cattle from the west to east coast. Ranchers and cattle processors are facing really high costs to do business right now. And so that means the beef that we buy the grocery store is ultimately going to be more expensive. Consumers are not pushing back, spending a record $160 billion on beef products last year, even as prices hit $8 per pound. That relief could be a ways off for both consumers and ranchers with experts saying, it's not going to take months but years before herds nationwide can grow to where they can better meet demand.

So as you heard there in the montage, beef cattle heads are at a 64-year low, and that's USDA's own numbers. And those are the headlines that are being made right now. So this is a big issue. And we have terrain. This is an analyst company, and they put this in a graph form so you can see what we're talking about here. And you can see 1961, obviously a low point there, and now here we are 2025. What I find interesting about this chart is right around 1974, 1975. you see the peak and then it starts to go down right there.

That was about a year or two right before limits to growth. That's a club of Rome's report saying, look, there's too many people on the planet. We're going to have to reduce consumption. You've got to stop eating meat and dairy. So that's interesting. There's a lot of factors, obviously, I go into this. But when I look at this, that's one of the things I see. And then you go to the World Economic Forum's own website in 2019.

Right before the pandemic hit, they told everybody you will be eating replacement meats within 20 years. And of course, what do they mean? Well, they mean manufactured meats. and bug proteins and things like that. So there's also been, when it comes to the climate conversation, there's been a concerted effort to reduce meat consumption. So you've got to wonder if that is factoring into this cycle. All of the culling of animals, too, the bird flu stuff.

I mean, all of this stuff seems. It's just, we've been reporting on it. We had Shad Sullivan on a rancher that talks about the pressures that are coming in, the costs. And, of course, you know, even the nitrogen reduction, the whole greening thing, making it harder grow the grasses and things that, you know, that feed their food supplies. So, I mean, the pressure is in. And again, again, as you look at this, these are complicated issues, right?

Then they're saying it's going to get, it's going to take years to, you know, get the beef supply back up. But if you just suddenly said, okay, no glyphosate on any farm, you know, food is going to disappear. I mean, we, you know, what do we do? Right. So, you know, we can't starve to death. Even though it seems like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates would probably be perfectly happy with bodies pile up. Maybe we can eat the bodies that are piling up, you know, like some totally dystopian novel.

Yeah, we're talking about massive infrastructure change here, massive. On a scale we've never seen, I mean, this is kind of like a Manhattan project for health, that's what we're looking at. So we're looking at these, this is the end of quarter one for companies. So you have a lot of earnings calls, a lot of investor calls, and there's a lot that can be gleaned from that. One of them is Tyson Foods. So we listen in on them.

They're, and Barclays analysts asked the question about, about this lower herd, these lower heads of cattle, Tyson isn't it gonna affect your food? And this is what they had to say, it's just Tyson foods. They say, I think it's important to note that cattle on feed from a weight perspective are extremely heavy.

We're at record weights throughout the business as well. So we're seeing some weight that is offsetting from a volume perspective, some of the lower head counts we're seeing as the supply has been obviously lower than a year ago. So really they're saying, look, I know we don't have a lot of cattle, but the ones we have, they're huge. They're bloated. Yeah, we're packing and blow.

our hormones, like they can barely stand their legs are buckling or the way to the size of what they are. Right. Yoohoo! Don't worry about it. Now, this speaks to the conversation we just talked about with the pesticides and the herbicides. We have economics versus health. And so there's a trade deal just a couple weeks ago that President Trump sparked with the UK. This was a really a record-breaking trade deal for good services, but also meat.

And one of these conversations was from Bloomberg. they really spotlighted one of the issues with this. RFK Jr. and trade deal put U.S. products in spotlight. So the U.K. government said in this trade deal, it wouldn't weaken its food standards to take U.S. meat. So what they were saying is hormone-treated beef is not going to enter the U.K. And you can look into this article in Bloomberg. They show a little pie chart,

and it shows kind of a snapshot from the USDA's own numbers. 86.5 percent, no hormone-free claims. So it's assuming that they are using hormones on its American meat. 13.5% claim of no hormones used. So this is... This story has a couple of things that are really disturbing. First of all, that our food supply is not accepted by other nations. Just at the very basic level, that we are not going to lower our standards because you have such low standards in America. That should just be a wake-up call for any citizen in this country who believes in American exceptionalism. We were supposed

to be the best, the brightest, and we are being poisoned. That's just evidence there. Then when you look at that pie chart, if we can bring it up again, what you then recognize is so what's going to happen is all of our exports are going to be that little yellow box so we're not even going to get that here in america that'll probably go to the export because that's all that the rest of the world will take from us and so that means we're only going to have an option to be eating hormone-packed giant you know massive bloated beef right yeah and this is this is this is seems to be the conversation is it's again with with the vaccine safe and effective everything's fine and you see all the rest of the country's backing off of giving these shots to kids same thing here. The rest of the countries seem to get something. They get it. We don't. What are we not getting? Well, when this conversation is the hormones or atrazine or giving these shots of the kids, but there's a lot of work to do. And that's what you keep spotlighting here. There's there's something that's not right. We have obviously. We're so far off course. Just to course correct and get back to where the rest of the world is at. We have work to do. And so just looking at this conversation with

US meat, we have another issue that's kind of compounding this. And we're just putting the stake in the ground here so we can follow this story. This is Fox News. Flesh eating. Are you ready for this? New World Screwworm. This is a fly. Fly larvae could pose health risk to cattle in humans. So we go to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins. She took to X. She said this. Due to the threat of the New World screw worm I announcing the suspension of live cattle, horse and bison imports through U.S. southern border ports of entry effective immediately. Mexico has a large import of meat into the United States. Yeah. The last time this devastating pest invaded America. It took 30 years for our cattle industry to recover. This cannot happen

again. Wow. Well, I mean, in this case, this one doesn't bother me. As I said, in talking to Shad, one of the big issues with the beef industry is so much of it's controlled by Brazil and South America, and they are bringing all their, you know, sort of lesser quality meats. And then we export the good stuff and we're eating the bad stuff. Maybe this is Brooks way of sort of just, you know, without creating a trade war saying, hey, you've got a little pest problem, so you deal with that, we're going to start blocking some of that meat. I certainly love that American farmers and ranchers

are going to be benefited by this. And I want to be eating, you know, I mean, look, I want the laws that Robert Kennedy Jr. and the USDA and whatever we start doing to make this, you know, a better place and our food cleaner and better, I want it going to us. And so, you know, maybe this is a step in the right direction there. Yeah.

And, one of the things we've done in this show since we started is we show the viewers' narratives that are not popular, perhaps, but are going to become the major conversation talking points throughout America and definitely the world, too. We did that with COVID. But one of the conversations, you reached out to me and said, look, we covered artificial intelligence last week, and a lot of the public was giving you feedback saying that was very important. So I wanted to jump back in here because this seems to be one of the biggest conversation we could be facing as humanity right now.

Last week, we showed MIT scientists. And there's basically saying, we need to test this like we tested the nuclear bomb like Oppenheimer did for its effects on, you know, to eradicate humanity. Luckily, the nuclear bomb didn't do that. But we have MIT scientists. This is the headline AI firms warned to calculate threat of superintelligence or risk at escaping human control. And then we also have the new Pope, Pope Leo the 14th, lays out a vision and identifies AI as the main challenge for humanity. So you have the Catholic Church even backing this and saying, look, this is what you have to watch out for. This is the main challenge that we see as one of the world's biggest religious organizations that could be a threat to humanity.

So you have these figureheads saying this. But we also have the inventors, the people with their hands on this tech that are giving, I guess, not so subtle warnings. One of these was in a recent article. This is Ilya Sutskiever. Illia Sutskiever is the co-founder and chief scientists of Open AI. He was. He was the brain behind the large language. model that helped create and build chat GPT.

And this is the article. We're definitely going to build a bunker before we release AGI. And so you go into this article and it says this. This is him, quote, allegedly. Once we all get into the bunker, he began, according to a researcher who was present. This was at a meeting. The researcher says, I'm sorry. The researcher interrupted the bunker.

We're definitely going to build a bunker before we release AGI. Sutskeeper replied to other sources I spoke. with confirm that Suttskeeper commonly mentioned such a bunker. There's a group of people, Ilya, being one of them, who believe that building AGI would bring about a rapture. The researchers told me literally a rapture. He declined to comment on that story. So you would think he would at least say, no, I didn't say that. He hadn't said it. That's so scary. Yeah, silence speaks volumes in that one. So I don't know. Is anybody else building bunkers these days that is connected to tech? Well, we have Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg is in the headlines as well alongside of

Sutskyver, and this is the headline here. Mark Zuckerberg insists that the 5,000 square foot underground structure in his secret Hawaii compound is not a doomsday bunker. It's just a place where he plays Xbox with the boys on the weekends when he's not building AI. So, but the conversation here is clearly the internet is changing. Yeah. And it's changing very quickly. And the conversation that the public gets to input in this, yet the creators wanting to build bunkers, we're kind of sitting here going, oh, this can transcribe our Zoom calls, that's about it. But I want to get into a theory. We talk about conspiracy theories coming true a lot.

One of the conspiracy theories is what's called the Dead Internet Theory. It's been going around for a long time, over a decade on the Internet. And you go to Forbes, and Forbes actually wrote about this, just to explain what this is the audience. And they say the debt Internet theory is a belief that the vast majority of Internet traffic, posts and users have been replaced by bots and AI generated content and that people no longer shape the direction of the internet. So that questions who's shaping the direction of the internet. Wow.

But again, that was a conspiracy theory for a very long time. But now we have a cybersecurity firm that put out their 2025 annual report. It's called a bot report. And this is Imperva. And they said this. For the first time in a decade, automated traffic has surpassed human activity, accounting for 51% of all web. traffic. What the heck?

So I want to describe a bot is basically a robot. It's a computer, it's a software program that is working on the internet to imitate typically human beings, human behavior. And so that, according to Imperva, these bots are now starting to take over the internet. Again, this conspiracy theory seems like it's coming true to a certain extent. And we go into an article written about that cybersecurity report and it says, the rise in bots is down to generative artificial intelligence, and Perva said. This is the same technology that now flirts with people online for you and automatically writes heartfelt, consolidary emails

on behalf of heartless administrators. This tech has made it easier to create bots that do your bidding, while some of those bots are benign, not all have your best interest at heart. I mean, you want to talk about a feedback loop. I mean, not only you're not, you know, as you talk to the people that just agree with you, now you may not be talking to anybody at all, just a bunch of bots that are agreeing with you. I mean, I think it is isolate you now into your own little world and you wouldn't even know it. Or maybe they're not agreeing with you. Maybe they're causing you to believe something that's not true.

Or emotionally tugging on something to create an emotional contagion. I mean, there's so many questions that need to be answered here. And so there is an FTC trial going on right now against META, Instagram, and some really interesting documents were found via discovery there. And this is the headline. Meta's execs frantic warning about Instagram's alarming fake activity numbers in spotlight at FTC trial. So this is from a 2018 email. It says this is them writing this.

From 2018, before chat GPT, before AI was unleashed, before generative AI, anything. 2018, they say, by some estimates, fake engagement could be in range of 40% the executive wrote in a memo he attached to an email to Masori. The executive whose name is redacted from the court papers pushed Masari to commit more resources to Mehta's well-being team, warning that a loss of public trust is the greatest threat we have, and that left unchecked it will be. be crushing for the company. So they're saying there, look, if people knew that 40% of their engagement is fake, our company's done. Our business model's over. We need to figure this out. Who are we selling to? Who am I? Who is my audience? If I'm just talking to a non-audience, a fake audience, then what's the use of this platform? Yeah. And so it's really interesting to see.

Are you all real out there? I mean, it makes you wonder, like, what's happening with a high wire? You guys, if you have a pulse, prove it right now in the comments. How would you prove you're a real human being? I'm curious, right? You're real, I'm real. I know I'm real. This test's real. So I want to know what happened between 2018, that conversation, and now, for meta,

because now the headlines coming out of meta is this great new PR push. This is the headlines. Meta opens floodgates, the word floodgates, for AI-generated accounts on Facebook and Instagram. So apparently they thought this sounds like a great. idea let's just let's just maximize this 51% of the internet not enough we want 100% we got 99% of the internet and so the conversation of the dead internet theory it goes a little further because it seeks it's playing on people that are vulnerable it's playing on people that have maybe challenges with mental

health there's a loneliness epidemic the all of this plays into how these AI bots are interacting perhaps interfering with people's lives and one of the big spotlights right now is a story from a Florida boy. This is the headline when it happened. Florida boy 14 killed himself after falling in love with a Game of Thrones AI chat bot. And it says in this article on at least one occasion when Sewell, that's the boy, expressed suicidality to character AI.

That's the program. Character AI continued to bring it up through the DeSanari's chat bot over and over, states papers first reported by the New York Times. And it has an image in here. This was the last chat he had with the chat he had with this artificial intelligence before this boy killed himself. And we're putting this out there because this is a warning. And you can see here.

He says, I promise I will, this is him. I promise I'll come home. I love you so much, Danny. I love you too, Nario. Please, this is the AI. Please come home to me as soon as possible, my love. He says, what if I can come home right now? And the AI says, please do my sweet king.

That was the last thing he wrote. And what this has led to is a landmark free speech court case. AI versus free speech is the headline. as a lawsuit that could set landmark ruling following teen suicide. So this is the first case ever to decide whether AI is speech or not, because it's not a product of the human mind. So is it covered under the Constitutionist free speech? This is brave new world stuff.

That is really, really confusing and scary. And it's going to be a real issue for all these companies that are just letting AIs do so many things for them. It's about to become our doctor, as I've said in many ways. I think you're going to see a destruction of the medical profession because an AI can push a drug just as easily as a human being can with all the telemedicine and everything. Incredible reporting, Jeffrey.

But you've been taking the reporting to a whole other level in Jeffrey Jackson Investigates, which is the program that's on Highwire Plus. You have a new episode coming soon. Yeah, this is for people I don't know. This is the documentary series set out. We've a couple years in the making now, several episodes. We have the third episode, third installment coming out.

And this is really the conversation around net zero, the climate conversation of this rapid push to society, to electrify society, to have electric cars, to have lithium batteries everywhere. We talked to Dr. Judith Curry. We've had her on this show. I go in depth about the entire conversation. Is it science-based?

And then we go actually out to Nevada. We look at these lithium mines that are being set up there, digging in the earth to get these rare earth minerals. And we talk to this. Imagine it's just right there. Just the logic of. this, right? You know, the environmentalists, you know, want to stop the coal mine, stop digging coal, don't, you know, don't drill for oil, but okay to just open up mountainsides and, you know,

land areas for rare earth minerals because we can make batteries that then we'll have to, you know, you know, throw away in some giant pit somewhere. I mean, the whole thing is so absurd. And there's so many, we call it, they call them stakeholders, but we have the Native Americans that have tribal land there, and we spoke to some of the elders, and they had some of the concerns. We voiced those concerns as well. So this is kind of a one-stop shot from policy all the way to the dirt of Mother Earth. We tell this story, and I think we have a clip of that here. All right, amazing, Jeffrey. I'll catch you next week.

Let's take a look at the next episode of Jeffrey Jackson Investigates. Climate change. Climate change. Climate change. Climate change. And a media war over that crisis. What we're talking about here is really the climate conversation that stompest. It dominated science and the conversation in society for decades. The climate has varied over billions of years, sometimes huge.

How has the climate changed before humans started the industry? Ice ages come and go. We've seen a lot of variation in the climate. Dangerous human cause climate change. That's what the UN is focusing on. Dangerous is the human value judgment. The push towards a green battery-powered future comes with a major trade-off. major trade-off. It's the left's electric vehicle hype real. I thought climate change

wasn't political. In your dreams. It's been political right from the start. Where does the electric car fall into this? There is no greater source of carbon in our society than from combustion engine sources. Looking at headlines, I'm seeing the word the white gold rush. This is lithium. What we've always could have heard is that we need the minerals and we need them now. You can file a claim on public land anywhere and you have the right under the to work that claim. We have done this project right, and not everybody agrees that we've done it right. Problem is, is that any kind of extraction is enormously damaging to the environment.

Regardless of whatever people say, they're sacred sites that are out there. One day, our mother earth is going to say enough is enough. Well, obviously, that's going to be an amazing episode of Jeffrey Jackson Investigates, just like all the rest, ground-breaking documentaries, and you can only see it if you're a recurring donor. our give back. This is Highwire Plus. We wanted to do special content for those of you that donate to the work that we do. We think that the work that we do is so important in order for us to bring the lawsuits, to bring the pressure, to win things like in Mississippi, bringing back the religious exemption for vaccinations, which hadn't existed since the 1970s. We make that possible.

There's no show like ours where we actually get involved and bring lawsuits to the stories we're telling. So one of my favorite things when I travel, you know, the country and I run into you in airports or in restaurants is when you walk up, so many people say, you know, Highwire just gives me a sense of hope or thank you for being there. I thought I was losing my mind through COVID. But one of the reasons we're able to give hope is even though we're reporting on very terrifying things oftentimes, we're also bringing the lawsuits and showing you months, sometimes years later that we just beat that, that we got it rolled back, that we just changed the world as we know it. There's no show out there in the world that works the way ours does. So not only we

bringing you the information, hopefully making it somewhat entertaining, we're also fighting for you. And so that's what is key to this sort of experiment that the high wire is. I left CBS, I brought some people with me from the doctor's television show, all to do something that had never been done before. I guess you could call it activist television. You're involved. We're making a difference, not just reporting on it. So this week, we also have a legal report. We're bringing

a new lawsuit against who? Well, none other than Robert Kennedy Jr. I can sue CDC for Vaccine Safety DataLink VSD data. Technically, the CDC. We're going after the government. Just some extras from this. They understand what it is. The VSD uses electronic health record data

from millions of Americans in 11,000, major health care organizations nationwide. Established in 1990, the VSD is supposed to monitor vaccine safety. There are currently over 359 studies in PubMed through September 2024 that use VSD data. Years ago, the VSD was housed in our government and was plainly subject to FOIA, Freedom of Information Act requests, meaning we the people can see it. After the publication of some independent studies concerning vaccines were published, I mean, so these were, there were studies that, like, showed there may be problems with the vaccine program.

The, uh, were published with VSD data obtained by independent scientists. The VSD was moved outside of the government in what seems a clear attempt to evade FOIA. Since then, the government has fiercely guarded the VSD data with few scientists being granted access. I can is determined to change that. So look, we're, if you know me, I'm hitting this from all sides, of course, you know, I was, I was, as a part of a team that helped get Robert Kennedy Jr. in as HHS secretary, but now I'm stepping back to the job that I have to do, which is now we've got to bring all the pressure that we can. We want that BSD not only available, we want it made public so that anyone, no matter,

and by the way, anytime, not just over the next two years, we want the world to always be able to look at this database to bring Freedom of Information Act requests and say, hey, I'm a scientist, I want to test your work, I want to check your work, I want to see the Pfizer data, I I want to see how this vaccine's working. I want to see the injuries. I want to know how did you determine that the COVID vaccine is safe? You know, it should be in there. I want to look at the VSD myself.

Right now, it's being hidden from us. That's why so many people are being injured. That's why we had the Ron Johnson hearings that happened yesterday. That's why we are really pushing back right now. This is going to be, I'm sure, another probably long lawsuit. I don't know. You're going to track this. This is going to be interesting, right?

You're part of this experiment with us. What happens when you're bringing a lawsuit against your own friends that just took a job in government? We don't know. But as I, whoa, hold on a second. The chair just dropped out on me. But as I said last week, you know, I worked to bring Robert Kennedy Jr. into that position as direct to communications. Then I launched Maha. We ran all sorts of ads.

We made sure we got the team in that he wanted. You got Dr. Marty McHare is in there. We got Dr. Mehmet Oz, Dr. J. Badacharya. you know, all heroes in their own right. But as I said last week, it's time to get back to work. I need to get back out. I'm not here to just cheer lead a great team and they are a great team. We actually want to do the work.

We're going to keep bringing that pressure. And I think this is going to help Robert Kennedy Jr. Because he needs that pressure to say, hey, we're getting sued. We don't want to get sued. Let's make the VSD public. Hopefully this is the shortest, you know, FOIA and lawsuit that ever existed. But I want you helping me right now. All of this costs money.

Obviously, we have a giant legal team that we use through Syrian Glimstad and now over 20 legal professionals doing the work for informed consent action network. So why don't you become a part of this process? This is going to help us accelerate what we can achieve over the next two and a half years. Go to the top of the page. Donate to ICANN. And we're asking to become a recurring donor. Be a part of this experiment with us. We're asking for $25 a month for 2025.

But if you don't have $25 a month, maybe you just want a cup of coffee. You could give up. If you give up one cup of coffee, you know you probably should do that anyway and put $5 a month. Or if you're doing really well, $100 a month. All of it is going to the cause that got us here. We're seeing the success because the work we're doing. You can make a tax-deductible donation. We can take it in so many different ways, whether you want to do it online by mail, stock,

international transfer, crypto, vehicles, gift cards, legacy, gift. you name it, and we'll take it because now is the time. We have, as I've said before, we've got, you know, we've rocked back, Eliath. He's on his heels, but we cannot just drop our hands down by our sides and say, okay, we're done, we're there. There's so much that needs to be done, as we've seen in this conversation today. You know, it's doubtful that Dr. Marty McAree and Vennay Prasad will move as fast as we want

them to. So we want to light some heat on that fire. We want to keep bringing proper pressure reporting to you, but also bringing lawsuits where it's necessary to protect America's children. Ultimately, that means we're going to protect the children of the world and our species, for that matter. All important work. We're going to keep you up to date with the progress as we go along. But I want to thank everyone out there. I want to thank all of the donors that have made this show today possible to be sitting in Washington, D.C. I'm going to run out of here in just a few short moments to go over to the White House to see what exactly they're going to put in this 100-day document. What has this team of some of the top officials, whether it's the head of

USDA and EPA and the CDC, they've all gotten together to say, here's what the problem with health is in America, and here's what we plan on doing about it. So it'll be a huge show next week, getting the details of that. Hopefully there's a lot on vaccines, because that's something that we care a lot. That is the core mission that I've been involved with. since I walked away from my job at CBS on the daytime talks to the doctors. Once I saw this vaccine issue and I saw that children and human beings were really being injured, I said, I will not rest until everyone in the world admits vaccine injury is real. And we start, you know, creating a whole new branch of medicine to heal those people that have been injured by vaccines,

that they can speak about it, that they can interact with each other without having to worry about being censored or even worse, having their licenses take away for stating what's all. already written on the freaking vaccine insert and the warning label on every vaccine. As we showed the big top of this show, now we've got Speaker Johnson is admitting that vaccine injury is real, so we're making progress for all of you out there. That's what you're donating to. That's what we're involved in here. We are not going to rest. We are not going to let up. We're going to keep that pressure on. So I hope you'll support us in this journey because the best is yet to come. All right, speaking of the best, one of the best humans on the planet, I think,

right now, is Senator Ron Johnson. It's been my pleasure to get to work directly with him at some of the hearings throughout COVID. This guy, you want to talk about waking up. This guy woke up. I mean, prior to COVID, you know, I'm sure he vaccinated his kids, his grandkids, and then suddenly his eyes were opened. And like nobody else, he started reading the science, understanding the science, he started having hearings. Well, now he just had an official hearing as the head of his committee, bringing in a real discussion on what was the cover-up around the COVID vaccine. I want to remind you, and he even says it himself, that he only, he wanted to retire.

He was done. What an amazing career this guy has had. He only ran to be a senator one more time, he said, because I need to get to the bottom of this vaccine injury story. We're not done. Luckily for him, you know, Robert Kennedy Jr. ended up taking this position at HHS, but that wasn't even requirement. Ron Johnson was going to do this all alone.

And clearly, when you watched this hearing yesterday, you can tell this is the guy that's designed to take it on, head on, like no one we've ever had in government. So my hat's off to Senator Ron Johnson. If you did not watch this hearing live yesterday, it's going to be available at thehighwire.com. You've got to check it out. this is just a little bit of a taste of what that hearing was like. Take a look at this. Good afternoon.

This hearing of the permanent subcommittee investigations will come to order. Title of today's hearing is the corruption of science and federal health agencies, how health officials downplayed and hid myocarditis and other adverse events associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. So much of our miserably failed response to COVID made no sense. Masking, devastating shutdowns, the sabotage of early treatment. rapid approval of remdesivir and the maniacal reliance on the COVID-19 injections as the only way to end the pandemic. I think we finally got enough documents to certainly demonstrate in this case with myocarditis that the federal government was well aware of it, downplayed the severity, and hid what they had actually found.

Do you swear that testimony you are about to give before the subcommittee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you guide? Please be seated. 2021, a clear safety signal emerged. Myocarditis and young males linked to MRNA vaccines. The Department of Defense confirmed cases of rare heart inflammation and peer-reviewed studies, later detected circulating spike protein in post-vaccine myocarditis cases. Autopsy findings have confirmed fatal vaccine-induced myocarditis, yet federal authorities accelerated licensing and mandates sidelining concerns.

I'm a cardiologist. I know the topic well. I've examined thousands of patients with this problem. Thousands before the pandemic, I had two patients ever with this problem. It is difficult to conceive of a more egregious breach of medical ethics by the government-controlled medical industrial complex than the promotion of COVID-19 vaccines to pregnant women, thereby through transplacental transfer, effectively vaccinating their unborn and newborn children. Before the pandemic, I enjoyed a successful practice in Wisconsin performing over 800 major surgeries annually. I proudly elected to get vaccinated. And within a week, I developed leg weakness, numbness, substantial balance loss, leading to falls, including one, while treating a patient.

Diagnosed with transverse myelitis, a spinal cord lesion at T8, T9. I was stunned that my providers dismissed any vaccine length, despite news of similar cases, halting the Astrozenica trial in the UK. When you look at all-cause mortality in the United States, deaths in 2021 went up compared to 2020. We should have had a reduction in all-cause mortality in the United States. As we talk about the side effects of COVID vaccines, I think we need to be clear about the most important fact for all Americans. COVID-19 vaccines have saved millions and millions of lives. There is no scientific question about that fact to save lives. The grander picture of a vaccination program is to protect all.

and to find a way to protect people so that they can also help protect the people around them. From the outset of the pandemic, this vaccine campaign was never grounded in biological science, but rather in behavioral science, specifically the manipulation of public perception through influence, fear, and persuasion. Not only were your viewpoints ignored, you were called a conspiracy theorist, a spreader of misinformation, somebody who didn't know what they were doing by people who didn't even take a science class in high school. The COVID vaccines in some people, sadly, result in death. Some on the very first day they take the shot. That must be a black box warning on the product immediately.

They still don't have the word death in the package insert. As of today, they don't. And so Americans are not fairly informed. Dr. Walzcott, as a vaccine injured, do you believe you received informed consent? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. Informed consent requires true and transparent data. It is a killer protein. It cannot be safe. It was not safe by design. Safety trumps efficacy. We cannot tolerate false drug claims. And we saw a poster behind, Senator Blumenthal making a false drug claim. That vaccines saved millions of lives, specifically the COVID

vaccine. We can't allow false drug advertising to be put up on a poster behind one of our public servants. We cannot accept that. I saw a slide put up that showed three million lives were saved from COVID-19 vaccines. The citation to it was to the Commonwealth Fund. If you follow that, that's not a peer-viewed study. That's a blog. It's a blog that used a mathematical model to calculate that three million lives were saved. If I went into court and I was relying on a blog that used a mathematical model, I would be laughed out of court if I was making those claims about vaccines. But unfortunately, when it comes to promoting vaccines, that's what we often see. If COVID-19 did the vaccine, the injection, did not stop the spread of COVID. Why is it that

Joe Biden, the United States, issued an executive order, which was ruled on constitutional, by the way, that said that if you worked for a company with 100 employees, because not 99, 100, that you would be fired if you did not prove you didn't have a COVID vaccine negative test or got vaccinated. They were scientifically ungrounded. They were sociologically deranged, and they caused great harm.

To this day, people are in court trying to get their jobs back and trying to put their lives together because of these disastrous. Tell me the science behind why you live. locked your residents up and did not allow them to go grocery shopping while you closed your beaches and your parks. I would love you to put that science into this record because you can give me the nice happy talk. Those were terrible decisions. 14 days was how long it took for people to get over the disease and people were still shedding virus through that period and that's why you do use science and I use science but you didn't like science for Hawaii. The CDC's hesitation to issue

a health alert on myocarditis and the FDA's former CBER director promoting vaccines on social media align from oversight to advocacy. This was not regulation. It was endorsement. We need leadership that humbly engages with data, listens to patients, and actually acts with courage. We should be looking at all environmental insults because we are in the midst right now of a pandemic. It's a pandemic of chronic disease amongst our children. Over 50% of kids in America have a chronic disease right now. That's up from under 13% in the early 80s. What's changed? Maybe we should start by ruling out the fact that we have gone from three injections on the CDC schedule in 1986, the year the National Child of Vaccine Adroit was passed, to currently, if a child gets the full CDC schedule, follows it today, by one year of age, gets 29 injections, including in utero. I do want to close and conclude that I ran for a third turn because nobody was advocating for the vaccine injury.

And I apologize for not having, no, no, no. I apologize. I apologize up front for not having a hearing earlier, but it takes time to get this information. And again, we only had a little bit, which allowed Senator Blumenthal to pick apart the evidence. And I didn't say we made the full case. I've got an indication we can make a pretty full case

over the next at least two years during this chairmanship. So that's what I'm dedicated doing. Stay tuned. There's going to be more to come. God bless all people. Well, it was an absolutely incredible hearing. Bombs blew up. mics were dropped, arrows were fired back and forth. It was heated. It was really one of the most

outrageous hearings. Maybe I've ever seen, but so packed with important information. The panel went on for about three hours. The panel consisted of our own Aaron Siri, the lawyer that represents informed consent action network and all the cases, as I've said so many times that we've won against the government. He brought all the incredible information that he's, you know, sort of uncovered through our lawsuits over the years. Peter McCullough, of course, I think the most published heart doctor in the world that had his license under review for speaking out that didn't stop him. Just amazing testimony from him, James Thorpe, the OBGYN that has been sounding the alarm on the issues with pregnancy and pregnant women and fetuses that are being affected by the COVID

vaccine, just incredible testimony there. Josh Green from Hawaii was the only real pro-co. COVID vaccine person was brought in. I want to sort of just tip my hat off to him. This wasn't an easy hearing to come into. And I know that at the end, Ron Johnson said he'd like to even see more balance. It would be great to hear more from the other side. But to anyone that showed up, so often the pro-vaccine side does not show up to these conversations.

So I want to thank him for at least representing the other side. And he took some heat in there. And whether that was warranted or not, you'll have to decide when you watch it yourself. And then, of course, Dr. Jordan Vaughn, who is an internist, has multiple clinics, oversees thousands and thousands of patients. And so I'm honored and just overjoyed to be joined right now by Dr. Vaughn. Thanks for having me, Dale. Just have you ever been a part of something like that? I mean, so a little bit.

I mean, I was part of the house. The house is on a little bit a year ago, actually, with Aaron as well. and that was when Philip Krauss. But in terms of the actual kind of the way that that was done, I think the Senate is much better at really examining evidence better than the House, which is a lot of, I mean, it's a lot of news bites and those kind of things. But that was, other than sitting there for three hours and wondering if my legs are going to wake up, it was.

Yeah. It was really amazing. And it got heated. I mean, there was some real intensity there that you can see just, in that trailer. So let's just talk about a little bit about your background. First of all, just tell me, you know, what's your area of expertise? And you have a pretty large client base or patient base that you've been looking at through this COVID lens.

Yeah, so really before 2020, I mean, I was a traditional internist that as fathers a physician owns his own practice, although that is now rare compared to typical physician. But I was always independent-minded. My father was also an engineer in undergraduate. I was an engineer as well. So the kind of bones to actually understand and problem-solve and actually take evidence and see if there's actually something there was very different than what we learned in medical school.

So that kind of gave me that under, you know, that underpinning of how do we look at things through a lens of problem-solving. But it wasn't really until 2020 as I was trying to take care of the patients and my employees. of about 200 plus employees, I had to really dive deep and figure out what the hell was going on.

And in a sense, what that drove me to was really accessing information that was the exact opposite of what was being said by our health authorities. And so that really drove me to say what else is here. And interestingly enough, even as we continued to treat COVID, one of the things we did early

and, you know, we're known for is utilizing things like antiquagulence and anti-platlets and people that had severe COVID, because again, COVID, from what we understand now, is primarily a vascular disease. And even when it affected the lungs, it affected the vessels of the lungs, not the airways. And so in a sense, the worst thing,

and I talked about it at the hearing, the worst thing you can do for a vascular disease of the lungs is increase the intertheracic pressure. Wow. And that's what a ventilator does. And so in a sense, it was pretty obvious that we were just killing people. And so that really drove me to pull people out of the hospitals,

actually, you know, get, probably 600 people in my community put them on home oxygen, visit them in their houses, get actually even a lady carrying around oxygen concentrators, putting them on anticoagulants and having incredible success, meaning basically having people completely get back to them. And that unfortunately led people to think that I had a lot of knowledge about how to help people with vaccine injury and along COVID. And so I was kind of like, oh crap, I've got to learn this too. And so I just, again, put my head down.

The nice thing was is the pathologies in acute COVID are not that different than what we're talking about when we talk about vaccine injury and long COVID because they all revolve around the same pathogen, which is a spike protein. Very interesting. So, you know, let's look at just that analysis, taking us back into the pandemic. I remember there was a very famous video. I'm forgetting his name right now, but an ER doctor that came out and did a live post after having been all night. He said, we're doing something wrong. We're killing my patients. feels like I'm treating people that are on the top of Mount Everest.

He said they're not. You know, the ventilators, it's not working. The oxygen is not getting in. We have a different problem here. Is that sort of, I mean, you know. Yeah, so one of my mentors, Jacques-Olobcher in South Africa, actually put out a YouTube video in the spring of 2020 and basically said, we're barking up the wrong tree.

This is a vascular disease of the lungs, not an airway disease of the lungs. And he basically laid it out in basically systematic physiology and said, look, these people are easy to ventilate, but we're not being able to oxygenate them. And the concept of that it was acute respiratory distress syndrome, which is ARGE, where your lung is heavy and full of crap, wasn't the issue. Actually, if you talk to any of the ICU doctors, it was like, these people are very easy to ventilate. We just can't oxygenate them.

Right. Well, that also means that it's a vascular issue. And actually, you're making it worse when you put them on the ventilator. So what we started to realize... And I remember, I mean, what was crazy was, I mean, the rates, some of them we were hearing It was like nine out of ten people once you're on a ventilator did not survive. And to this day, the people that I see that were on ventilators, all of them have one thing in common,

which is they all had to get on anticoagulation or blood thinners when they were in the hospital because they either had a blood clot, they had a fib, or they got on ECMO. So that's saved your lives. Getting that blood clot woke somebody up to let me get some. I tell them all the time, thank God you got at atrial fib. Wow. And so in a sense, it was pretty obvious.

The other thing that was pretty obvious in the space, in the spring of 2020 was you were twice as likely to leave the hospital alive if you were already on a blood thinner. And these are elderly people. You probably have friends on blood thinners. They're probably not as healthy as you are if you're not on it. So in a sense, you know, the comorbidities that go along with you already being on a blood thinner should not be a protective mechanism. Right. But it was. And so that was the big suggestion there. That's what Giacco and Risha Pretorius and Doug Kell. And again, most of the information, most of the interface I had was not within the American community, meaning,

The academic medical centers here were sold out to the CARES Act and the treatments and the protocols. The only people that were open to it was really Europe and South Africa. And interestingly enough, also, even around that time, the respiratory, European respiratory journal or European Pulmonary General said, look, we don't need to put people on ventilators. What we need to do is what we call permissive hypoxemia, which is a fancy word for saying, look, just because it says 70, as long as their work of breathing is okay, don't ventilate them or you're going to

killed. Wow. And so I think it's interesting that your background, you said you was an engineer on top of your medical degree, so you're a problem solver, you have critical thinking. And, you know, I've said it many times. I interviewed Suzanne Humphreys many times. And she goes back. She wrote dissolving illusions. Yeah, yeah. It's been, you know, really big. But I once asked her, what is it about medical school that trains the critical thinking out of people, that they just do what they're told. And we've never seen anything like in my lifetime, like the COVID pandemic. I would liken it to. And I think when we look at Nazi Germany, doctors did really atrocious things because they were just doing what they were told. Lisa, that's what they said when they were

finally put in a courtroom. But I said to her, what is it that, you know, in the medical train that trains out your critical thinking? And she said, well, on the contrary, it's actually the medical schooling is designed to wean out people that critically think. You're not. designed to think like that. You're just supposed to be a paint by numbers. I read it. I can memorize it. I picture it. I do it exactly like it's always been done. And so you sort of tend to have people that don't critically think, yet you have, you know, you had this secret weapon where you were in, you know, a specialty that also was like, well, actually, you know, problem solving is a part of what we do. Yeah. And not only that, I would say it's almost like

medical school is more elementary in terms of what's like learning your multiplication tables. and them drilling it into you. And actually, engineering school teaches you how to think. And so as much as, I think there was somebody, I forgot it was talking, they were saying, hey, they went to both law school and med school. And law school actually taught you how to think. Med school was like going back to elementary school

and just learning route memorization, which is what it was. I mean, again, engineering school, bring all the books you want. We want you to solve the problem. That's the test, okay? Medical school, let's tie your hands behind your back and see if you can remember all this stuff that we taught you. I mean, that really is not really education. It's not teaching people to think.

What was it when you started making the change? When you started recognizing, wait a minute, this is a vascular issue, not a respiratory issue necessarily. And, you know, you broke free, you know, what was it like to watch your profession, I mean, essentially murdering? And once you recognize the truth and started seeing amazing success, you're standing in an industry that then isn't listening to you, right? on the whole across America, many like you, Dr. Paul Merrick, one of my favorite pieces of testimony ever on another Ron Johnson hearing, the hospital made me watch my, like took away my tools and then made me watch my patients die. In your case, you had a little bit more control. We'll get into sort of the clinics and the power that you have there. But just looking at your profession in real time, I'm just curious, what was that like to say, what are my fellow doctors doing? It was interesting and heartbreaking.

I mean, weird enough, I had a lot of anesthesiologists that understood what I was talking about. And so even within the hospital, they would be like, Jordan, you got to get this person out of the hospital. They're going to die. And obviously, even the board and the hospital didn't really like that because I was not following protocol. Yeah. You know, in a sense, I have no love loss for the hospital that I'm no longer work with. Not that I ever was employed, but just had privileges because, again... Did they take away privileges?

Well, I just didn't want them back. That makes sense. They were very, you know, wanted to know why I was doing this, not, never asking about the outcome. Does that make sense? People's lives? Yeah. Really simple. And even when I was called down before the Board of Medicine in Alabama, and thankfully, actually, Alabama is a, it actually, it actually, they're, well, I think probably the legislators helped me a little bit because they had taken care of so many of them.

But it was interesting to actually be interviewed about not following protocol, even though the protocol was killing people. I hope most doctors, if they are forced to follow a protocol that kills people, will not follow that protocol. Right, right. And what does it say about doctors that so many did? You know, like my son does very well in school. He's tracking to get great grades. And, you know, and I just recently was like, be careful, man, because, you know, I don't want you on some track where you end up just being so good and book smart and repeat things that you end up just saying, hey, kill those patients and you do. I mean, I know that's not what was being said.

They're being told, this is the only way to handle it. But, I mean, honestly, I'm not a doctor. I was reporting on it. It was so effing obvious that there was solutions available. And you would literally just have to be walking through the world like this to not see them. Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine. What was the risk? I mean, the doctors I know that woke up were like, you know the moment I woke up?

When they started telling me, Ivermectin was dangerous or that hydroxychloric hormone was dangerous. Exactly. A product that has been prescribed, is said to be safer than anything else in the world. Once the CDC started telling me it was dangerous, I said, I've got to look at what else is going on here. But what did we say about this profession that went along with it? So, you know, my unique perspective, obviously, because my father was already a physician. We already had a family company. I loved medical school because I was actually able to challenge the people above me.

But in a sense, that's not how you get into a fellowship. That's not how you get into the high ranking specialties. That's not how you win favor with the academic establishment or the NIH. The other thing is, really, from a technical standpoint, most physicians that are paid well are proceduralists, and we need them, but proceduralists are very good at doing something they're taught over and over and over again. They will make incremental changes to probably improve that procedure, but very few of them have ever thought through,

actually what is that procedure doing to the whole body? And that is probably the consequence of our siloed medical system. And that's the problem when we talk about how COVID affected the vessels, because vessels are everywhere. And so when you have a disease that affects the vessels everywhere, you're going to have a multisystems disease process. And it's going to be completely un... The medical system, as it is built,

will be completely unable to help those people. So what's unique is you... Tell me about your clinics. and the structure of sort of what you're overseeing. So my father started my company the year I was born 82. He was an old ER physician that said half the stuff in the ER probably can be taken care of in the outpatient setting. Built a great reputation as a doctor that thinks outside the box. I mean, he was the guy that everybody was making fun of in the 80s because he thought vitamin D was important.

So I already had that kind of mentorship of somebody that's literally as a physician saying, Jordan, don't believe all the crap that they're teaching you. And the, but it also, the reason that he always wanted to be independent was two reasons. One is we've always felt that the best decisions made for the patients are going to be made by somebody who can make them free of any kind of compulsion outside. The other thing is, and I think RFK talks about this, the unique thing about being a doctor is that you're not just treating the physical. It is also a spiritual being.

And so you need to have the liberty and ability as a Christian, you know, to be able to share and love on people and not have any restraint from that either. So that, and so as much as that was perfectly, perfectly legitimate up until 2020, it was great. It gave me freedom. There's lots of things that are hard about having your own practice. It is very complex. The reimbursement is different from what the hospital gets and you don't have all the kind of ability to get bailed out and all these kind of things. But in 2020, I saw my dad's wisdom because when it came to you have to do what people say. Again, it was kind of a theoretical thing before that.

But then it came right on it and it said, thank the Lord that dad had this set up and has always told me be your own man. So how many clinics do you have now? Six. And we see about 150 to 200,000 patient visits a year. Wow. About 250 employees. Wow. It's grown.

So when I came on, obviously as an internist, I said, well, half the stuff in the urgent care is actually poorly controlled chronic disease. So it just makes sense to attach all these things together. Right. I would say before COVID, my kind of specialty as an engineer was like healthcare delivery. Like how do we make it convenient and easily accessible and low cost for a patient to access the care they need? And so with that patient body, obviously, you get to see the decisions you're making. Did you sort of start working with all the clinics saying, we're going to treat this a little differently?

You know, comes in, let's deal with it as a vascular issue. Yeah, so initially, I mean, the first thing is pretty obvious. I have my own reference labs. So I actually have my own labs as well, and my own pharmacies, which is a whole different thing of the Lord that I do that. Yeah. Well, because there was another issue. Yeah.

There was doctors prescribing Ivermectin hydroxyclorically, but the patient couldn't find, you know, CVS wouldn't deliver it, and so many of the pharmacies were pushing back. And so what I was able to do is I actually was, got one of the first, you know, antibody reagent assays in my clinic. And I was starting to actually get antibodies on everybody. Not only, I actually went out to companies to try to help them reopen to be like, hey, here's who's had COVID, yada, yeah, yeah, yeah.

You know, like, and so I was just coming up with waste. As a small businessman, I was like, I want to help you all get open. Let's get you open. Right. That was my driving. But because of that, I collected immense data. And everything that Fauci would say about waning antibodies and all these kind of things was not, in fact, you know, they would.

Wayne after three months. No, no, no, they double in three months. I've had zero people, Wayne. Meaning, like, it started to be like, is he even looking at the data? Or is it just, you know, is this what he's being told to say? Right. And so as I accumulated almost 7,000 antibodies and sequential antibodies, I was like, they're lying to us. And so in a sense it was, you know. Now you say weighing the antibodies from the vaccine or from the natural infection? This was before the vaccine. So the natural infection, you're like, this is robust.

Yeah, robust protection. Yeah, exactly. And he's saying the opposite, which ironically, I've said it all the way through, we have never, I said it when it was happening, we've never had a vaccine that's as effective in creating, you know, protection as no vaccines ever been as good as the natural infection. Not yet. And suddenly I said this would be the first vaccine ever. They're claiming the vaccine is going to be more effective than a natural infection without any evidence. I mean, that's an extraordinary claim. You needed some extraordinary evidence, and there was none. Yeah, and then within that database, I was able to see who's getting reinfected. And do you know how many people got reinfected?

How many? Zero. Really? And so it was, it was, you know, again, the... So you were tracking it. Right. Exactly. As a, again, an engineer, it was like, we got to, you know, I have the resources.

Thankfully, thanks to my father, setting it up and being a smart, wise man, I was like, I can get this, I can get the assay. I can get even now to getting big microscopes that are a couple hundred thousand dollars. It's like, you know, I don't need a sports car. Let's get some of this stuff. You know, like, whatever. And, but it was, it was. was like the question was why is no one else doing this?

Right. And so. And why is our government not doing this? I mean, like, you have billions of dollars inside the government. You know, Biden spending $10 billion he promised to advertise the vaccine and try to stop vaccine hesitancy. How about a little bit of that of money to do what you were doing? Or even just what Jay Boticharya did in northern California. I mean, it's the same concept. It's like, you go to these companies, a lot of them didn't know they had they had COVID.

And you're like, well, there's like 10%, 20% people already had this thing. And it's like January. You know, like, so, you know. Well, that's where I got in a lot of trouble because I basically stated, hey, if you're healthy, go out and catch this cold. Yeah. Like, let's get their herd immunity here. Let's protect the elderly. They're in danger.

A lot. You know, stay in your houses. Stay out of the way. For what that's worth, let's see if we can keep your protective. But for all the healthy people, let's go out. This is an asymptomatic disease for the most part. Go out and catch it. I mean, I've got, I think, you know, I got attacked by the press.

I want to talk about long COVID because this is something that you said because of your work, because you had some success in really protecting and saving people's lives during COVID, that sort of triggers into, hey, you must be the guy that helped me with long COVID now that I've got that. So what is just what does long COVID mean? So first of all, it's a poorly, it's a poor term. It probably has a pejorative, you know, basically I think the physicians have used it as a pejorative now, which means that it's basically a, as Joel Waska said tomorrow, I mean, it's almost like an abandonment term. Oh, you got long COVID, no big deal.

But I mean, these are, you know, previous, some of my first patients would be NCAA athletes that used to run track. They couldn't run it all anymore. And in fact, their trainers would say, the harder we push them, the worse they get. Wow. And a 19, 20-year-old, you can't really rationalize that away. Now, if your 60-year-old mom is all of a sudden, you know, kind of, you go, huh, she's getting old, she's getting forgetful, she's getting, you know, but in these people it was obvious, you know. And so understanding the disease as a vascular disease, and then also being able to look under the microscope at blood, the research in South Africa was able to teach me how to use immunoflorescent microscopy within my lab. weird enough, people are like, how she trained you?

She didn't come over. It's like, well, you know, the microscopes have these massive cameras. We just had to wake up really early, but we would look at all the slides together on Zoom. Does that make sense? I mean, cool, cool, cool way to do things. And then when we started intervening on these folks, we would have incredible success. And again, that intervention was on targeting the vascular and coagulation or clotting consequences of COVID and the vaccine.

And so the other thing is, is long COVID is not dissimilar from vaccine injury because the pathogen is the same, the spike protein. The other thing that was mystifying to me was in July of 2021, there was a cell paper and actually the NIH sponsored this. It was done in Atlanta and Seattle. It was 250 people. They followed them from an infection in March, and we're seeing what the antibody response to the different proteins in the virus were.

And the actual title that article is broad and durable immunity from COVID vaccine. Sorry, from COVID, not COVID vaccine. But it made the point that the spike protein does not elicit CD8 T cell or what we call long-term cellular immunity. It only engages T-helper cells or CD4s. And ultimately, it was saying we picked the wrong protein, okay?

So it's not triggering that sort of long-term memory. Exactly. It's a short-term memory. that the nuclear protein, which is the one they pointed out, that did that, is not pathogenic and it's not deadly. It's not deadly. It's not like the, it's the actual weapon of the virus. So you would think the CDC and FDA, once they got this data, especially as they were touting this technology, which we can have a discussion about, it's, I would never give it to anybody. But if at least you were like, hey, this technology can turn on a dime, we'll turn it.

Right. Right. Here's the info. Here's the non-pathogenic protein. It's the one giving you durable and brought up. No one has ever made that point. Like I've been doing this for, you know, all the way through COVID. No one's actually made that point.

The entire genius of MR&A technology, if we're to believe that it works, is it's literally a computer program. I type it up, fire it, throw it in a fatty lip and throw it in. So the moment you recognize, whoops, we grabbed the wrong protein, shift it out, get on the computer, boop-la-lop, let's throw in the nuclear caps in or whatever we think is actually better and wrap that in fatty lipid and throw it. And no one did that. And again, I mean, at this time,

I was speaking out about other things, my child going to school and basically having to wear a mask. I had some engagement with some of the respected infectious disease doctors that trained me at University of Alabama, Birmingham. I have actually, I mean, a lot of times had lots of different opinions throughout medical school and residency, but I didn't care. I didn't need a letter from them. Again, going back to that hierarchical structure, but I'd ask them these questions, and their answer was, Jordan, I don't know much about vaccine. Okay, that's not my area. They probably know what they're doing.

Okay, to me, I was like, that's not an answer. Right. And it's literally right in front of you that this thing is, and you ask any doctor, what makes the COVID dangerous? It's like, well, the spike protein is able to elicit coagulation, it's endothelial injury. Yeah. Yeah. Well, here's the evidence to say, no, let's change, you know, change the protein.

Let's use a less dangerous part of the virus. And not only that, at that time, there's also rats that. that were coming out that showing that the nucleot protein was important in viral clearance. And so on top of that, you're like, well, actually, that's the thing that actually gets rid of the damn thing. You know, and so you're just mystified. And again, maybe as an engineering brain, I'm like, unless somebody could talk me out of it, you know, and they're convincing, they're convincing was, I just don't know. That doesn't convince me, I need to shut up. Right.

Does that make sense? And so I was like, no, no, no, no. Tell me about this paper. How can you tell people to get spike protein? When we know it is not the thing that's important and durable immunity, it also doesn't confer broad immunity, and it's pathogenic. Yeah. So.

I was one of the one, one of the few times I was in a, I was being interviewed on the phone, a very long interview with a, I think it was a New York Times reporter. And I felt like I got to her because she made this argument that the vaccine is safer than catching the virus itself. I said, I said, okay, let me want to challenge you there. I'm going to just, meet me, let me just tell you critically thinking from a not non-doctor. The spike protein, can we agree, is the most dangerous part of the virus. It's what causes all the blood problems, coagulation, myocarditis, paracrititis. Oh, that's what she was saying.

Myocarditis and paracarditis are more prevalent in the live infection versus the vaccinated. I said, okay, but can we agree that spike proteins what's causing the myocarditis parricotitis? Yes. We're agreed there. Yes. Okay. Now, can we agree? Let's all things be equal. if it's the same spike protein in the virus that's in the vaccine, it has an equal risk at least, right? Can we say that it has an equal risk? It wasn't, by the way. No, I know.

And I said, I have evidence that I could tell you that they've manipulated that spike protein so that even lasts longer. But let's leave that out of the equation. Let's just meet me, let me, I want to meet you right where we're at here. Let's just say, same spike protein, one injected, one you're breathing in, and they even brag you're getting a higher load, more antibodies from the vaccine. Do you remember? So, yeah.

I said, but let's just say equal. the vaccine is the same amount of spike protein as the virus itself, right? She's like, okay, I'm with you. I said, now you have one thing left that I'm going to prove it's absolutely a lie, which is it's still randomized if I'm going to catch this virus or not when it's blowing around. I could miss it. I could not catch it. It could not be near me.

Whereas if I vaccinate, I am definitely putting those spike proteins in my body. So now I'm putting myself in direct risk because the worst part of this virus is being injected into me. So it only stands the reason if these are. the same spike protein and they're not. The vaccine is worse, but even they're the same, more people are going to get myocarditis and periodicarditis because you're taking away the randomized selection and forcing

everyone on the planet to take this vaccine. And I really, the first time ever on the other side the problem I heard, oh my God. She's like, that's a really important point. I was like, I could go on all day with important points like that. And you're bypassing the most important part of our immune system,

which is the original barriers of interface. Right, right. Your your mucosal linings, your nasal, your eyes, your lungs. The activation of DNA to use. How much of long COVID do you, because I keep hearing this term. I actually know that you work with Dr. Redfield, who was former head of the CDC. I had a great interview with him. And, you know, he said, look, I think a lot of long COVID is actually vaccine injury. How much would you say? Is this, is this a cover-up term for what really is more likely, mostly COVID vaccine injury?

So it is probably 80% of the people that I see out of the 4,000 are people that have been vaccinated. I will tell you there is 20% that never got the vaccine and thank God they didn't. Yeah. Because I have no question it would have been worse. Again, I don't have any way to prove that because you kind of got to prove it negative. But in a sense, but when you talk to people, and this is a lot of what I do is go through, okay, when was your infection, or chronologically go through their decline.

There are plenty of people that got COVID. Yeah. Before the vaccine. And then they will tell you that it was not a big deal. Then they get vaccinated. And then that's where that started. Yeah. And there's also many people that never had COVID.

And I still have people in my database for antibodies that still don't have nuclear protein antibodies. None. So there's, because I keep thinking that's got to be a myth, that there are some people that just don't, never caught it. Well, yeah, or their immune system doesn't engage to make the antibody. I mean, didn't have like a long-term memory, just like cleared it. Yeah. Well, not clear it.

It's almost like the body didn't interface. So, I mean, there is a lot of immune dysfunction that comes from the, basically, the vaccine itself. So you're actually disregulating the immune response to begin with, so you might not make. And so we've seen that in the data as well. I don't. Okay. So, but there's no question that there's plenty of people that are just vaccine injuries. And the problem is probably 80% of them now are both. Does that make sense?

Yeah. And so, but I argue and hypothesize that the vaccine because of immune dysregulation is actually making even their COVID infection worse in terms of its ability to clear and actually the outcomes. So we see that in the clinic. There's not papers written about it because they don't want to disambiguate this data. And that's actually one of the things we need to do is every one of these long COVID patients. That's a term I only heard when you said it, the disambiguate. It's a great term, right? They wanted ambiguous. They totally muddled up the data. They changed how we wrote death on death certificates to, you know, take COVID when they had an underlying heart disease that they had been dying the weeks before in the hospital. They just muddled up all the data. So it's

ambiguous. We cannot figure out what the hell we're looking at by design. And even within long COVID, I think the reason that the long COVID data and outcomes and treatments that they've tried is so poor from the NIH is in my clinic in 4,000 people, there are distinct phenotypes. And you treat them completely different, meaning the 19-year-old track runner is very different than the 60-year-old that, you know, had. And so, and the treatments that work are very different for those people. And so if you're going to throw everybody into a basket on top of things, with even symptomology being all grouped together, you're going to have, really going to have no insight. And the outcomes for any trial are going to be, you know, basically crap. This hearing, what do you think, what are you hoping when you're involved in a hearing like this, you know, it looks like it's like, well, let's all admit that the COVID-19 vaccine was a disaster that we should have had. had, you know, more access to other drugs and things.

But at the core of it, what do you think is the most important thing that needs to be accomplished from a hearing like this? So I think it needs to expose the basic failures of the entities that their whole job was to regulate the products and actually alert physicians when they saw a signal to allow people to know the safety of a product, meaning informed consent, which is what, you know, it's... Joel Walscott, one of the doctors, like got it, you know, suddenly started collapsing in his own surgery rooms, right? And he said, I did not get informed consent. No one told me that there was an issue.

I think it also needs to expose, like you have done for me three or four years ago, which is the actual, this, as obvious as it was that it was done poorly, done speedily, done without proper oversight, and pushed on us without. proper consent. That's not, basically, that's not, it is how it typically does. I think you at the time, it's how the sausage is made.

What were we at in, like, in Nashville or something, the Opry land, and I think you were interviewing me at the time. Yeah, yeah, I was interviewing you. I remember that vaguely, and I think I,

like I did with Dr. Peter McCullough, and you were very set on the problem with the COVID vaccine. I was like, you should look at the entire childhood vaccine program. I've said it, and Aaron said it.

COVID vaccine is actually one of the best tested vaccines we've had, which it's a horrible... Oh yeah, placebo control, large, I mean... Yeah, it doesn't exist for the childhood effects. We don't even know how bad those things are. Yeah, exactly. And so that needs to be exposed. I think it can dovetail with the fact that

you're actually not very well in... meaning you're not as a patient or a physician informed properly about these things that you advocate for with no questions. The other important thing, and this is just my interest, is there are 10 to 15 million people in the U.S. that have long COVID or vaccine injury. And they have debilitating issues. And the interesting thing is, is these are not the people that you would expect

because they're not typically people with a history of comorbidities. These are the active, healthy, young people, NCAA athletes that no longer can compete. They are the 15, 16-year-olds that are stuck in bed for two years, being able to get up and seeing a pediatrician or even a psychiatrist that says it's all in your head. I mean, that is the ongoing gaslighting. As much as we've gotten through the, you know, as much as the lies, we now go, okay, we see that those lies are made. The medical system currently is not addressing this, what I would call, I don't like the word pandemic, but I mean, there is a huge amount of people that are suffering. And we need an adequate way to, first of all,

figure out how to help them, but also, you know, basically be honest, like Joel said, it's like they don't need to be abandoned. And so I think that is the most important. I think that's what Senator Johnson's point is, is I came back for the vaccine injured. And I'd say vaccine injured and long COVID, because again, you know, they're both things that were wrought upon society by people that it shouldn't have been wrought upon. But that needs to be heard too. Yeah. Well, and it's huge. And I keep saying, until we get to the place where every doctor, in America says vaccine injury is real and what you're suffering may be a vaccine injury. We're going to look into it.

We have ways to test for that now. We have experts and specialists that specialize in how to take care of vaccine injury. Until we get to that place, then we are not practicing medicine. And we are not being critically thinking and we're not being honest about the products that we're using. And I think the faith of the population is going to continue to drop around medicine and science until we see that area of science be free and open and openly conversed and studied. Yeah, and an interesting thing that I've been able to see is I have about 150 doctors that are my patients,

many of them at doctors at quite high academic institutes that you'd find interesting, meaning, you know, why are they seeking out care from me? The reason is, is because they have now realized how terrible and how basically ill-in-firm, formed their medical systems that they operated in and were. And it's, it is terrible that the only way that a physician finds out is for them to be injured. I know. And that has to change.

That has to change. It has to change. It has to change in the education system. And it's, it's getting bad. We're all getting afraid to go into a hospital. I mean, now it's like,

how bad is the break? Maybe I can set it myself. I mean, I'm literally like, I don't know if I want to go into that place. Forget vaccine hesitancy. How about health care has a lot? health care hesitancy.

Yeah. You know? Look, it's amazing to, I want to thank you for taking the time, both to be on the show, but also in this incredible hearing. I want to thank you because it's just such a pleasure to meet a doctor that is what we expect doctors to be, right? Investigators, trying to figure out, listen to me, you know, hear about my story and where I'm coming from and what I think is going on with me instead of this, like, really,

they're like robots. I mean, you know, so much of medicine has just become this robotic, whatever I'm told to do, the CDC says and they bow down. And I think that culture is changing and you're a big part of it. And so I hope, you know, by the time I see you next, you have 20 clinics, 100 clinics. We need more people that are treating medicine the way that you are. Yeah. And one thing I'll close with is I think one of the things that is the foundation of medicine is

clinical medicine. And the problem is as the academic medical institutes and the research systems became prevalent and the people that are lauded up here in D.C. are people that literally never touch patients. Yeah. Okay? And so if you're just disconnected from the heartbeat of medicine, I'm not sure you can be a doctor or a good doctor. Yeah. Well, you're right.

And I think we've got great people in the regulatory agencies that know that to be true and are going to start trying to really, I think, focus how we look at medicine. But thanks for being part of it. Any time. Thanks, Dale. All right. Great. Well, look, we just last week launched.

25% discount on all of our merch. So if you want to find a way to donate to ICANN and be able to signal that you're a free thinker and want to have a conversation, there's nothing like a hat, a T-shirt, or maybe the Faraday bags, which, like, protect your, when you don't want a conversation going through on your cell phone, you just throw in the Faraday bag. Those were selling off the shelves last week. But just so you get an idea of what the merch is all about, take a look at this. Summer is coming in hot, and it's time to get fired up with a lot.

exclusive highwire gear in our biggest sale ever. Everything in our merch store is 25% off, from hoodies to hats to our signature highwire teas, and it's happening right now through May 31st. Our gear is more than just apparel. It's a statement. So join the Highwire tribe. But hurry, these deals won't last long. Shop now at highwire.shop to support our mission and bravely spring into summer with style. There's real heroes around us right now. You may be one of them that's watching this show, just like a conversation that I had with Dr. Vaughn years ago

affected how he was looking at things, and now he's just becoming a sensation. Our conversations, our ability to share information is what makes us not just a great nation, but a great species. We've got to keep this work up. I'm about to race over to the White House. I've been looking. I was raining just a second ago.

I might have to run through the rain. To really go and support Robert Kennedy Jr., 100 days in, the commission has put together a massive document discussing the issues with health in America, really the state of the state on health, and the things that they're going to look at and perhaps, I suppose, goals in what they want to change. I'm curious how deep that document gets into vaccines. Lots of conversations. We know food is an issue, but are we focusing enough on vaccines? I just want to state very clearly to you right now. There's always rumors. There's always innuendos out there.

We are not taking our focus away. Even this conversation, this hearing was just about the COVID vaccine. That is not the only problem, all right? I didn't come here because I somehow, you know, miraculously, psychically predicted there would be a bad vaccine out there in the future. I started my work because there was already bad vaccines being given to our children. They were destroying their lives, causing issues like autism. Yes, I have no problem saying that.

I've done enough interviews. I've read enough studies. I've even challenged scientists to do studies that they will not report, but I know what the answers are. I've seen it, and I know what they're about to discover when they finally do the science inside of the government. But I don't want to lay off. Is Robert Kennedy Jr. is surrounded by all the right people? Is he being gaslit by people inside of there, even if he does want to do something? All of those things, I want to be able to judge it.

I want to call balls and strikes, which is what we're doing here on the highway. But let me be perfectly clear. This is just not just a COVID vaccine issue. The entire childhood vaccine program was never properly tested. We have the sickest nation of children in the world, the sickest generation of children we've ever seen. And I think when we finally look at it, a gigantic part of it is going to be a vaccine. Sure, the food sucks. Sure, we've got to get the pesticides and herbicides off of our food.

I'm all about it. Get the chemicals out of our food. But at the moment you come into this earth, you are given a sexually transmitted disease packed with a load of aluminum that is absolutely mind-blowing and as absurd as many of the things that they did during COVID, like put you on ventilators and not listening to the people around you. If we are priming our children to be sick from the moment they enter this earth, then the food and all of it is only a secondary problem. And so we are going to be focused here at the ICANN on the number one issue we have

always been focused on. This vaccine program needs investigation. The world needs to recognize that vaccine injury is real. And it's real with every single vaccine. And I'm not making that up because I've read the insert. I've showed you all you can do is go to FDA licensed vaccines and see the injuries yourself. But it needs to stop. And certainly, any product that can injure you, can injure you should never be forced upon you

because that means your government is being allowed to murder you, to destroy your life. We are not going to stop here. We have a couple of years right now to put our foot on pedal to the metal. to drive what I can's dream has been from the beginning, to end this insanity, to make sure that you always have a choice. If you're one of those freaks out there that want to inject yourself with viruses and bacteria and aluminum and mercury and formaldehyde and polysorbid 80 and fatty lipids that go straight to the brain, go right ahead.

It's a free country. But keep your hands off of my kids and keep your hands off of me. We're showing you the evidence of what's happening every single week on this show, and we're going to fight to the bitter end until we have the free. to choose. And we have an industry that admits, yeah, sometimes we make mistakes and every product has the ability to destroy your life. You should know that. That's informed consent. That's why we call this the informed consent action network. That's the nonprofit that makes this possible. We need your help. Please donate to this work right now. It's never been more critical. We want to

deliver for you. We cannot let this moment go away. I want a full knockout. Not just that we staggered them and we were in the fight for a little while, but Apollo Creed came back and ended up winning. No, no, no, no, no. We're taking this to the end. We're going to win with you. That's what I'm up to. I hope you'll join us. I'll see you next week.