The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 464: STEEP TERRAIN

Episode Date: February 21, 2026

Del Bigtree returns to the desk after two weeks in Europe with An Inconvenient Study, bringing shocking reports from doctors and scientists around the world — and a firsthand account of breaking four ribs in a Canadian ER that exposed the reality of mainstream emergency medicine.Jefferey Jaxen reports on a Super Bowl ad that backfired in spectacular fashion, raising serious questions about AI surveillance and corporate overreach.Then, an unfiltered roundtable with Alec Zeck, Dr. Ben Tapper, and Katie Collins, PA-C, tackling holistic health, informed consent, censorship, and the terrain theory vs. germ theory debate many have demanded, and few are willing to host.Guests: Katie Collins, PA-C, Dr. Ben Tapper, Alec ZeckBecome 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?

Yeah. 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, I wasn't sure if I was going to do that walkout today because I'm in a little bit of pain. For those of you that may or may not have been paying attention to.

my social media feeds. I had a pretty good ski accident last weekend. I was just up in Whistler. After a long trip through Europe, which was amazing, came back through, grabbed my kids, and we went up to Whistler to do a little skiing in one of the few places that there's actually snow falling on the northern continent. But while I was skiing, and I just, you know, we hear these stories of people, you know, hitting trees, which is what I did. But I just thought I would clarify, you know, the way that I ski and what that actually means. I think a lot of times we picture someone racing like a downhill racer on an open run and flying off the run and hitting a tree. I guess that's probably how people die. Certainly I wasn't moving at those kinds of speeds.

I grew up in Boulder, Colorado. I grew up skiing. My favorite thing is backcountry skiing. I love skiing down through the trees, sort of like you see here. And, you know, I was reflecting on this type of skiing, which is a bit how I live my life. Unlike other ski runs where you can see way out ahead of you, 50 yards ahead and plan your line, as they say, the beauty of skiing in the trees is it's immediate. You've got to be in a position with your body. When you say turn, it does turn. Any hesitation or panic can get you in some trouble. When you go off of little jumps like that, you start picking up speed. That guy got too slow. But essentially what happens is you're moving in a faith space that there will always be enough

space through these trees to get through. But you don't know for sure because they're just wild trees. And in this case, I came off of a couple of decent little drops, was gaining speed, and it started closing out. The trees got really too tight to ski through. There was no way to turn. And so at that point, you start gaining speed. And I just saw this little bit of light where there was, I had to get out to the main run

and I was flying along and there was like fallen trees and it got really kind of out of control back there. And as I tried to break through these trees, the branches threw me sideways and my ribs wrapped around like the last tree before I made it onto the run. So I was three feet away from Genius. My good friend Josh Coleman posted this. art has a way of capturing an experience like nothing else. But it would actually in the moment, it felt quite serious.

I was lucky my wife, Lee, was skiing with me. My brother, Shad, was in another section of the trees, but she came down right next to me and said, are you all right? And I don't know, you know, in your life, if you had those moments, there's times you hurt yourselves and you're like, yeah, I'm going to be all right, I just have to walk this one off. I really wasn't sure as I was sort of wrapped around this tree, all the air was knocked out of me. And I remember saying to my wife,

I said, are you all right? I said, I really don't know. And I slowly tried to like push myself off the tree. There's a very unique experience where I heard every one of my vertebrae in my back started going pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, like down as I was moving away from the tree, which said to me somehow the impact on my ribs had pushed my whole spine out of, alignment for sure and it was like popping back into alignment as I moved away. So I didn't know what that really meant. But it was something I've never felt before. Didn't feel good.

And so I ended up taking a few deep breaths. It was of course the last run of the day, which is always the case. Those of you that ski, you know, you should really be careful that last run. Instead, I was having the ride of my life. I was saying it was one of the best runs ever until it wasn't. But I ended up skiing down with my wife. We found a green run. I just very carefully got down to a gondola that took me to the bottom.

I actually didn't go to the ER. You know, you know me. I'm kind of, I'm into like natural health, natural healing. I don't want to be over the top. I was like, I think I just bruised my ribs. I'm not sure. And it was my daughter's birthday. So we had plans to do dinner and all those things.

I didn't want to mess up her birthday. So anyway, I didn't go to the ER that night. But the next morning, it was clear. that I was in rougher shape than I thought. So I did go to the ER. Here is that moment as I'm finding out what actually happened to me. All right.

Yeah, so you have non-displaced fractures of your ribs five to eight. Okay, okay. And that is the source of your pain. What does that mean? Like they're just, they cracked? Yeah, there's a crack through them, but you not see the ribs broken up like this.

So they're in the right position, but they're a little bit deviated. Because I feel like movement. You will feel that. Yeah. You'll feel some clicking and you'll feel a bit of it. That's exactly expected. If you're doing activities, they're causing sharp pain and slowing down your healing.

So try not to. Okay. You can use... I'm not skiing tomorrow. No. My experience with multiple refractures up here is it hurts for a couple months. And most things you're going to do fine, but you're going to lay on your stomach or do something that has twisting and lifting with it.

It's going to really buggy again. And eventually it just stops hurting it all. I think we have the x-ray. ribs five through eight, they kind of circled it there. It's sort of hard to see me, to see these lines through each one of those ribs, almost like a perfect line where the tree impacted with my ribs. I've really thought a lot about how lucky I am really to walk away from that injury. I mean, it does make you think twice that it hit some other part of my body.

Had that been a head injury at that speed, you know, I don't know. and how close I might have come to, you know, maybe not being able to walk after that incident. So it makes you think about, you know, life, and I keep joking with everybody. I'm really, really being made aware of how grateful I am for my life in every agonizing breath that I take right now. As the doctor said, I got about two months, I guess. I'm going to try and make that shorter. So just to end this all up, how I deal with things, right? We talk about health on this show, but for me, what do I do?

I will say this, that in the immediate moment, I did go for a pharmaceutical product. I was having such bad spasms in my back. I couldn't move or walk. And so I, you know, as few as possible, but I did, where is it? There we go. Advil, it happens. So anyone thinks I'm totally anti-farmma. I just want to say this to the pharmaceutical industry.

I'm glad you've made this little product. every once in a while. You won't find it in my house. There's no Tylenol, no Advil in our house. There's never anything that's going to happen there that we need an emergency, but I did feel like if I was going to get on a plane and try to get home, there's a few things that makes it a lot easier. But what I really am working with is trying to get rid of inflammation using curcumin is something that I'm taking. I immediately always go to Arnica. So I take both Arnika as a homeopathic and I've been put Arnica as a cream onto the space. And let's see, the recent one, this is, some of you guys were writing in, all of you, so thank you for all the support. This is one I didn't know about. This is

Staphasagria, which I guess men's bones and has some, I think it's the comforty root, turned into a homeopathic. So that's been very interesting. Last night, what? Oh, I'm taking some phythum. Sorry about that. And then, And then this is a life wave patch. Some friends gave me last night, Mickey Willis and his wife, Nottie. I'm trying those around my ribs. And then I'm going with what I grew up with. My mom and dad were really into Edgar Casey treatments.

And so this is castor oil packs with a wool pad. I pour, you know, the casserole is really messy, this thing. And then I'm using an infrared heating pad on that to try and get it to absorb to treat the ribs. and then I have red light. This is a really powerful red light therapy. I've been firing onto the ribs too. So, you know, if the healing goes well, it feels like it's already going pretty well.

I won't know which one of these things or the combination of all of them is doing it. But as you can see, I mostly like to stick to holistic approaches any way possible. There are thoughts. People are coming to me. They could give me stem cells and maybe some peptides. So far in my life, I haven't done stem cells.

or peptides because I'm skeptical. I want to know safety on those things, not against them, but I've been healthy. So why mess with a healthy body right now? Maybe I consider it because I'm in a lot of pain if it could help with healing. So I might do some investigations in those things. Anyway, that's the personal story. I didn't mean to scare everyone. I think we started with a picture online on my social media of just me and the ER saying, you know, getting some news that had kind of happy music to it, but most of you thought I was dying of cancer, so I'm sorry if I set that out as a story. All this to say that, and it's interesting because I've been having this conversation with a journalist that's about to write an article,

I think, that I'm featured in. I'm not sure how nice that article is going to be, but I keep saying, look, you know, vaccinations especially when it comes to children, I don't want to get in the conversation whether or not it protects my child. That's not your problem. We should only keep this conversation is how we're affecting each other, and I got into a lot of science there. But he would keep kind of trying to say, well, you're putting your kids at risk. I said, I taught my children to ski at three years old. I recognize that there is a heightened danger to my children skiing at that age. But that is, you know, how I was raised, it's how most people from Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, you name it, how many nations that grow up

around mountains doesn't mean I'm going to force you to teach your kids to ski, but you don't get to tell me how to raise my children. And that is the heart of this conversation. It's going to be a big part of the conversation that we have today. I've got an amazing show coming up. In fact, we're doing something a little bit different. I've got some really high-powered thought leader influencers in Alex Zek is going to be joining me. I've got Ben Tapper here and Katie Collins.

All, you know, influencers in their own right, thought leaders in medicine health, holistic health. We're going to have a conversation about what's important right now in the world we're living in. And we might even delve into some controversial topics, especially one around terrain. I was laughing about the title today. You know, I took some steep terrain on my skis. We might get into some steep terrain on the conversation of terrain versus germ theory. I'm looking forward to that coming up. But first, it's time for the Jackson Report.

Hey, Jeffrey. It's great to see you. Glad to see you off the slopes and back in the chair, Del. for the most part. Yeah, and thank you for taking such a great, taking such great care of this chair, of this desk of this show while it was away. It's always fantastic to know that you're there, that you can jump in here and get to show how you would do the high wire or how you do the high wire. So it's really cool to watch that happening. You bet. It was very fun. And we have some, we have a topic here. I want to talk about Maha topic. A lot of things Kennedy's been doing, and his administration has been doing, just home run, home run after home run after home run.

One of the topics is, you know, pardon the pun, we're having impact speed here. There's a topic we cannot avoid. And this is the VARS system. This is this broken vaccine adverse event reporting system that we're told is the best in the world. We know it's not. Here's an article from stat news. Now, stat news typically slanted with their reporting when it comes to vaccine reporting. This is from almost a year ago in April.

RFK Junior plans changes to vaccine side effect reporting system. A lot of people want this. But look at this first line. It says, while the general idea, idea of improving the system is uncontroversial. This cuts across party lines, Del. This is no one, no one's saying don't fix this system. Everyone knows. Kennedy has exaggerated the extent to which side effects of vaccination go unrecorded, according to researchers. He's saying only about 1% are reported, and he wants to automate it. Well, Staten News destroys its own premise

just a couple paragraphs down because it quotes something we quote all the time, thank you, Staten News, you're saving, you're doing our job for us. It says an analysis conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality from 2006 to 2009 found that using an automated system could lead to more suspected adverse events being fled to doctors. They estimated that fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. So I don't know who's exaggerating it because fewer than 1%, as we've always talked about in this show, seems pretty low. And why wouldn't you want to capture a couple more of those so you can have a safer vaccine program? I'm not working for the pro-vaxxers here. And this is just common sense. So fast forward now to Mother Jones,

another outlet that's been somewhat adversarial to people that want their own decisions around their bodies, especially when it comes to vaccines. But they just posted this article here. And they're saying health department will mine unverified vaccine injury claims with new AI tools. So HHS has budgeted into their 2025 budget, the final quarter, that they're going to start using AI to sweep through these adverse reporting systems to figure out what's going on. So that's a positive thing for people that really want to understand the safety of vaccines and say just blindly putting them out there. One of the issues here is researchers, it's no big secret here. The vaccines are tested extremely poorly as I can and our lawyers have shown that they're not

tested against placebo controls. They're tests against other vaccines. They're grandfathered in. They have very, very small safety windows that they look for three, four days after injection, and then after that you're on your own. We'll let VERS catch it. So the people are the fourth phase of testing. They're the final phase of testing, and maybe if this broken system signals something, we'll look at it. Well, researchers are now starting to look at this. This is kind of the entire sea change that Kennedy has put forward is looking at vaccine safety. So here's a new research looking at the Tdap vaccine. And you can look at this study. This is a risk signal assessment. So these researchers are going into the VAIR system and looking at the TDAP

vaccine use alone by pregnant women. So this is, they're calling it a pharma epidemiological study. So this study, this is, they're using, they're using calculations that are used to look into these systems, the VAIR systems, FDA has one called FAIRS for drug reporting. These are systems that have been online for a long time. And this is what researchers did. This is kind of how they approach this. They said, despite global recommendations, for for maternal tetanus diphtheria accellular pertussis TDAF vaccination to protect neonates, safety concerns persist regarding pregnancy-specific adverse events. So right there, the researchers saying, look, this thing's been universally recommended,

but there's still safety issues. And this, something's wrong with this program because I'm not sure we're catching them all, so we have to do a study now to just look into this. This is, and so this is what they did. They said, we analyzed 870 pregnancy-related reports, that's through theirs, 128 were series from 20,358 Tdap submissions using disproportionality analysis. They call it reporting odds ratio. So basically based on the overall reporting patterns of this database are their higher expected reports of harms for certain outcomes for these vaccines. In this case, Tdap and pregnant women.

Well look at what they found. This is their results. They said 71.9% of adverse events occurred within 30 days post-vaccination. Let's get to know. No adverse events of maternal death. That's really good news that were found. But they did find this, a strong safety signal on stillbirth. Now, it's a reporting odds ratio of 285. Now, a reporting odds ratio of, say, zero would mean there's nothing to see here. A reporting odds ratio of, say, two would say this signal is about two times more than what we normally see three three times more this is 285.77 if you go back to these results for stillbirth a signal for stillbirth and bears for Tdap pregnancy vaccines given given maternally so let's go pretty term delivery 285 times more 285 times the amount

285.7 7 yes so we go on now preterm delivery you know probably not going to want that reporting odds ratio 196.8 and fetal death definitely don't want that reporting odds ratio 140.83 were found via disproportionality from passive surveillance system which required further validation in active surveillance studies. So just be clear do I read that sentence as fetal death is 140 times more likely or more than we would likely expect to be seeing it, right? In the VAERS reporting system. That's that's the caveat here. So you go into this study and they'll say, well, because we don't really know how

many people have in total have taken this vaccine, we don't know if that's a bad thing, a good thing, a high number, a low number, but within this reporting system, there's a signal specifically with Tdap given maternally for these three signals especially. These are the high water marks. These are really coming out here in this study. They're saying this is an issue. It appears to be an issue. We have this broken system. We all know it's broken. And we're using the garbage we have to study and what we're using in this garbage system, these are major signals that are coming up. So these researchers, they conclude with saying, look, we need to validate this with active surveillance studies. We need it now. And this is, I mean, this study here,

if Kennedy wants to improve the VAIR system, they should walk out and do an entire press conference right now. Jay Batataria just took the head of the CDC, should come out and do a press conference on this study and say, this is why we need a better VAIRS system. Because researchers are going into this broken system, they're seeing this. Now, I want to show an actual image from the study. I highlighted some of the things here that just jump out. You can see here huge issues, stillbirth premature delivery, talked about that fetal death, but you can see down in there in the middle, premature labor, gestational diabetes. You're looking at a 230 reporting odds ratio. At the bottom there, gestational hypertension, 161 times reporting odds ratio, placental disorder.

So a lot of signals happening here. And again, this is what happens when you use the the population as an open-air experiment and just say, don't worry, if anything happens, VERS will signal it. Let's just sit around and wait for this system to under-report. So if you want to, and here's a little pro tip for the community that really enjoys pharmaceutical products that come from a needle. If you want the population to trust these products, if you want to end vaccine hesitancy, this VAIR system is not going to do it.

People aren't going to walk into their doctor's office knowing that if they get this vaccine, and they can't sue pharmaceutical companies, that this system is going to tell them if these things are, this system informs the government, informs the doctors, and it's not doing its job. So what's the next thing we're supposed to do as the public wanting, you know, vaccine safety?

Well, we can sue the government like we have. We can put FOIA requests to the government and ask for the vaccine injury data. What has whatever these manufacturers given you that you haven't shown the public? Well, they did that in Canada. They just did that in Canada for childhood vaccines. This is the headline.

Health Canada seals vaccine injury records for 15 years. Well, it kind of reminds me of what Aaron Serian, his lawyers did during COVID, trying to get the COVID information from that vaccine. This is the Reuters headline at that time. FDA wants 55 years to process FOIA request over vaccine data. So we've seen that game before.

So Canada just, let me understand that, because I don't want to blow past that. They're locking away all of their vaccine injury data so that no one can see it for 15 years, right after. forced vaccinating their entire country, having trucker strikes and everything saying this is outrageous. We need to rob your bank accounts. We need to shut you down, just rob you of civil liberties because this vaccine is so important and this vaccine is so safe. And now right at the time

where the data is pouring in and we can actually get to the bottom what happened here, Canada is going to say hands off. You're not allowed to see that data. Boy, that does not look very good to me. That does not look like you like what you're seeing in that data because it sure seems like if you saved lives, you'd be like rushing that out to show the world how great that vaccine program worked out. And here's the issue I have with people that want to bash Kennedy. These are the people that are fine with what the government's doing in other countries. So is that radical transparency that's happening in Canada right now? That's my question for you. So where are we left?

Well, we're left finally, obviously with our own decision making and our family. But you go to your doctor and you have a conversation with your doctor. You say, the door closes, doctor-patient relationship, the most sacred thing in medicine, Hippocratic oath. And you say, doc, tell me what side effects are going on here? What should I look for for these vaccines? Would you take all of these vaccines at once or give those to your child if that was your child? And the doctor can tell you the truth about those things.

Well, here's a political article that they're trying to make stick. RFK Jr.'s allies are trying to free anti-vaccine doctors to speak their minds. I can barely read that title because my brain does not want to make this reality. So you go into this article and they quote some people in here. One of them is a public health lawyer at Georgetown University. He says, this is part of a judicial assault on science and public health that basically weaponizes the COVID-19 pandemic for political and ideological gains. This is Lawrence Goston from Georgetown University. I thought the COVID-19 pandemic itself, just because of the nature of it, was weaponized for political and ideological games.

That's why we're moving away from it right now. But then political just puts a fine point on it and says this. A Supreme Court decision in favor of broad speech protections for physicians could have far-reaching implications, possibly bolstering Kennedy's efforts to dismantle long, established public health practices by permitting doctors to speak more freely with patients and to the public, about approaches to health care that are outside the mainstream. This includes whether to recommend vaccination. Now, at the heart of this, Jeffrey, is this conversation that the Supreme Court may take up?

It's really on should a doctor, should these licensing boards be allowed to take away your license for speaking your truth in what you're seeing? Is that the heart of what they're looking at here? That I was, you know, if, I mean, we look at COVID. We saw those doctors who were having so much success with hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, who have had their licenses either under threat or taken away. Doctors like Paul Merrick, who was in tears as he spoke at the Ron Johnson hearing, they took away the drugs that were working for me. He had the highest success rate of survival in his ICU. As he said, they made me just watch my patients die. And we put doctors in a position where they were not.

allowed to practice medicine the way that they have been taught to do it, which is the patient comes first. I'm going to think outside the box since the entire world is saying they don't know how to treat this disease. Yet those that did treat, those that tried things like Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, had their licenses taken away based on they don't have the right to free speech. That's the heart of what this Politico is against. They don't want your doctor to be thinking outside the box. They don't want them to be allowed to break free of the narrative, which is there is no drug that works. We're all going to have to die until the vaccine comes a year from now. Shame on Politico. And you want to talk about proving that you're a propagandist

shill for an authoritarian system. That article does it. If anyone reads your trash any longer, then you get what you expect. And living through COVID, you want a medical class. This is what we learned. This is one of the lessons we should have learned as the society. You want a medical community that practices the Hippocratic Oath with rugged individualism. What can they do to protect their patients? Doesn't matter with governments telling them. You want people, you want ingenuity, you want invention, creativity from your doctors. You don't want one size fits all. So what happens in this vaccine conversation? I hate to interrupt you. You want a second opinion. Second opinions only exist if you're allowed to, you know, have a different opinion than the last

person you went to. If you take away my right to express, have a different perspective on this, then you take away one of the central tenants of medicine and health as we know it. And by the way, this shows you that Politico doesn't want you as a doctor. They don't trust you. They think you're a bunch of morons. This is what's happening to your medical industry. Let's be clear. They want the Supreme Court to tell you, stop thinking, you're a fool, you're an idiot, do what your boss says. This is a bureaucracy. This is not help. This is not your investigation. You can't be trusted. That's what this is really about. and doctors should be coming out against this article.

Absolutely. And so what's the public left to do? So you have a very system that's broken. You have a basically a journalist class that wants to silence your entire medical community and the doctors. And you also have a legal class that wants to do that. And they have no problem doing that. So you're left with this.

You're left with, wow, strange, vaccine hesitancy. So here's out of a JAMA publication that just came out, making headlines, looking at exemptions, non-medical vaccine exemptions are increasing. That's for children. And here's the University of Michigan poll. Why aren't more older adults getting the flu or COVID shots? And it goes into this infographic here.

About a third of them almost say they don't think they need it. And then I guess we're doing our job for people to question these vaccines and the terrible science that underpins them. A lot of people are worried about side effects. A lot of people don't believe the vaccine is effective. So safety, efficacy, you see that. And then some people didn't even cross their mind. Didn't think of it. Didn't even think of it.

So people are just living in bliss, didn't even know vaccines existed, I guess. But the bottom line here, yeah, the bottom line, one of the bills that is going through, I did a show last week with Don Richardson from MVIC and talking about all the bills, over 700 plus vaccine-related bills, just showing this push-pull that's happening in the United States right now. One of the most really, I think, loved bills is this one here, Rand Paul S-3853. And this is to, this is the article that was written on this bill. Hold Big Pharma Accountable Vax Giants are sure to be nervous about Ram Paul's new bill. This ends the liability exemption.

So they're allowing individuals to sue farmer. This is in Congress. This is at the federal level. They're trying to just exit this, this bad idea out at this point for people that trying to sue or trying to get damages for harms or deaths. They want people to actually be able to do, like any other product in the United States. So that's what Ram Paul is doing. And again, I don't think you can find really anybody on the street that would think this is a bad idea.

This bill cuts across political lines. It cuts across all types of ideologies in America. It aligns a lot of people behind it. So this seems like this may have some win behind it. Well, we should all be watching any individual that votes against this push by Rand Paul to put liability back on the manufacturer. If you believe in these products, if you're lining up for 72 of these things, it should bother you that they want to be able to injure you and not be sued. Because remember, they injured you with drugs every day. All those side effects that are written, they get lawsuits all the time.

They pull drugs all the time and the industry survives. What is it about vaccines they don't want to just sit on the same playing field as drugs? Honestly, ask yourself that. And if they push back against this, Jeffrey, the world has changed and we keep talking about all the winds. This is massive. Can you imagine if we managed to see the 86 Act taken down and liability put back on the manufacturers so that vaccines enter a free market system, which is the heart of how America works, how a republic works, how a democracy works. It's amazing we're in this position, but, you know, prayers and everybody. you should be ringing your representatives off the hook that if you do not support this bill that Rand Paul's put forward,

then I will never trust you again, and I will never vote for you again. Yeah, it definitely is a unifying concept. And talk about there's a lot of other topics that are just swirling around our society that are extremely unifying. You're not going to find a lot of people that are going to go against this.

One of them is massive surveillance by our government into our personal lives. Not a lot of people say, I want more of that. And this was something that was tried to be pushed, not by government, but during a Super Bowl commercial, by one of the key companies that's doing it. Take a look.

This is Milo. Pets are family. But every year, 10 million go missing. And the way we look for them hasn't changed in years. Until now. One post of a dog's photo in the Ring app starts outdoor cameras looking for a match. Search party from Ring uses AI to help families

find lost dogs. Since launch, more than a dog a day has been reunited with their family. Be a hero in your neighborhood with Search Party. Available to everyone for free right now. Join the neighborhood at rain.com. Boy, slippery little slope we're on. Yeah, and a lot of people were up in arms about that because you can see it's hop, skip, and jumping away from repurposing that for mass surveillance. And, you know, today, a dog, tomorrow, an anti-vaxxer, or maybe someone that broke curfew because of a lockdown. It's not hard to imagine.

So almost immediately, after that commercial, this is what the news look like. It's the Super Bowl ad sparking controversy. Some critics see it as a shocking level of surveillance. The home security company Ring promoting a feature that scans footage from ring cameras in your neighborhood. The ad said to find lost dogs. The AI detection feature called Search Party would have allowed homeowners to share camera footage with neighbors, drew backlash and stoked fears over mass surveillance. Some people online questioning if the feature could also be used to search for people.

Critics vowing to stop using the company's products altogether. As of today, I no longer use ring doorbells. Take your ring camera off, get rid of it. Get rid of ring, go to a new company. Ring camera ain't it? Ring says the feature was built, quote, with strong privacy protections from the start, saying it can find only lost dogs and has no capability to find. people. Critics say this is essentially private companies creating Big Brother and then convincing us to opt in.

But with the cost of a Super Bowl ad roughly at about $8 million this year for Ring, the cost may end up being a little bit higher. You know, Jeffrey, these are the things that really inspire me. When I see regular people probably that don't watch the highwire, some of them, maybe some of them do. But when you just start seeing society starting to reject the things we should all. be rejected, things we should really be terrified of. I remember, I don't know if you remember a couple years ago on one of the, I think it was one of the defeat the mandate stages. Robert Kennedy Jr. got into a lot of trouble making comparison to Nazi Germany and saying if the Nazis had the technologies we have now, there would be no hiding in an attic. You're not going to be able to hide anywhere. This is exactly. I think about this. And to think that, you know, people like, it's outrageous

what he's saying. Really? Can you imagine if every camera everywhere, can you imagine what Nazis would have been able to do with that technology. And I always say, I think when we look at any government, no matter where, and we're seeing worldwide right now, these governments, you elect the wrong person, something moves the wrong direction, where you get someone that really, truly is, out of their mind, and these technologies are at their fingertips? Do you know how quickly things can go wrong for a society, for a nation? This is a really, really big deal. And I hope people really think about how they interact with these products right now, because I'm getting a little tired of saying, oh, it's unstoppable.

It's unstoppable if you keep buying these things and using them. That's right. And the boycott is alive and well. It's very powerful. And I want to take one of those points that they said in that news article or the news package there. And they said, Ring has no capability to find people. This is just for dogs. Well, explain this headline then.

an Amazon ring to introduce facial recognition on doorbells and cams by December. Right. So we got that going. So it does have the ability to do that. And so you're seeing this. You're seeing, they're selling under the guys that we're going to find your fluffy dog. But you're looking around the world, unfortunately, we have media from around the world. We can see headlines coming out of, I don't know, the UK that look like this.

Police start live facial recognition trial at London train stations. Here's another one. alien states expand facial recognition and biometric digital ID systems. So they're doing it in the government there and throughout the police forces there. But here in the United States, we do have protections. Here's kind of a synopsis. There's almost 20 states that have biometric protections, meaning you can't allow these companies to take your biometric information, your face, your gate, your body. They can't take these. They can't store them. There's a lot of different types of ways this is written up in the law. But the bottom line is that,

these companies don't own your biometric information, and they can't just take it without your informed consent. So that's the huge legal area this opens up, because that's exactly what these companies are doing. They're scanning the entire neighborhood. You're outside your entire front door. People are walking by. It's picking up conversations of people on the street that people are not consenting to. Huge issues. But it's being here directed in the United States by massive, massive billion-dollar companies. And Amazon's one of them, but the other one is meta. So meta, they're trying to take it off your door and stick it on your face with glasses. Here's New York Times. Meta plans to add facial recognition technology to its

smart glasses. But listen to this. It says the feature internally called name tag would let wearers of smart glasses identify people and get information about them via Meta's artificial intelligence assistant. So you can imagine if people are doing that, meta is definitely doing that. Their internal system is definitely taking all of that information, just like they did with their past technologies on Facebook. So it goes on and say this. The document, this is an internal document in New York Times looked at from May, describes plans to first release name tag to attendees of a conference for the blind, which the company

did not do last year before making it available to the general public. Meta's internal memo said the political tumult in the United States was good timing for the features release. They said this, we will launch during a dynamic political environment where many civil society groups that we would expect to attack us would have that. resources focused on other concerns that's according to meta's reality lab so again hey let's let's use this stuff to find dogs that'll sell it to the public let's let's release these ad glasses during a conference for the blind now forget that let's just ram it down people's throats well well all these

NGOs that would attack us because they're worried about privacy and biometric data being taken by the government they're they're busy because this is a politically crazy year so let's just go with it and that's that's what meta did. But so interesting because we have the internet, we can do a basic search engine. Here's a New York Times article from 2021, Facebook citing societal concerns plans to shut down facial recognition systems. So what happened in five years? It says Facebook plans to shut down its decades-old facial recognition system this month, deleting the face scan data of more than one billion users and effectively eliminating a feature that has fueled privacy concerns, government investigations, class acts and lawsuit, and regulatory woes. And you go to Facebook,

Facebook's blog posts that made that headline in 2021. Listen what Facebook itself said. They said every new technology brings with it potential for both benefit and concern. And we want to find the right balance. Okay. In the case of facial recognition, its long-term role in society needs to be debated in the open and among those who will be most impacted by it. Well, or just rush to the finish line during a politically crazy year and forget about the blind people.

Let's just massively get this product out. because people are going to attack us, but they're busy right now with looking the other way. Is that open debate? I'm not sure. But right now, as we speak, Mark Zuckerberg just got done testifying in trial. This was yesterday in Los Angeles.

Zuckerberg forced to defend Meta's action towards kids in front of a jury trial. So it's not just facial recognition. It's actually the practices of Facebook. You've judged them by their fruits. Internal memos have shown that they've allowed sexual predators on their platform. Obviously, the algorithms are fueling mental health situations,

even their own internal scientific documents. Research showed that. And it's really kind of fascinating just to wrap this up, that Mark Zuckerberg's own entourage had some of these meta glasses on, and the judge actually had to say this in court. Judge during Zuckerberg testimony, don't record using metaglasses in court. They basically threaten to hold them in contempt of court if anybody was trying to tape this using their metaglases or record it.

So that's the state of meta right now. Zuckerberg's on trial for all these issues. They're trying to force facial recognition and biometric scanning. You have Amazon ringed doorbells, basically it's carpeting your whole neighborhood and mass surveillance. This is moving really fast. And in the U.S., it's coming from the corporate angle, the manufactured corporate angle, as opposed to top-down government control. It's really scary because, I mean, I know there's people who say what, you know,

I'm not breaking the loss of what difference does it make. It's a total, it's the total loss of privacy. It's an inability to walk in your world and just be left alone or just be, have a day that's quietly to yourself to grow grocery shopping. We watch how superstars from Hollywood sometimes go crazy over the amount of attention on them, they can't go out in public anymore. They get paid huge amounts of money to buy islands, but we can't all buy islands. What happens if those glasses start saying,

Trump voter, Biden voter, or Catholic or Jewish, you know, all of those things so that now you're wearing things that used to be privately yours, gay, straight, whatever. Why is that somebody walking by's information to have on you? These things are really, they're going to have such massive implications on what it means to be human. Frankly, I mean, I think a lot of people, things that that would be held to have no privacy anywhere you go. And yet, and again, I think, Jeffrey, as we get deeper and we're starting to really cover these issues, and it's fascinating, right? Because we always started with the informed consent action network, was about pharmaceutical products. That's what's got us in here.

And I guess on what you're spraying on our crops, but the fact that it's informed consent that may be the only thing protecting us from surveillance right now. So this term is now, we're being dragged, Jeffrey, right now into these conversations around AI, around surveillance because it's the heart of what we believe in. A free people must have a right to consent to the world that they live in and the things that are done to them and the things that are known about them. Otherwise, we are not free and we are losing the freedom that we grew up with. We're going to leave our children a prison if we do not really get focused right now. Really great reporting, Jeffrey. Now, of course, you have a brand new segment dropping, first segment of a new part of your series,

the Great American Food Fight. It just dropped this Sunday. Boy, with Bobby Kennedy out there talking about food, and he's on a tour with real food, and everyone's putting tattoos on their faces because Mike Tyson is supporting it. But tell me, what is your angle? What is it you cover in episode

in this first segment of this documentary series? Yeah, we try to give people the entire picture, the snapshot from start to finish, pretty much over the past century, of how our food system got so bad. Why are our kids so sick? And also, what are the latest issues? We kind of chronicled all of what Kennedy and Maha

and Brooke Rollins have done, but we also bring it right up to the editing up until last week, right before we put this out, because so much is breaking. But again, so much is still breaking. We sat down with Zen Honeycut Moms Across America there to talk about all of the issues surrounding glyphosate, which is really relevant right now

because just last night, an executive order came out that it seems like everyone's talking about right now. And this is it right here, promoting the national defense by ensuring an adequate supply of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides. So this puts United States-based production of glyphosate-based herbicides as central to economic economy and national security. So this is dangerous for a lot of reasons. First and foremost, it's because industry talking points have now been directly written into an executive order on glyphosate. Now, a search of this, I was searching kind of all morning doing a lot of research on the, because I'm seeing a lot of conversations about blanket legal immunity.

It's under the Defense Production Act. So that's what this whole heading is about production of this. So while this is not a positive in any way, it doesn't seem to give blanket immunity from manufacturers like Bear. It basically just, it does not give them immunity from the personal injury, the tort claims, the damage from their products. It basically gives a limited immunity, from my understanding, to basically the production, so the contracts, the deliverability of this. Again, it's still not positive. The Trump administration, let's be honest, is making this a national security issue. This stockpile must be protected. It's not very protected if it can be sued.

This is a really, really bad sign, Jeff. We're going to have to track this. But again, for people that wanted to know how the 1986 Vaccine Injury Compensation Act happened, this is exactly why they did it with vaccines. They made it a national security issue. We need to be able to inject you, make vaccines overnight. We won't be able to do that if you don't protect us from liability. It's the same track, everybody. We're watching this play happen all over again.

And really, unfortunately, I'm sure, you know, Bobby Kennedy's rolling over in his bed right now in the middle of Washington, D.C. I can't imagine what it's like to be in the middle of that. But we've got a new, the first segment. So let's take a look at the Great American Food Fight. Take a look at this. For the last 50 years, American children have increasingly been living in a toxic soup of synthetic chemicals. Today marks the beginning of restoring the trust at the FDA and our regulatory institutions. Since 2012, the United States has seen no increase in life expectancy.

That's how I was raised on processed food, and it was detrimental to my health. I am a mom, and my kids were sick. You went from starting a blog to affecting change at multi-billion-dollar food corporations, Chick-fil-A, Subway, Starbucks, Kellogg's, General Mills. The majority of foods on the grocery store's shelf in fast food is dead. John Harvey Kellogg invents Kellogg's cornflakes. This was literally an anti-mastipatorial tool. for the church. You have to look at the ingredients and you have to know what you're eating.

A teacher came to me first week and said, I have never, ever had the kids with this amount of attention in the afternoon after lunch. This is a community issue. Everybody needs to know about GMOs and eat organic and be able to be healthy and to be able to reproduce someday. Something is wrong with our food. I've read a lot of studies about glyphosate and they all do not look good. It kills off everything. that it touches. When Michelle Obama gets on national TV and partners with Subway for the Let's Move campaign, Subway is stepping up to provide even more healthy choices for our families. My jaw is on the floor and I'm going, wait a minute, she doesn't even know the truth.

Something happened in 1971 that flipped all the incentive systems, the most consequential cover-up of the last century. or gold standard science so we know it's in our food and we can eliminate it. I want to, you know, just point out that Highwire Plus has been designed for all of you that support the work that we do. So many of you don't recognize that we're not just an online news program. In fact, some people would say I'm breaking the rules of news because we become advocates then for the issues that we see in this world and we try to bring lawsuits. We try to do deeper dives on the work that we're doing.

So Jeffrey Jackson investigates is one of our ways of giving back to those of you that have really been helping us do this work, really helping save children's lives, bringing back, you know, opt-out options out of the vaccine program for those being forcibly vaccinated around this country. So this is a really great segment, but it's a great time to sign up.

We don't care how much. I just want to see you engaged. I want to see you become a recurring donor. Just engage yourself in process. Watch what your life feels like when you don't just sit there and judge the world or watch it go by or glad everyone else is taking care of it. Your life changes the moment you become actively involved. You'll watch that your skepticism and your fear of the world around you starts to shift because you know the world that you live in. You know, we believe what we see, but we also see what we believe.

And if we are not involved in our lives, then we must assume nobody else is either and we're all screwed. It's why I have a very positive attitude. I'll be honest with you. I feel like there's hope because I know how hard I'm working to bring hope. I know the world as I see it through the lens that I'm experiencing. Our legal team is perpetually at work. We have 90 cases across this country right now. They're expensive. We're in real live courtrooms with real live lawyers, really spending lots of that money you never want to find your

in the courtroom. It's only possible, this fight is only possible if you become a sponsor or donate to the work that we're doing. We had a legal breaking news on something a lot of you don't realize we're investigating right now, which is geoengineering. I can document show us government funded the holy grail of geoengineering research. So we're really starting to hone in on this. I think we've got an excerpt from it. Thanks to Freedom of Information Act requests, submitted by our legal team, I can is uncovering who is funding geoengineering research and why. According to one disturbing grant obtained by ICANN, the National Science Foundation, awarded nearly $400,000 in 2021 to Cornell and Indiana University scientists who claimed to be able to achieve the, as they put it,

holy grail of geoengineering research by determining exactly what geoengineering can and cannot do. It goes on to say they devise tailorable plug and play injection choices, depending on climate goals and ironically named them degrees of freedom. Wow. So where did they discuss injecting the atmosphere? The Arctic. Their Arctic-focused SAI strategy explored using aircraft to inject aerosols of the Arctic at lower altitudes because they believed it was plausible to do so with currently existing aircraft

without need to develop new ones. This is a, I don't think any of us are saying this is a shocking discovery. And I think some of you are like, geez, what's taking so long? You know, this is, I would say in some ways, this geoengineering investigation that we've been on now for several years due to some really incredible sponsors that make it happen, this is harder than vaccines. It's been pretty easy to do FOIA requests and find out that the CDC, never did the study that they were talking about and having them admit it's been pretty easy

to find the trials that they never did like the placebo-based trials they say existed that don't exist we know what we're looking for we know what's happening there we know who's the heart of it because they injected into our kids this is so much more elusive because it's being injected into our skies by who is it military is it government is it private who's the enemy on this So when we, you know, we're constantly putting out FOIA request to try and it's a bit like battleship. You've ever played that game where you're like A1, okay? How about G4 until finally you hit something? We're over a target now, everybody.

We're starting to hone in. This is one of the bigger discoveries that we've had is we try to figure out who, what, where, when, and why. Not to get you alarmed, not to, you know, sell tickets, essentially, but to be. be able to win in a courtroom. That is what is key to the work that we do. We don't just look at raising alarm or seeing a problem, which a lot of podcasters out there and a lot of people can do. We're trying to find the way that we can win. How can we get into a courtroom and stop this? If you think about it, think about geoengineering, right? There was two states that passed no geoengineering laws, okay? But they have a problem. Have you seen the lies in those lines in I think Florida was one of the

States, do they still see those lines in their sky and what's going on? Like, what's happening? Why hasn't that stopped? Well, maybe the approach was wrong. Because you can say no more geoengineering, but now you have a problem. You've got to prove what I'm looking at is geoengineering. So we're still missing a step. And so those are the steps that we don't just go out there.

We're trying to find the step, the language, the way forward that actually ends something, not just makes us feel good because we passed a bill that achieved. nothing. So these things are complicated issues. When you look at one of the most complication is complicated issues there's ever been, it's been vaccines and we've been very effective at it because of your support. So I hope right now if you're like I want the best team there is that doesn't just give in it you know a big slogan but figures out how to win in courtrooms become a recurring donor. For 2026 we're asking for $26 a month. It really makes a difference. You can donate to

I can at the top of any of the websites you're looking at, become a recurring donor. This helps us understand how much funding we're bringing in, how many lawsuits can we take on. Should we continue to investigate geoengineering? Is this something that the audience cares about? If you care about it, we can really use your help right now. If you're listening to a podcast right now, we'll make it easy for you. Just text the number 72022 and write in the word donate. And I'm going to respond directly to you with a way that.

you can immediately start being a part of our team. This is the informed consent action network. You are our network. We're all working together on this. And I don't know if you've been paying attention. We're kind of running out of time on some of this stuff. We have a globalist world order that seems to be taking down all the rest of the world. I'm going to talk about my trip to Europe coming up later.

But for everyone that sponsors the work that we do, for all the achievements, all the legal wins, I know you know how good this feels. Just know everywhere I'm going in the world, they're thanking us for what we're doing, and you're the ones making that possible. Okay. I want to get into, you know, it's an interesting thing to decide to be a podcaster,

to decide to try and have a voice, especially in a world where there is so much controversy and conflict. What makes someone do that? What are the important issues of our time of this moment? What are the things we are talking about? Are we missing some of the right conversations? I wanted to get into that with some of the top sort of influencers, thought leaders, whatever title you want to give them. So we're about to have a really super awesome roundtable conversation. So the first person I want to bring out is Alex Zek, is the host of the top performing podcast.

One of the biggest ones in the world, The Way Forward. He's a well-known for his conversations around health and holistic leaving free. personal sovereignty. If you don't know who Alex Zag is, take a look at this. The man himself, Alex Zack. Alex Zack. The Host of the Alternative Health Podcast, The Way Forward, with an amazing medical freedom warrior,

independent researcher, former US Army captain. Because I never planned to do what I'm doing right now. My wife actually played an instrumental role in my awakening, so to speak. My wife had been diagnosed with lupus and rheumatoid arthritis nine years prior. nine years prior. Matter of four months, had reversed all of our autoimmune conditions. And all we did was start eating organic food.

I started doing a deep dive on all things, pharmaceuticals. The whole COVID trade happened in this will no doubt be used for mandatory vaccines for all people. This is going to be pretty bad. I just felt so compelled to speak despite being a captain in the army at the time. It felt natural to start a podcast after that. My podcast somehow has evolved to be one of the top 0.5% of the top. of all audio podcasts in the world.

When we look at what happened in 2020, yes, it was a traumatic experience. Yes, there was a lot of uncertainty, but if you recognized it as a possibility for being a catalyst, get deeper in your connection with God, the creator, your help. It helped me understand the richness of life. It can tie back every single time that I, quote, get sick

to a time that I was perpetually stressed or having, being inundated with too many metaphysical. talks every single time. We don't fix the existing system by fighting it. We fix it by making the old system obsolete. Alec, thank you for joining me today. You got a really successful thing going on. And I guess I'm sure a lot of young people come up to you, like how do I get to be a podcast? Or, you know, how are you so successful? When you think about this experience that you've been on, And why, what is it you think you're doing that is getting you so much attention, is making this such a success?

I think it's two things. I think one is that I'm a layman that is speaking about topics that are typically spoken by people who have degrees and certifications and things like this. I think the second thing, and this is the biggest thing, is that I'm just speaking what I'm authentically passionate about speaking about that I think is important. And am I perfect at that? Absolutely not, but that's my guidepost. That's, you know, what I strive to do is just be the authentic version of myself

and express that openly as best I can, even get vulnerable on my show sometimes, you know. I think creating that container, especially within the context of my podcast, invites a lot of my guests that come on to share some depth that they may have not shared otherwise and some other shows that they've been on. So at the top of my mind, I think those are the two things that pop up. I'm looking forward to having an authentic conversation here today. All right. So also on this panel today, Dr. Ben Tapper is a chiropractor and a health commentator who gained national attention during the COVID-19 pandemic, pandemic, whatever you want to call it. He was named one of the disinformation dozen that was called out by the Center for Countering Digital Hate,

which we've talked about a lot on this show. But if you haven't been watching Ben Tapper, take a look at this. good friend Dr. Ben Tapper. He's with the wellness company. He was also on the disinformation doesn't. It's an honor to be speaking to one of the original Darchy doesn't. That's an accolade. He's someone who seeks to undermine vaccines full stock. Chiropractor in Omaha Brands got responsible for 65% of the anti-vaccine misinformation. Put what I say to the test. Just don't write you off as crazy misinformation. These masks have absolutely nothing to do with health, but

everything to do with the complying with a false flag tyrannical agenda. If we sacrifice our precious freedoms for temporary security, we will lose both. The reason why I was on that list is because they were afraid of men who are unafraid to bend in need, who saw through all this propaganda and corruption. Big Pharma spends 19 times more on advertisements than they do research. Americans make up 5% of the world population, but yet we consume more drugs than the rest of the world combined. How many vaccines are they going to get away with before? the people say enough is enough and before there's some accountability with with big pharma the truth's on our side the soil for truth is rich right now and we need to be fighting back

with everything we have Ben thank you for joining me it's as far as i can reach today did you start in COVID is that when you started part together were you podcasting before that so we started after COVID but we actually it all started back when i campaign for Ron Paul back in in 2012, he was speaking out against the swine flu vaccine. I grew up in a basically a household where I was never vaccinated, nor were my siblings. Are your parents a chiropractors? My dad's a chiropractor.

Oh, okay, yeah. He was a practice of 43 years. And then we saw, we started Nebraska's for medical freedom in 2015. We saw a lot of draconian bills kind of leading up to COVID. And so that's, you know, we saw a lot of bills in the World Health Organization in 2019. You know, they said that, you know,

the greatest threat are those who are unvaccinated who question vaccines. Then you have the ACIP in 2019. state, you know, they can't force vaccination upon the people, but they can force compliance. And with all these bills coming in, this is why we say this was the great pandemic. So we saw this coming. And so we started the podcast here just two years ago. Wow, fantastic. And just, you know, also what's interesting with the chiropractor background, I mean, a history of really being under attack by the AMA.

Chiropractic has fought for its existence several times here. So this was also not unique to your family if your father, you know, you know, came out of that space. Right. You know, like you said, this whole thing, what made chiropractic sprout a hundred years ago was the same soil that's rich today because if you look at the writings of the developer of chiropractic, B.J. Palmer, who is the founder's son. He wrote an article back 100 years ago during the Spanish flu titled A few fearful physicians forced funny flu virulets for a few frenzied folks, right?

A poet, too. Yes, a poet too. But we talked about how there was so much manipulation of data during the Spanish flu, how they used virtue signaling with the mask. They talked about experimental influenza vaccination coming our way. He spoke out against it, and that's really what put chiropractic on the map,

because he had the courage to speak out during times of oppression when the world was gone crazy 100 years ago. And so COVID was literally out of that same playbook. And so this is why it's important. And so I don't think it was by accident that when I took my staff to Palmer in Davenport, Iowa, 10 years ago, I got that article that he wrote wrote that article that talked about the manipulation of data, the corruption with the

medical tyranny, the people that went to chiropractic route had zero deaths during Spanish flu. And the people that went to the medical route, they had a high number of deaths because of the protocols. And so what do we see during COVID? It was the same song and dance that we saw during the Spanish flu. Amazing. All right, we're getting some of the details around that.

My other guest today is Katie Collins. She's a board-certified physician's assistant and a health influencer that's really, really skyrocketing right now for all those parents asking questions about wellness, about vaccines, about disease, all those things. Really understandable, great short videos for all of us with that sort of short attention span space. I was really blown away, having fun. Actually, in the middle of the night, I just couldn't stop going through them as I was preparing for this. This is Kate Collins. Have you ever left your doctor's office more confused than you were before you got there? Are you more likely to die from cervical cancer or from one of the side effects of Gardasil?

This is one of the most controversial things that I've talked about. So let's talk circumcision. Let's chat about it. Let's chat about it. Let's chat about it. I'm a conventionally trained physician assistant, but also kind of a crunchy mom. I put in hours of research because informed consent is such a complex conversation. Hesitancy when you're putting anything in your body is important. I'm fired up because it is the first time in 20 years, that a vaccine has been taken off the childhood vaccine schedule.

Big news. The vaccine court just ruled a SIDS death, sudden infant death syndrome, as vaccine-induced encephalopathy. There are, you know, no placebo-controlled trials with any inert placebo. It's usually all the ingredients that are in vaccines. Aluminum formaldehyne, bovine serum protein.

We wanted to create a space for moms of all sorts to get factual, unbiased information to help you make the health decisions you need to for your families. Because we all know that doctors only have about 10 to 15 minutes to spare with you, and that is not enough time to give you true informed consent. If you are a medical provider, I am calling you out. Doctors, nurses, pharmacists, medical providers need to be educated because the health of our kids depends on it. Katie, thank you for joining me today. Thanks for having me.

What inspired you to, you know, take your work and say, I'm going to hop online and really, frankly, start challenging. I think what we would all say is one of the most powerful, horrifying industries in the world, pharma, mainstream medicine. You're finding a very balanced space in there, but why do it? I, you know, I have a lot of friends who are just having kids, and I just recently, my daughter's two and a half, my son is one and a half. And when I chose not to vaccinate my kids, I got a lot of questions from just my family and friends on why I was doing that. And it prompted me and I got a lot of encouragement from my family. Just be like, hey, you should try this. People have questions about these things.

You should put up information about this. And so I kind of just did it as I saw a little bit of need just in my local circle. And it's blown up way more than I ever thought it would. That's how those things go. Did you guys, you know, just starting out, Alec, did you start out with an image that you're going to be a big sensation? Was that a driving force? No. Absolutely not.

I just felt so convicted to share what I had come to understand. I mean, I started waking up, so to speak, in 2016 right after, as you saw in the sizzle reel, my mom and then also my wife drastically healed from conditions that traditional allopathic medicine. that they would always be sick from and my mom almost died as a result of that and then after adopting a very natural approach to health both began to heal and my wife drastically healed from quote autoimmune conditions so by the time 2020 came around i'd already done extensive research on a lot of things i just never shared it but i was so upset at what was going on especially because i was an officer in the army and seeing everyone around me comply with just mindless nonsense so i just started speaking and you know as dr larry plevsky one of my mentors says

I followed the proverbial bouncing ball of life and ended up here sitting in the studio. I mean, that was something that like when I started the high wire, people come to me, I always think one of the issues we have is when we talk about the paralysis of analysis, so many people come up to me like, I want to create a whole new health system or blah, blah, blah. I was like, why don't you start with like a clinic? You know what I mean? And I think podcast, people that they want it to be big. How am I going to be big?

How did you make it big? And for me, it literally was I was on somebody else's podcast in a podcast studio in Hollywood talking about Vaxed and the work that I was doing. And I got done and the guy that owned the podcast studio said, you should have your own podcast. I was like, oh, that's great. You know, thank you.

I appreciate it. It's really flattering. And he blocked the door. And he said, I am serious. I'm not going to let you leave. And pick a time. I have several studios and several openings. pick a time and come back next week and do a podcast.

And I was like, all right, what the heck. And so it started that way. And I remember, and I had a couple people, Patrick Layton and Kat. Layton was our company was just three people, really, and we would sit there and come up with a show and, you know, one little camera. But I remember thinking the same thing you thought, which is, I'm just going to tell the truth. I'm just going to tell the truth as I find it.

And whoever cares to hear it, then so be it. this is going to be what's going to be. Was it any different for you when you jumped in? Well, so for me, like Alex said, convictions, you know, we had, Omaha was one of the last cities to have a mask mandate. Okay. And so, you know, being vocal, I had a chiropractic practice at the time. I had, I did not think ever that I was going to be sitting on your show one day or do this for publicity or prosperity. Again, I always say that my convictions were greater than my fear of persecution. My convictions were greater than my complacency. We saw a massive corruption. We saw a massive manipulation of data. I believe this whole thing was spiritual and psychological warfare on the people. So, you know,

I went down to speak and I attribute the good Lord above because I prayed, Lord, let my words travel far and wide. I said, you know, turn me into a line. I spoke passionately at the hearing, the mask hearing that you played here. You know, nobody knew who I was prior to that video going viral. I spoke passionately, went home, put the kids to bed and I said to myself, oh my goodness, what did I do? Because that video is going viral and I didn't sleep. because I watched that video accumulate hundreds of thousands of views overnight, and by the next day, within 24 hours, had millions of views. And I'm a living testimony of the saying that we never know how far reaching something we may think, say,

or do today will affect the lives of millions tomorrow. And I'm living proof of that. You're here. All of us here are living proof of that. Why? Because we act on our convictions. You know, and that's what the time right now is very rich, because the people are starving for what we have to offer. They're starving for what we have to say. And so, and the time is now.

Katie, there's a, I saw a poll recently done where they're saying that 60% of parents in America are now saying that they are going to skip at least one vaccine, that there are, like, vaccine, what we call it, hesitancy, as is an all-time high. We saw some polls today discussing that. Are you seeing that from your perspective in the work that you're doing as a physician's assistant and your friends, young families out there. Are these numbers, do you think they're as big as they sound like they might be? Absolutely, from my point of view, honestly. And I think it's just a testament that the mantra of safe and effective is tired.

People are tired of hearing that, and they're starving, like Ben said, for information that's different than that. Whether it be good or bad, I mean, parents are really well-rounded in my view. A lot of my audience are following different people on either side and just wondering what is actually true. And so I think these conversations are great. Like the fact that these conversations, especially about vaccinations and the childhood schedule, they've been censored for over 40 years. I mean, you could not speak a word about any of this. Or you'd be called a quack. You get your license taken away.

There was so many consequences. And now here I am a mom of two, like just in my house and making videos about this. And I haven't luckily experienced any repercussions yet. And that's because we thank the good Lord for free speech in America now, right? And it's something that we cannot take for granted and we need to fight for. And that's why parents are asking questions. I mean, parents need to ask questions. We were never taught to question our doctors, but they're people too.

And there's foundations for medicine and how it's taught. And we need to start asking questions more about that. There's probably no person that more represents this idea of questioning vaccinations and Robert Kennedy Jr. I think we all in agreement. He's probably the biggest figure in that space. So, you know, what are your thoughts as, you know, people that have kids? we're seeing this conversation going on. What do you think of Robert Kennedy Jr. as HHS secretary?

Good thing, bad thing, doing great, not doing enough. Alec, what are your thoughts as you sort of look at the state of America, Robert Kennedy Jr. in a position like he's in? Yeah, so I would consider myself what's called a voluntarist. That's like hyper-libertarianism, if you will. So if there is a role for someone to come into government, it's to completely dismantle any corruption and tyranny within government. And I think most effectively, though, by him being the Secretary of HHS, it is now brought many of these conversations that were happening behind closed doors where people were scared to speak out into the mainstream. And that's what we see the real world results of is 60% of parents are now going to at least skip one vaccination.

I think the greatest effect, because I'm very skeptical myself of government in its entirety, is that it is causing the people who have the real power to question things and then no longer spend their money or their time on many of these things that we have come to understand are not healthy or are corrupt or toxic or tyrannical. Ben, chiropractic, I mean, I worked with Bobby. A lot of the film backs I make was funded by chiropractic. So I know he's been in your circles in that, you know, that support. What do you think of the job that he's doing where he's at right now?

So I love Bobby. I think he's doing a phenomenal job like Alex said. He's bringing that conversation to the forefront, you know, and so I think that's much needed. But what I want to see happen, I want to see the Vaccine Compensation Act eradicated. Okay. We need to promote medical freedom because we don't have medical freedom here. We have a medical dictatorship at our doorstep. And if we stay complacent, if we just trust government officials with their health,

we're going to let them in the door. So I'm with Alec. I side with him on the, I don't trust our government. I actually side with Thomas Jefferson who said that originally, that we can't trust our government if the people let the government decide what foods they eat, what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in a sorry state as those souls who live in our tyranny. I'm very thankful for the work that he's doing. I support him 100 percent and he's doing doing big things here.

And so I don't ever want to take that away because he's going against the Goliath. He's going against a Goliath and now's not the time to over-criticize him. Now is the time to support him, to encourage him to go after, continue the fight that he's in because this is a fight that we're all in together.

And I know the Bible even says, divided we fall. And if we try to get divided more now than ever and over-criticize him, then it's gonna be a problem. But again, we can't just blindly trust the government when it comes to our health. But he is doing good things with the food pyramid

and raising awareness on the vaccine topic. So I endorse him. Fantastic for you with, how is Bobby viewed by young people, young parents? Is it, I mean, he's kind of, I mean, he's a different generation. I don't know that they grew up watching him as an environmentalist.

So, you know, there's a, there's sort of this guy, I mean, in many ways he kind of appears out of nowhere. Is there an awareness of him? You know, I didn't know who he was before he came, like you know started campaigning but I will say he definitely is making an impact and I think people appreciate that a secretary of health and human services actually looks like a healthy person and is says he's a dude and that's kind of very important um so I I do not envy his job at all I mean he is doing I completely echo what my friends here are saying he is doing incredible

incredible things, bringing this conversation to the forefront. And I really think it is affecting young mothers. They are listening. And I think so many young moms, maybe not my age, maybe a little bit older than me, were the first ones to come to him saying there's thimerosol in vaccines. You're the environmentalist. You need to recognize that these are actually in products that we're injecting into our children. So really, mothers were the first people to get RFK going, which is really, really cool. I think that he is doing an incredible job. The one thing I would say is take the COVID vaccine off the market. That's kind of, and I think that's a pretty common sentiment among, at least my audience. But I also recognize the government is a house of cards and he has to

really play the game. And I don't envy his job at all. I think he's doing a great job. What do you guys think of, I mean, moving to essentially the Denmark schedule, dropping 54 shots down to about 23 shots. Where does that sit? I guess I think, let's look at it this way. I feel like every day he's there is sort of borrowed time. It's like someone that skips getting killed and just says, I feel like every day is borrowed time. with what he's doing, if every day could potentially be his last, is that going to be enough? I think it's a step in the right direction, don't get me wrong, like to decrease it down to the

Denmark schedule, but what I always come back to, and that's the same with the conversation we'll get into later, is where's the foundational empirical evidence for this claim? For example, the claim that vaccines are safe and effective is a broad sweeping claim, but when we apply that to either the entire schedule itself or to any individual vaccine, we know that COVID vaccine aside, for the entire childhood schedule, that's not true because there's no double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial for the entire schedule itself or for any individual vaccine. And then when we take it even a step further, just as an example, with something like aluminum adjuvants that are in shots, the claim that those are safe to be administered in vaccines

ultimately stems from two primary papers, if I remember correctly. And one of them, you look at it, and four rabbits, adult rabbits, were injected with aluminum, and it was just a biodistribution study, seeing how much was then expelled from those rabbits, and then they took the data from that and then extrapolated based on ingested aluminum, how much with the rabbit injected aluminum, kind of came up with this algorithm model,

ingested aluminum in adults, and that's how they came to the determination that this was safe to be injected into children multiple times throughout their adolescence and into adulthood. And so when we look at those foundational claims, There is no empirical evidence for them. So that's what I ultimately go back to, but I guess I would consider myself a peerist rather than a pragmatist, if you will.

And that's okay. We need people coming at all angles. And again, it is a step in the right direction, though? Ben, is it dangerous to say that these vaccines are okay? I'm moving these ones. Is it potentially even more harmful that it starts saying there's a group that Bobby Kennedy even signed off on these vaccines? So I cited the Supreme Court what they stated in 2011 when they said all vaccines were unavoidly to be on. safe. I was never vaccinated as a kid, okay, nor were my siblings. I never vaccinated my kids.

I don't believe that these vaccines are safe and effective. I think that's a bumper sticker slogan to get people to stop asking questions. The science has not settled clearly. So I believe that these vaccines really are a violation of how God made the immune system. Okay, they go in an outside source through the skin barrier, the CDC, the ACIP, all these people say it takes two weeks to create antibodies to that certain vaccine. That is not true. We know that inflammation is part of the antibody process as part of the immune system. We have, you know, different antibodies that are firing initially in that first two weeks before their teeter or antibody that they're looking for is triggered. So it is a violation of our immune system. If you were to look at every single vaccine

ingredient, if that was on a food item, you would say there's no way I'm going to eat that item. That'd be the most toxic food item in the grocery store. There's no way. There's no way that'd be approved on the shelf. But how is it approved for a newborn, an infant? These vaccines are loaded with aluminum nanoparticles. We have other ingredients that are, you know, They're inflammatory. There's not a single nutrient in there. And so when you inject that baby with this, there's a reason why we have more neurological developmental disorders than ever before.

Neurological developmental delays. I mean, they took crawling off a milestone for these kids for crying out loud here just, you know, a few years back. And there's a reason why they know what they're doing. So I, you know, I'm thankful that we're diminishing the schedule. That's a step in the right direction. But I'm on the side of, it goes really, it's in violation of how God made the immune system. and really we're not protecting the wellness paradigm. And we have to shift away from this sickness paradigm model that is sinking.

And we have to move into the wellness and prevention paradigm. I'm very thankful for the medical doctors and the nurses and crisis care because they are the experts in crisis care. You broke your ribs. Where did you go? You went to a crisis center, right? They took care of you. They're the best of the best.

But when it comes to wellness and prevention in that paradigm, these vaccines are perverting that model. They have no place in that true model, and that's the model that I'm trying to protect. And that's the model that I'll stand for. I totally agree with you. And it was really cool to be in ER, not a place I like to be, but it's not the turf I'm used to. I didn't grow up in it either. I wasn't vaccinated as a kid, all holistic health growing up.

But when you find yourself in that environment for exactly those reasons. And by the way, an ER at the bottom of a ski resort is a trippy thing to see because partly that we're free to do something as dangerous as it is because just one person after another, head injury, shoulder injury, knee injury, these doctors are there just taking care of people like me that pushed it too far, went a little bit too fast, but they're good at it. It's amazing. They really seem to enjoy their job. And it's the pharmaceutical industry coming into some use. I mean, there is moments where there's so much pain. I don't know, maybe someone can gut it out and just go with some straight curcumin. good on you. I was like, I can't even move at the moment. I think I'll take an Advil.

But my wife knows how difficult that was you said something, Katie, that I think gets to the heart of where I think this conversation sort of can go or needs to go, which is where is the line? I, you know, and I'm going to, when you said the COVID vaccine should be pulled off the market, You want Robert Kennedy Jr. pull that vaccine off the market. I feel like what I keep saying is I want a free country. I want the right to choose. I am fighting that there are no mandates. It's my number one goal.

That liability, I want a free market pressure on these products. I think they'll be pulled off on their own if we can get to that place. But I guess sort of in this question, that's not freedom. That is somewhat in one person saying, not good enough. I am taking that out of your hands. For all of you that believe in this COVID vaccine, I'm going to remove it from your ability to use it. Are we not then just doing the same thing as the mandates are doing to us if Bobby moves in that direction? I think that's a great point, honestly. And there is a massive group of people that actually believe the COVID vaccine did

reduce hospitalizations and deaths. I think the safety record of the COVID vaccine is a little too obvious in terms of the damage coming from the spike protein causing things like myocarditis and sudden deaths and young children. I think it was just way too obvious in front of our eyes. But that does happen with vaccines on the childhood schedule. And our, like you guys talked about, the vaccine adverse events reporting system is terrible. So I think that's a great point you make. I appreciate the decrease in the childhood schedule in terms of the mandates because it allows for personalized medicine and allows for some other some more medical freedom. What I hope is that it's not just this federal kind of blanket of like here, here's some personalized medicine

recommendations. I really do hope pediatricians actually allow their patients to have some more medical freedom in that way because it because it does seem like they are going to divide the line and take the American Academy of Pediatrics vaccine schedule and continue to recommend every single one instead of allowing for individualized personalized medicine. In your podcast right now in the work that you're doing, is there a particular issue that you would say is the most important? If there's one that man, we have got to handle this thing or we're screwed, like I could accept losing all these other conversations. Is there one that is just really drives the work that you do? I say right now

Like my biggest focus is on how powerful we are as human beings. And it kind of relates, again, to the conversation that we'll get into later, specifically what we'll talk about, placebo, nocebo effect, mass psychogenic illness, mass social contagion, and then on the flip side of that, the Maharishi effect, just the indication, I wouldn't say direct causal link, but the indication that our beliefs, thoughts, and feelings have an impact not only on our physiology, but possibly. And I want to be very careful with my statement here because people will misrepresentation. present what I'm saying, possibly reality itself.

And again, we have some indication of this with mass psychogenic illness, mass social contagion, and then the Maharishi effect, and I can share some of those. I'm looking forward to even having you explain what that means. Ben, is there something that you think is a full focus? Right, so the biggest thing for me, obviously, I love defending health and the true paradigm. But in my personal testimony, I was so censored as one of the disinformation doesn't. I mean, my social media, you know, we were hitting millions of people a month. It was wiped clean.

I know Alec was a victim of that too, and so many people that were standing in the gap during COVID were censored. And, you know, in this country was, is, we defend freedom. And, you know, and so the First Amendment, right, freedom of speech, we have five freedoms in the First Amendment, and they were all under attack during COVID. I mean, we couldn't form groups of more than six during COVID. But for me, we have to defend our right to free speech. You know, I'm in massive litigation right now in the Department of Justice just backed us last year and they said that we were in the right here. But if we don't have freedom of speech, you know,

then dumb and silent we're going to be led like sheep to slaughter. And so we have to have, you know, the ability to speak out more now than ever before because with this AI world and social media, it's a scary world that we live in. And so to me, the most pressing issue is the right to be able to speak freely is vitally important. I think it's spot on from my perspective. I grew up a progressive liberal.

I don't even need to get into politics here, but there is two parties running in this country in the end and one of them saying we're going to end misinformation, we're going to end disinformation. That meant that the state is going to decide. what is acceptable speech and what is not. And I saw that as the end of the United States of America. I never thought I would say I'm a one-issue voter.

That made me a one-issue voter because if we cannot speak, we cannot speak of our minds, if we can't disagree, then we can't defend every other right that this nation is, you know, protects for us. And so I agree with you, really huge for you. What do you think is the core issue? that drives your work and that you think is the most important right now? The core issue for me is teaching mothers that kind of like Alex said,

like you are fully equipped to raise your kids and you don't necessarily need somebody like me, like a physician assistant to tell you what to do. There are plenty of things you can do to help your children be healthy, and you can do that on your own with a little bit of work, time, education, and just feeding your children healthy, you know, protein-rich food, getting them outside, having them sleep, teaching parents the basics of getting back to the basics where it doesn't have to be so complicated. What disease are you preventing here? What can I do to prevent this complication? Like, what's my child's chance that they're going to get this rare disease.

And instead of just spending all of your time mulling over the chance of something happening, why don't you just look at your kids that are right in front of you and feed them a healthy meal and look at them and love them and take your mind off of what could potentially happen and just live in the moment that God created for you in your family? There is, I think, a headline. And I think this is something, you know, there's places where we may agree or disagree. We're going to maybe move into some of those territories. But I would say at the heart of it, we're all, it sounds like, pretty vocal on your right to choose whether you should vaccinate or not.

Amen. Right? For our kids, for ourselves. I would say, I say it all the time, if you don't have the right to decide what goes into your body, if you don't have the right to decide what goes into your children's bodies, you are property of the United States government, you have the same rights as a foreign body, animal. And I will say that over and over again. People say you're being drastic or extreme. I wouldn't say so. But the hit we all get then is it's going to be your fault, Alec, the next measles outbreak. You're going to be causing, what are you going to do when there's a return

of polio measles outper? I think we have, do we have the headline right now? This is what's going on. Why is South Carolina's measles outbreak spreading so quickly? Nearly a thousand people. Measles alert, Disneyland now linked to two confirmed cases. I thought that was an old one. It's 2026. We're back to Disneyland. Amazing. But these are the things that get thrown in our face. I've just been being interviewed. I've said it by a reporter that's gotten an article.

And these lists like you are, it's people like you, are responsible for these outbreaks. So if the world is watching right now, the people that are afraid of these outbreaks are, you know, and, you know, what do you say, Alec? Where's the evidence of that claim? Of what? That there's an outbreak? No, no, no.

Where's the evidence that we're responsible? Oh, well, I mean, I think they would just simply say that you are getting people to not vaccinate. And that headline, I'm sure somewhere that article, will say the body of the people that are getting the measles did not get a vaccine, which means they're listening to somebody that's telling them they shouldn't vaccinate. Yeah, and ultimately that goes back to, again, like stepping back to foundational claims. Where's the foundational claims that vaccines work is intended to work? Again, like if we look at, for example, dissolving illusions, I'm sure you're familiar with that book by Dr. Seizan Humphrey. in Roman Bistrionic. They go into great length to discuss how all of these disease with respect to the mortality

and in some cases just the incidence of the disease were on a steep decline prior to the introduction of the various vaccines. And they even bring up the example of scarlet fever. There's no vaccine for scarlet fever. And it had the same exact trajectory as all those other diseases. I also want to point out because that point does come up. You know, you had scarlet fever. Same time you had polio, the issues.

They were working in a vaccine. They could never get one in their minds to work. So it wasn't that they didn't. try, they saw it, and it was just as deadly, but it disappeared, I think, on its own, as you well point out. I'm going to dive a little bit deeper into those diseases here in a second, but what do you say to people that are, you know, two kids died in Texas, is what I get of the measles. Do you not take some responsibility for that? Well, we have to look at it in history, like in there was a school in Illinois back, I believe, in the 80s, they had a high vaccination rate in the

school. All the kids that got the vaccine got the measles. The kids that didn't get the vaccine did not get the measles. Why? There's a vaccine-induced measles, right? So there, so is it the unvaccine that's causing the measles or is it really the vaccine-induced measles? That's really the factor here. But again, so and I look at the testing of the measles because measles uses, there's a lot of faultiness with the PCR test around it. You know, thinking measles, we have the spots and the rash should be easy. A layperson can diagnose that. But a lot of your diagnostics and the measles is using the PCR test, which does not, it's not based on observation. Okay, there is no rash. It's like, oh, they got a fever. We run the PCR test. They got measles.

So I have a lot of questions around that PCR test and the diagnostics that are used for measles. And so a lot of these articles, again, I've been in this fight for a long time. Every year there seems to be a breakout. Every year there's a fear-mongering campaign, a scare attack of being pushed on the people. And now more than ever, you're going to see that. And you're seeing it ramped up. Why? Because they want to blame Bobby and the unvaccinated for causing this rate or decline in vaccinations. And so I was taught that fear is the fuel that fires the furnace of disease. And I don't think fear should be used in a clinical setting. And you see it all the time.

You see it in the pediatricians office. How many people go in? These new parents go in. I see it all the time they go in. And the pediatrician is like, you're going to kill that baby if you don't get vitamin K. You're going to kill that baby if you don't get that baby vaccinated. And these parents, they don't know. It's terrifying.

It's terrifying. Especially your first baby. You feel so vulnerable, this tiny little thing. I don't want to be responsible for killing it. Right. This huge fear treatment. Right. It's a fear-mongering tactic.

It's coercion. It should be illegal. Right. And this information that they're suppressing and censoring is a precious commodity to them. They don't want that information getting out, and that's why they use censorship and suppression of the truth because it really is, it's tyranny and it's evil. May I add to that real quick? Sure. Just on the fear thing.

So, Ben, you know this. We've talked about this before. There is a study done, I believe, in 2021, 2022 that looked at, I think, 140,000 people who had been hospitalized and subsequently died with a COVID label, which means that the PCR test was used, setting that aside, but died with the COVID label, right? You know what they found was the second strongest risk factor for death associated with that? What? Fear slash anxiety-related disorders. Again, there are countless examples of this, and that goes back to what I was talking about earlier, mass psychogenic illness, mass social contagion, the nocebo effect, psychosomatics. there's strong indication that just what's been saying, fear alone perpetually can induce real physical symptoms of illness, especially...

I thought a lot about that during COVID because I just thought the times I've had the flu, you know, I've gotten the flu, whatever is where you're hallucinating. And there's just always like, I feel like hell, but I know I'm just, I'll come out of this, this is going to be really lame three days. suddenly COVID was like, even I was like, I mean, could I die in the middle of this? Like, is it because, I mean, it just wasn't something that I'd ever thought, like, was, you know, had thought that I could die. And I do think it affected people, you know, what does that do? If everyone that had a flu thought, this is going to kill you, you know, I don't know. When, you know, you've got two very young kids right now, are you worried about being, in the middle of one of these outbreaks?

No, no, because I know my kids are healthy. They have really, really well-functioning immune systems. I feed them healthy food, and I feel equipped to be able to treat whatever illnesses come up using different commodities, whether it be vitamin A in the case of measles. A lot of people will go to homeopathy in some cases. But sometimes a well-timed dose of motrin really does the trick. And it's something where you can use the twosyopathy. you have in your arsenal in order to help your kids.

Now, tragically, kids die every year from something like measles or even pertessus, and that is irregardless of the decision that I make for my kids and the information that I put out for people. People die from infections, and that is something that happens regardless of anything that I say. And so you have to be as the parent, well-educated and informed on how to help your children,

children through these illnesses and and help them if you know whether you decide to vaccinate or not knowing that you are their mother and you are equipped to be able to help them through these things i think that that's what um if i was to pinpoint down the work that i've done um as in we're about to get into i think into some deeper water on this conversation but i wasn't vaccinate as a kid either Wasn't my baby had just been born. I'm working on the CBS talk show, The Doctors, in the middle of Hollywood. And suddenly, SP 277 comes along. And this is a law.

And by the way, I was the one sitting at the doctors when Senator Richard Payne walked on the stage. It was supposed to be in my show that this guy's presenting this new law. We're going to force a vaccine to every kid here. It was a God moment for me. It was a reason someone had said this should be a DEL show because that lit a fire. you know, woke up a monster that I don't think that anyone really wanted to deal with. But I've been on one mission, which is you are never going to force vaccine. My kids or me.

And so I've done everything I can do. And what I would say, if I was going to simply put it, I took what I learned working on the doctor's television show. And my mom would say, what are you doing working on a medical talk show? You've never been to a doctor in your life. I said, I must be here for a reason. but I learned how they made people afraid of disease. I learned how they sell pharmaceutical products by creating fear. I watched, as we would, you know, in the show, you know, flu outbreak or whatever, create fear.

And I realized the simplest way to undo this wrong that's happening is I simply have got to show you that you should be afraid of the vaccine too. that if you think that you are stepping into a safe world that is, you know, that the measles is dangerous, yeah, well, guess what? There's a good chance the measles vaccine is even more dangerous. Let me make a film called Vax and show you what that means. And so that has been the core of my approach to this, is making it really simple, make it really understandable that, you know, and you say safe and effective. We've all said, this mantra safe and effective. My job is I've taken it for nearly 10 years now. I think I'm the only journalist that set out to achieve one thing.

I have an international group of scientists I work with. I have the best lawyer, I think, in the world in Aaron Siri. I have this amazing show with people that watched and watched the lawsuits who were winning that started sponsoring so that we could bring lawsuits so that we could get investigations into one word. I didn't care about efficacy. They didn't care whether these vaccines are efficacious, especially after making vacants, meeting thousands of parents of autistic children. I want to know how you determine that this product was safe.

And I have set out to prove unequivocally that this product, and I would write it very specifically when I was working for Robert Kennedy Jr. on his presidential campaign, I would say, Bobby, say it like this. There is no such thing as a vaccine. that is safe and effective for everybody. You know what I mean? To make it as safe and a political run as I could for him, because it would be like, you said they're not safe.

You're not saying, like, no, I'm not talking about everybody. I am just saying you are not allowed to say that people are not being killed by vaccines. Why do you care about rare disease, but you don't, and, you know, you don't care about the children that you know are being killed by this vaccine program, that you know their lives are being destroyed by this vaccine program. Now, how many, is it rare, totally different conversations?

that we still need to have. But to your point, I think there's a risk. There's a risk to not take vaccines. There's a risk to take vaccines. Whether they're on an equal playing field or not, that is the only question that remains. And what I've just said to this reporter is the world has just changed on your side, not on mine.

We are now on an equal playing field. What I believe we're sitting right now in this moment in science around this conversation is you never did the placebo trials. I think that me and Bobby, that was the main focus of CHD and informed consent action network was to prove that. You never did them. Now you know that's true. And if you're still saying it, then you're full of it and you know it because you'd be able to publish that placebo trial in the cover of New York Times or Washington Post.

You haven't done it. Okay? So that means they are no longer. The other side is no longer on any kind of an ethical, scientific, moral high ground. You don't get one. You have, because the only way you could say that the vaccine is safer than the disease itself is you had to have done those pre-licensing, you know, trials that you did not do. So now we're both, this is what I said to this reporter.

We're both stuck in the same exact boat. You have retrospective studies, and so do I. And it's my retrospective study against your retrospective study. And you can say, oh, yours are biased because they were done by, you know, anti-vaxas. And I could say it, and yours were done by cheerleaders that believed in the vaccine program. It's why my film I think right now is so successful because I actually convinced, you know, Marcus Zervos, who states he's ProVaxine to do the study, but I'm not here to market that film. I just want to say that's where I'm at.

Now I want to get in the conversation that everyone has said that Del Beattray and the Highwire is afraid to get into. I've seen, you know, posts like this all the time. Probably the strongest sets of comments I get on every show is Dell. Why are you talking about viruses? You know that's not true. You know there's no such thing as germ theory. There's, you know, terrain theory, all this stuff going on. In fact, just announcing it's going to do this show.

Let's just read some of the comments right now before we get in this conversation. Most of these so-called interviews are predetermined with questions and answers and don't allow any variation. I'm sure there will be a lot of circular reasoning and such to us that will show Dell's true colors, but to Dell's cult-like followers, it will not prove a thing except that Dell is correct. It will be interesting to say the least. Okay, that's one, I guess, on my side. Let's see here. He sure did.

That's how I heard about it. What is this? He had Dr. Kaufman on years ago, so he's fully aware of the no-virus message. Dr. Kaufman did an amazing job explaining it. And then there's frustrations that I didn't continue to follow this conversation with Dr. Kaufman. Why do I suspect this to be scripted to make it seem like this is being addressed? I guess something I need to address. Oh, dear, you just joined the controlled option.

position. You shill. I believe that was you. It was me. And I responded to that guy and commented back, signed a shill. Right. So you're a shill for coming on this show. I want to thank you for risking that moniker. And I'm sorry about that. Say it loud, Alec. Delavoid of that virus BS like the plague. So I quit listening to his program. Even emailed him a few times to have Tom Cowan on and get to the truth. might have to tune in and see how far you get with that. Best wishes, go get them. All right, Alec. And I think, I mean, I don't know where you're sitting on this exactly. I think, Ben, you're partly in this conversation too.

But let me just try and start out for anyone that's hearing this for the first time. There's apparently a debate, not apparently, there is a debate between people, whether viruses exist, at all. We can go back to a couple of leading, you know, scientists in their time that debated terrain theory, which is your body's terrain, and I mean, I'm going to give a really rough. Here we go. Terrain theory. The scientific concept proposing that the internal environment, terrain of a host organism, rather than the external pathogens, germs, is the primary cause of disease. The disease comes from within you, not from without. And then, of course, germ theory is this idea that the scientific concept that microscopic organisms, pathogens like bacteria viruses,

fungi and protists are the cause of many diseases. So there's competing thoughts. You're, you know, you've put out some like two and a half hour podcast on this. What I would say is this. this is you know i'm i'm willing for this show to go a little bit long but give me the elevator pitch yeah the elevator pitch i guess to sum it up would be cause and effect claims that are claimed to be scientific claims need to be painted against the scientific method right and when we look at the foundational so-called evidence for the field of virology and then from a broader perspective, the germ, it's not even really a theory, hypothesis, the failed germ hypothesis, when we look at those in accordance with the scientific method, they do not hold up to the

scientific method. With respect to virology, for example, the independent variable is purported to be the virus. And we can get into later the viral isolation technique that's used electron micrograph imaging and things like this. But the foundational cause and effect claim, X causes is Y, X being your independent variable, Y being your observed natural phenomenon, has not been met with respect to virology. So germ gets breathed in causes said disease? Correct. That that has never been proven.

That has never been empirically demonstrated. Is it and you, where are you at with this in your perspective? So if the germ theory were true, we'd all be dead. So we have 10 times more bacteria on it in the body than we do cells. We have trillions of bacteria on it in the body. And so to give you an example, I mean, I believe in the old definition of virus, which means poison, right? I think this new definition of virus has changed, and I don't believe in the new definition of virus. The old one, we can be poisoned.

Yes, I believe all disease starts with toxicity deficiency. Okay, to give you an example, you know, if I were to set trash out in my kitchen, eventually flies are going to come. So what came first? The flies are the trash. right so I believe that we're arguing about the cause of disease here and it's always a disturbed condition bacteria and germs bacteria does exist I'm not denying the fact but again is it the cause of disease or is it the result right if I everybody here has streptococcus bacteria in their throat if we were to do bacteria cultures of the throat we all have strep bacteria then why didn't we get

diagnosed with strep throat right so So when I have strep throat, there's an over-accumulation of that bacteria. And what is that bacteria doing? Can that bacteria cause problems? Eventually, yes. But is that the cause of disease? I believe disease is a disturbed condition. And just like a carpenter Fred Barge stated that the only cause in disease, disease

dis means away from a state of ease. So I believe it's a disturbed condition. There's only one cause in disease, and that's the body's inability to comprehend itself or its environment. There's one cure in disease, and that's the body's ability. to heal. There's only one thing any physician can do for that patient, that is to remove that obstruction to healing, thus facilitating that. So again, going back to this, it's the cause versus the result. I think bacteria can cause problems if I'm delivering babies or performing surgeries, but when it looks at the cause of disease, it's always the environment, always.

Are you aware of this debate? I am aware. I get the same comments on my social media. I definitely am not. not. I will defer to the experts on this one, but I definitely think it's interesting. And I think that it going to the idea of how do we know what we know and how do we know these things exist, how do we test these things? These are all great questions. And this is why, you know, the vaccination debate with safe and effective. Why are they saying it's safe and effective when they don't have the foundation to prove that? So I appreciate the line of reasoning coming here. There is some things that don't make sense to me about it, but I'm definitely willing to, you know, listen and learn.

What doesn't make sense to you about it? Being a clinician, seeing things in, you know, PDF, I've worked in family medicine, I've worked in urgent care. Some rashes, we would consider kind of like viral rashes, right? And they're just kind of nonspecific and you don't really, you know, it's just like, oh, you have a virus or whatever it is. Some of them actually look similar to kind of drug reactions, right? So it's like a viral rash could look like a reaction.

If you took amoxicillin and you get a rash, you could assume that the amoxicillin potentially caused that rash, right? But that rash actually looks pretty similar to something like a viral rash. So I can understand, you know, why people would say, okay, there may be multiple causes for something like a viral rash. Maybe it's not necessarily a virus. It's something where, like, I had test questions where there was a picture of a rash, and I had to decide what was the virus that caused it. Okay.

And, you know, they're very characteristic rashes in these cases, I think, of chickenpox. Yeah. You know, and there, you know, kids everywhere used to get chicken pox, right? We would have chicken pox parties. Like, you know, people would get. Chicken parks parties worked. They worked. You could take your kid.

You know, we got chicken pox. over here you could bring your kid, bring them home, you know, what, a week later or something, I don't remember from exact incubation period. Now they have chicken pox, then their brothers and sisters start getting it, and so forth. And then they're immune, right? They're immune for life when you get chickenpox, you know, the actual infection. Now, you know, when we have this vaccination now for chickenpox, I'm not saying I'm a fan of it, but they were able to manipulate something to make the incidents at least appear so, like, you know, there's no more rash now. And so I get parents asking me all the time, where can I take my kid to go to a chickenpox party?

Because there's no, there's seemingly no more chickenpox anymore. But, you know, so I'm, my question is, what are they manipulating? If viruses don't exist, what are they finding that they manipulate in order to make this rash go away. Now, I'm not saying the disease totally goes away. I'll say that's my exact question. Oh, okay. Good. No, no, it's great. There's a lot. There's a lot there. There is a lot. So take, you know, yeah. I want to give a shout out to my friend Jacob Diaz, who goes by undercover virologists on Instagram. He has done incredible work on the specific, quote unquote, specific diseases. So in this case, chicken pox, he highlights and he has all the sources on his posts on undercover virologists.

So please go check him out. So as an example, a 22-page report on failed contagionstst, studies regarding varicella viruses, chickenpox, herpes, shingles, etc. by Dr. Colin Cutner states, incidentally, these tests furnish interesting information as to the portal of entry of the quote unquote virus of varicella. The fact that the lymph from the vesicles, meaning the fluids from these vesicles, these chickenpox pustules, when applied to the broken skin or to the mucus membranes of other people who were not sick, led to no infection, must cause us to consider this investigation from quite another standpoint. How are we to explain this lack of infectivity of the contents

of the vesicles, which are generally regarded, presumed, presupposed as the source of the infection, and are used as the criterion in prescribing the duration of the quarantine. So another one that I wanna bring up, and I noticed that you had this book on your shelf, which is really cool. I really hope that you read this.

Can You Catch a Cold book written by Danderreutus, a naturopath from Australia. In this book, he goes into over 200 attempted contagion studies throughout history. And what he finds in his book, looking at these 200 studies, is that in virtually all, in most of the cases, zero contagion was demonstrated, right? The modal or most frequently occurring result

was zero contagion was demonstrated. And then in some cases, two or more people did become sick in the same space with similar symptoms, but in no case, was a double-blind or randomized placebo-controlled trial done? The placebo, nocebo effect, as we've discussed, and I can discuss later on, is a strong factor or is likely a strong factor in a lot of these things and again I'll get to that later and

In no case was an actual infectious agent identified in what Daniel talks about in his book Getting to Mass Psychogenic illness mass social contagion. I just want to give you one example that really stands out And there are plenty of other possible explanations. I want to say this too. Sorry, there's a lot of things to cover I do not deny the phenomenon of two or more people getting sick in the same space with similar symptoms nor do I do I do to deny symptoms of illness themselves. Those are real phenomena. Okay. Obviously.

What we are calling into question is the presumed or asserted cause of that phenomenon. And so like in this chicken pox example, and like what Daniel discusses in his book, the countless historical attempts to demonstrate the idea that healthy people become sick when exposed to sick people or their bodily fluids have failed drastically. As one example in Daniel's book, he highlights a study that was done just after the Spanish flu, where a higher percentage of people became sick when exposed to a saline placebo while thinking they were being exposed to fluids

from a sick person than those who were exposed to fluids from a sick person. And again, we can get into the mass psychogenic illness, nocebo effect, and things like that in a little bit. But with respect to, as I'm looking at this thing with chicken pox, right, they've attempted to demonstrate that it is caused by the fluids from a sick person, and they're unable to replicate that.

Now, there could be some people that will watch this push back, be like, what are you talking about? There's countless animal models and things like this. It's interesting. If you go look at them, and one example is polio, for example, right? They took the crude biological brain material from someone who had died of polio, which they're real symptoms, but again, we're questioning the cause. They took the brain matter of that individual, ground it up, and then drilled a hole in

a monkey's head and injected it into the monkey. The monkey ended up getting sick or dying. I don't remember the exact details, but the point is they tried to claim that that is evidence of what occurs in nature. When any of the, quote, naturally occurring, relatively speaking, based on the idea that disease is transmitted via fluids, attempts to demonstrate this have all failed drastically. And again, in the attempts to where more people did get sick,

we have to sort of weigh that with the examples of people getting sick when exposed to saline placebo and higher percentages than those perceive the fluids from a sick person. So I think a lot of people misunderstand what we're coming from. We're not just saying that there is not the phenomenon of two or more people getting sick in the same space. Obviously, that's a real phenomenon. We have to call into question the presumed cause,

especially when the presumed cause leads to all the things that we experienced during COVID. Because ultimately comes down to three foundational claims. One, a virus is an obligate intracellular parasite consisting of a proteinaceous coat surrounding a core of genetic material. Two, COVID-19 is a disease caused by the SARS-CoB2 virus. And three, healthy people become sick

when exposed to sick people with bodily fluids. When we talk about the mandates, the business closures, All the things that occurred 2020 and onward, in childhood vaccine schedule, SB 276, SP277, they ultimately rest on those three foundational claims. So when we look at those three foundational claims and ask, is it true? And just go give it a look. What we find is that not only is it not proven, there are also multiple ways to falsify it. And I can get into the viral isolation technique and the areas to falsify it.

Just I want to like obviously you do two and a half hour podcast. I think you've done some long ones trying to explain this. I'm not going to try and get you to fit it onto a bumper sticker because I've said the same thing about vaccines. It's hard. I cannot do this in three words. We're going to have to talk about context. We're going to have to talk about science what was and was not done. I'm with you.

I've done, I think the deepest dive specifically on safety and vaccines ever done. And if you go down any rabbit hole that deep and look at all of the deep, detail and nuance in it, you start recognizing patterns. And I will say, and I think I've said this on my show pretty consistently, and most recently my new definition for science is the art of finding what you're looking for. I absolutely believe that the problem with science is very early on. It got so contaminated, you know, right around Galileo deciding we're not the center of the universe.

But it gets contaminated by. I have a hypothesis and then I sit out to prove that that's right and as soon as it starts making money Your money got involved no one was allowed to bring the scientific method and challenge that So hold on a second I think there's another way to look at I want to challenge it this way I want to see if it holds up and none of that's being allowed to be done and I think that's in every sector I recently you know actually is a few years ago my son asked me dad what's at the center of the universe or it's the center of the earth I said, oh, it's like it's molten cobalt and steel metal and well, it's melted. And he was like, well, how does it stay metal?

I was like, well, it's the pressure of gravity. I mean, I mean, I didn't study. I wasn't paying attention all the back when you covered this. But as I was saying it, I was like, you know what? The current hypothesis is, like how do I know that? Like how do we know that? Like when did we corner to the center of the earth? Like some idiot saw a volcano's like, it's melted metal in the middle of the year.

You know, like, so I don't know that I don't know that I'd. I trust, I think where we're meeting on this is I don't hold out. I'm not here. And when I see these comments about me, it's like, Dell's defending, he's fighting for, you know, virology, and I'm not. I'm not. I've been very specific on I'm trying to keep, I'm trying to stop kids from being forceably vaccinated. I've used every tool I know with the most clear languaging, trying to get people to use

that languaging to go to politicians, to talk to their doctors and start moving this needle. we've been effective. But let me be clear about because I want to understand this. Yeah. So people can be in a room. They can exhibit the same symptoms after being in that room together. You acknowledge that that's the case. Sure. Can I just really quickly, are viruses and bacteria in this space that you guys are in seen exactly the same way? Is there no, are there viruses? Again, let me start right there. Is there such a thing as a virus?

I would say that there is no evidence that viruses exist or cause illness. If we're talking about the definition obligate intercellular parasite consisting of a pro tenacious coat surrounding... Not poison like your definition. Not poison. Virus in the original definition, that's the irony. Yeah. Depending on how you look at it, the mainstream media of the government, they're not lying when they say there are viruses. If you go with the definition of poisons, yes.

And I think that's the ironic part is that we've been distracted away from the poisons. I would say both physically and metaphysically, and we can touch on that, and we're hyper-fixated on this idea that these little sub-microscopic particles exist and cause illness, or again, bacteria, which do exist. Okay, so do, so bacteria do exist. Viruses don't exist, bacteria does exist, but bacteria, I can't breathe the bacteria in and cause illness? You can breathe bacteria in, absolutely. But the key is going back to the cause, right? I mean, we're exposed to bacteria all the time, but again, we have 10 times more bacteria

on and in the body than we do cells. And going back to this, we're forgetting history, and this whole lie is like an onion. There's many layers to this. Right? So we're peeling back the foundational lies that we're put in place here around viruses and virology. I mean, look at polio. Alec brought up polio.

I mean, polio means gray, myelous spine, and idis is inflammation. Right? We didn't have electron microscopes to visualize viruses until the early 1930s. How did they know it was a virus? Polio wasn't coined until 1908. They took the spinal fluid and they jucked into monkeys' brains,

like Alex said, and they said, oh, it must be a germ or a virus. And so polio, if you look at prior to polio in late 1800s, there was a drug called Kalamil, that they were giving to babies. It was a cure-all drug. It was a mercury-based drug. It would cause polio-like symptoms. And so I think, in my theory, is that they try to blame it on a germ or virus, so big farmer would not take the blame, right?

And so I think that was the early day in the stages of that. But if you look at the historically, when the medical establishment, when they don't understand the cause of something, they blame it on a germ, bacteria, or virus. It's easy to just say, oh, it's a virus. Look at scurvy. Scurvy used to be blamed on a germ or bacteria virus, but we know, without a doubt, it's been proven that it's a vitamin C deficiency. Look at Ricketts.

Ricketts was the same way. Ricketts was, you know, blamed on a bacteria, but we know it's a vitamin D deficiency. Let me ask this question. Because when I talk to Kaufman and I've been on stages where this debate comes up, I will say this. I mean, I was raised with holistic natural health. I just showed that in dealing with my ribs, drugs aren't my way. Like, you know, Castro oil and holistic modalities is how I've done. It's how I deal with my kids.

It's not Tylenol in our house. And what I've said is, and I've had this Larry Paleski and I've had this debate. And I get all the way to point. Here's my point. I absolutely agree that terrain is critical to your health, meaning my health, I don't believe a healthy person gets sick. If you're healthy, I once had, you know, one of the practitioners that I grew up within Boulder, Colorado, would say, you know, Tim Binder was his name. And he once said to me, I was a young, I think I was a teenager, and he said, Del, think of health as centrifugal energy. and everything you do, you know, throws that energy further and further out so that, you know,

you're born perfectly healthy. It's like you can't even see the spinning movement, but then, you know, you start, you get some fluoride in your water, and now, you know, you're out, and then as you get to be a teenager, you're trying, oh, let me try drinking some beers, and now you're here, and all going to smoke a couple of cigarettes, and pretty soon you have no, your core energy is being, dissipated and you're thrown out. Now you're vulnerable to all sorts of things. That's sort of where I sit, which is, you know, I know when I'm really healthy, when I'm staying on top of my exercise, my diet, all those things, I watch the kids colds come into the house and out doesn't affect me at all. If I'm stressed, I'm running around, blah, blah, blah, they come in with the cold. And there was a time a couple years ago, I just assumed every time it was around me, I was going to get And I remember thinking, where am I at from my childhood? Like, that is not how I used to think.

There's something wrong here where I'm not vulnerable to those things. Now, for me, that is that I still, you know, I'm not lying. I still hold this idea that my kids are bringing you something that I'm breathing in, colonizing, trying to colonize my throat. But my vitamin levels are so high, my immune system's so strong that it is just protecting me. So I guess is where our line of disagreement is, I think like Tim Binder said, when I am perfectly whole, nothing can affect me. I don't think I can get cancers. I don't think I can get anything.

I don't think they exist in my experience. But there's so many things that are making us toxic in this environment that are weakening my immune system to be able to protect itself, that now I'm vulnerable to what I've been seeing as outside elements. So is our disagreement then whether these are actually outside elements? Where am I different than your perspective? Yeah, so I'll give you an example. My brother, when he was in college, he was in some ecology class, and this was just as I was coming into this terrain-based perspective. And he was as well.

And he called me, and he was like, you know what I learned today? That I just find hilarious, and the whole class missed the point. That our professor was saying that bees become more susceptible to viral illnesses that cause them to get sick when they're exposed to glyphosate. And everyone was like, oh, that makes a lot of sense. And it occurred to me, based on what you've been talking about, Alec, that it makes much more sense just to say that glyphosate is a toxin that causes bees to get sick. And what getting sick is is ultimately the body attempting to come back to homeostasis.

It's a body expressing health. So rather than adding an additional layer, I guess you could say, and again, questioning, is there actual empirical evidence for those premises? Instead of adding that additional layer, it's that these toxins in our environment, malnutrition, emotional factors, non-native EMFs, a unique combination of all those things. We've got your slide up here, this is from some of them.

People can look at this, these sort of four quadrants, physical toxins, metaphysical toxins, relationships, you know, and all those things. And this is not an exhaustive list, obviously. You could probably get in a lot more detail. So then there's another slide, I believe, as well. Why do we get sick in groups?

And could it possibly be, possibly. And I would be clear, I'm not asserting that I know exactly what is the cause of this phenomenon. And that's what's awesome about being able to sit back and just say, I don't know for sure, is it leaves you open and curious with childlike wonder and awe. Like, how does all this work? I know that what they're claiming, in most cases, when I go look down those rabbit trails and find the foundational papers that they claim. our evidence is ultimately unsubstantiated.

So now we get to sit back and look, what does cause this phenomena or these other phenomena? So could it be shared exposure to the same environmental factors, the same emotional stress, the same toxins in our environment, the same malnutrition, the same non-native EMFs in our environment, a unique combination of those things?

How do we explain the phenomenon that so many women talk about, and then the mainstream will try to gaslight say it doesn't occur, when women sink up on their menstrual cycles when they're around each other for an extended period of time? Is that caused by a quote virus that just hasn't been discovered yet? Or is there something else happening that we haven't looked at because we've been so myopically focused on this unproven, dare I say, disproven idea that healthy people become sick when exposed to sick people or their bodily fluids, which is a separate category of two or more people getting sick in the same space?

I want to come back to unproven or disproven because I think that that's where I want to drill down. But while we're right here and we're having this, you know, conversation, is there any of any of you? Is there anything about that that you disagree with? Do you want to add anything in? So basically, I'm just going to add that, you know, allostatic load is something. Allostatic load is basically a big fancy word for, we adapt our physiology to meet the load it's under, right?

So we're all basically in a boat on the lake, okay? We're out there in the boat. And every stress is adding weight to that boat. And there's going to be a threshold eventually where that boat will sink. And each weight is a stressor. It could be a toxic relationship, like the four quadrants that Alec brought up. And eventually, if we keep adding toxins and deficiencies in that boat, it's going to sink.

And so that's called life. We have to eliminate that toxicity and deficiency, and we have to move into purity and sufficiency, and we can be well. And that really is the key. Our level of health is dependent upon the choices that we make. We're either moving towards health and wellness or sickness and disease. I mean, during the whole pandemic, I didn't wear a mask. I didn't have social distancing in my office. I was putting hands on every single one of my patients.

I saw hundreds of patients every week. I didn't get sick. And I would pose a question, how many people do I have to see? How many violations do I have to be in from the World Health Organization or whatever before this contagion claim is mathematically impossible? So I agree with Alec, but I also agree that we have a lot of questions. And from a chiropractic standpoint, like Hippocrity said, and all disease looked to the spine first. And so this is why we have to look at nervous system optimization because that controls everything.

That controls we live our life through the nervous system. Everything we eat, everything we move, everything we think is transmitted through that nervous system. And we can part minimalize the body for ease of study. We do it from the educational side and the side of practice. But the body is one system working together. We have to view it like it is. It's a one system working together and the key to health is focusing on the nervous system.

That's it. I read sometime back Tom Cowan's book Contagion Myth. I think he's changed the title. Yeah, because it was banned off of Amazon to the myth. To say the Contagion's the myth. The truth about contagion, yeah. The truth about contagion, I think is what it's called now. Let's, and look, I wish Tom could be here too, and maybe I'll get a chance to do that.

He hates travel. I tried to get him to speak at so many of my events. In the future. But I want to just sort of drill in on where I still, where my big question lies. And it's sort of exactly where you were Katie. And you brought up, you know, in his book, he talks about the introduction of radio lines. Like as soon as you started having radio frequencies correct, that we saw certain illnesses appear the moment that was introduced.

Every time we've upped, you know, the G from 2G to 3G to 4G, we see different illnesses then appearing, you know. And just if I'm missing something, but I just want to just sort of generally speaking, that there's these outside, like they're not viruses, but that what we say is a virus, like that getting a fever is just our body trying to detoxify this assault that's coming from things that aren't viruses, but environmental impacts. Am I in the realm of what we're. I would say that's accurate. Okay. Discussing. Okay. Which again, I don't have, I have a hard wire. house, no EMS running through my house, so I'm not against that concept whatsoever. I'm trying to mitigate all forms of, you know, I think, damaging impacts on our lives. But with all that said, then I want to look at what I've used in my argument on vaccines and measles and everything else.

Here's the Brady Bunch. Let's watch this real quick. Peter. What's doing all from school? They sent me home. Measles. You see, their measles are a strange case of red freckles. You have got a temperature. They told me, 101.1. What's the record? Never mind. That's one record. You don't want to break. Right. You don't get to hold the title very long.

I think you better go upstairs and get into bed. I'll phone the doctor and be right out. Measles. Let's hope all the others don't start coming down with it. Oh, that would be terrible. Right. As the ward in the state prison once said, I sure would hate to see them all break out at once. Oh, no. Are you sure it's the measles? Well, he certainly got all the symptoms. A slight temperature, a lot of dots, and a great big smile. A great big smile. No school for a few days.

Jan, you've got measles. Golly, mothers are supposed to know everything. But do you have to keep proving it? You've got a temperature, too. What do you mean, too? Peter was sent home from school a little while ago. Oh, what was his temperature? 101.1.

Oh, is that all? I'm 101.2. Oh, Greg. You on my railroad. I'll be a sport. You can ride on it free. Thanks a lot. It's... Your turn, Peter. Only has two more half. Six.

Oh, missed it. Boy, this is the life, isn't it? Yeah. If you have to get sick, you sure can't beat the measles. That's right. No medicine. Inside or out. Like shots, I mean.

Don't even mention shots. Yuck! Jan had chickenpox, and Marcia and Cindy had mumps. There. Well, whichever doctor we choose, at least we'll have all the information on all the kids. I added that last part in because I think it's important in this conversation. If we're to say that measles is not a virus, and a word that in your podcast, I think I've heard you both use this,

science is observational, right? And that we've got to see, you know, action, reaction, and prove it and challenge it. in, you know, in the depiction of, I think that's 1950s, and I always like to play it for, like talk about it with journalists that are like, I'm getting people killed by the measles. Like, oh, measles is deadly. Well, you should have told that to the writers of the Brady Bunch who had a laugh track. I think if they considered it deadly when we didn't have a vaccine, you know, can you imagine having a laugh track to cancer right now? I just don't think something's changed in how, but that's not the argument I'm trying to make. This family has gone through what is clearly something they can define.

It's been around long enough. You have the measles. It's a certain fever, a certain rash that is coming up. And she checks it off. And then you've had mumps, which features its own way, very specifically. Swollen glands has a look, has a thing you go through. I had chickenpox. I don't know that I had the other two.

I've wanted to check my titers. We could get into whether that means anything whatsoever. But there were these things that could say we knew that there was an observation of a disease expression of some kind. And that somehow is appearing to happen in groups, in large groups. Right now in South Carolina, there's a thousand kids, you know, that are showing measles. So the argument Cowan is making, and I think you guys are, there's no such thing as measles. Is that right? So this is where you have to distinguish between cause and effect, claimed cause and effect, rather.

Because oftentimes with these conversations with respect to so-called viral illnesses, we conflate the two and say measles doesn't exist. And a lot of people will take that to mean, are you saying that my kids didn't actually? have this rash appear all over their body, et cetera, et cetera. And like, no, what needs to be said more specifically or more clearly is that the presumed cause for that real observed phenomenon has never been proven to exist nor cause any of that phenomenon. So when we talk about science, as you brought up, right, like it's observational. Yes, it's observational.

You observe a naturally occurring phenomenon. In this case, it might be two or more people getting sick in the same space with similar symptoms. So then you come up with a hypothesis, right? We all learn this in grade school, but it's important to harp on. And your hypothesis might be, I think that there is a sub-microscopic particle, insert the definition for a virus, inside these fluids that is being transmitted from this person to the other one where it is causing illness. Okay. In order to proceed to experimentation, you need to have that presumed cause, the independent variable, the thing you think is the cause of the observed phenomena by itself to very manipulate to see if it produces the,

the effects in question. And with respect to the entire field of virology, that has never been done. So I'm comfortable with saying, I have a lot of speculative ideas on what might be occurring. And ultimately, a lot of them have not been sufficiently looked at because we've mistaken what is fundamentally, by definition, pseudoscience, again, no independent variable

to varying manipulate. They assume that the independent variable is there. I could get into the cell culture isolation technique in a little bit to discuss the exact details that, but it is by definition pseudoscientific. They mistake that for scientific because it's coming from authoritative bodies, governments, et cetera, et cetera. And ultimately, we haven't looked at these other possible explanations for what might be occurring. So that's ultimately where I land up. And I have a lot of interesting ideas of what might be occurring in that situation. But I admit a lot of them

have to go forward. Jump in. I know what would you question about what he just stated? Yeah, I mean, I think that the idea of, I'm not saying that the, like, vaccination totally works. Like, the, there, but they have been able to, you know, find something in a sample, put it into, like, animals, have some, have them have some symptoms of whatever they were looking for in by injecting them, right? In the brain or, yeah, see, this is the, The problem is when we go back to the examples where it is done via natural means, it fails. But I think where you're going with it is they've made a product out of it. They've isolated what they've said. They say they've isolated the measles virus.

But you're right. I was working with, just be clear, when I was working on Vax with Andy Wakefield, whose entire body of science that put him on the autism thing was he was a Crohn's disease expert and found measles, latent measles in the ilium. Eulium, is that right in the intestine, that he believed was the cause of lupus, that it was an ongoing, low-grade measles infection that was causing gut disease. And that is what catapults him into parents saying, my kids having the same gut issues, but it started right after autism.

I don't want to get off track, but that was the heart of Vax. That was the heart of this entire, what ruined his career was getting, an investigation of this. But I said to him, because right at the moment we were making Vax, this German guy, I think it was in Germany, put out, I'll pay you, I think it was $100,000. He won, by the way. If you can prove the existence of the measles virus. Somebody stepped up and said, here it is. I guess it was a genetic code. They said he lost, and he took it all the way to Supreme Court. Supreme Court then brought in two of the biggest blood banks in the world in this case and said, show us the measles virus and they could not do it.

So I will meet you there with, and I remember I said to Andy, Andy, when you said you were finding measles in the intestines, that that was your hypothesis causing lupus on some level interconnected, what was, how is it, they can't prove the existence of measles, what are you pointing to? And all he said to me was, I really don't know. I don't know. I have a genetic code.

I'm told is measles. I'm finding that genetic code inside of this intestine, and that's all I know. I just am assuming that that genetic code, because everyone's saying this is measles, and you're saying not the case. We don't have the genetic code. Correct. I'm saying that. I'm going to go ahead and just read one more quick line, if I may.

This is coming from the final pandemic and antidote to medical tyranny from doctors Mark and Sam Bailey out of New Zealand. They've done tremendous work in this field, if you will. I also highly recommend checking out a paper that was written by Mark called A Farewell 2 Virology, which goes into great length to discuss how viral genomes are ultimately algorithmically created using computer technology. So when it comes to viral genomes, ultimately, let's take COVID as an example. A 41-year-old man reports to hospital, and this is coming from the Fanwu paper, which is one of the foundational papers with respect to SARS-CoV-2.

41-year-old man is admitted to a hospital in Wuhan who has uncharacteristic pneumonia, they're saying, right? And they test him for quote unquote known viral illnesses, and he tests negative for some of them. But they already had the presupposition that this was a viral cause, despite being in a city that is known to have insane amounts of pollution or the other unknown number of possible causes of pneumonia.

So they presuppose a viral cause. So they ultimately extract his bronco alveolar lavage fluid, which contains a mixture of human cells, bacterial RNA, DNA, fungal, genetic material, pollen, food particles, a variety of sources of genetic material. Extract all the RNA they could from that, which ends up being tens of millions of fragments of RNA, right? They input this RNA into two different computer programs, Megahit and Trinity. And I don't claim to be an expert on viral genomics at all, but just following the pattern that they do, right? And they input these reeds is what they're called

into two different computer programs, Megahit and Trinity, which algorithmically assemble them against each other with overlaps which are called contigs, which are also theoretical, by the way, templated against, in this case, I think it was called SL-C-4-5, right? So they templated against another virus, which they algorithmically assembled in the exact same way, viral genome.

And ultimately, the template that they came up with using Megahit was 30,000 base pairs, and they said it was 89.1% similar to this templated coronavirus SL-CoV Z-C-4-5. Are you following so far? Barely, but keep going. Okay. But what they highlight in their book, the final pandemic, firstly, 89.1% isn't exactly that similar when comparing genetic sequence. For example, humans and chimpanzees share about 96% of their genome, and we can agree that they're remarkably different.

Perhaps 89.1% sounds from it similar when the virologist permit their alleged coronavirus genomes to vary by as much as 50%. So they had this template of an alleged coronavirus genome that was made in the exact same computer algorithmic process. They then take this crude biological sample from this guy who presented with quote-unquote, quote, a different type of pneumonia, let's say, and presuppose that the cause is viral, sequences genetic material, pull out all the fragments of RNA they can, which ends up being like short reads, which were 150 base pairs or less, right, which would represent a more incomplete organism, if you will. Upload them into these two computer programs, template them, and what's really interesting is

that Megahit came up with a templated, algorithmically assembled genome that was 30,000 base pairs, but if they had just used the computer program Trinity, which was another one that they used, it came up with a 10,000 base pair virus. So the point in that is, if they had never used Megahit to algorithmically assemble this genome and only used Trinity, the entire SARS-CoV-2 being a virus that's 30,000 base pairs would have never been a thing, which again points back to you, this is all algorithmic assembly. And the other piece that I want to highlight is ultimately this genetic material so called is coming from a crude biological sample or from a cell culture, never from a fully intact, isolated virion coming directly from the fluids

of a sick person where it is claimed to be. Christine Massey has done an absolute incredible job of doing FOIA requests to various government health institutions across the world who are making these claims that there is these particles inside the fluids of a sick person, transmitting from person to person. She's done over 224 requests. And what she asked is essentially, I'm looking for direct evidence that these particles are in the fluids of a sick person where you are claiming that they are. I'm not talking about a cell culture isolation technique and particles derived from that. I'm talking about your own claim that there are particles being transmitted from person to person.

And in every single response that she has gotten, the results are no results were found for your request. Every single time. time. So they do not have the foundational evidence for their own claims. We're not talking about Burger King and Chase Bank. We're talking about the CDC, the FDA, various government health institutions across the world are admitting that they do not have the evidence that there is a virus coming directly from the fluids of a sick person and they employ circular reasoning and other logical fallacies to uphold their truly unscientific, pseudoscientific paradigm. Okay, so to tie these two things together and your question that you lit out with, and it's still my question,

This measles code that Andy Wakefield was told is the genetic code for measles, but we don't have a picture of it, so this guy wins $100,000, you know, keeps his $100,000. But I'm assuming in some way that genetic code goes to making a measles vaccine. We're going to try and somehow use this as a protein injected so your body will have an immune response, create immunity to it, and thereby you will not catch the measles. I think it's an imperfect product. It has all sorts of dangers that I'm very concerned about. But back to Katie's question, why did it work on some level? Why is it that the measles vaccine, if it's radio lines or 5G or whatever it is, or they didn't have 5G back in Brady Bunch days and this is a disease that goes pretty far back in its expression,

if it was an outside environmental thing that was affecting their bodies but wasn't something they breathed in, why taking this genetic code that you're saying hasn't been properly isolated, but making a vaccine did stop people from expressing this illness? And even more importantly, is keeping my kids from being able to get it, which is pissing me off. I actually want to live in Brady Bunch time. I have looked at science that says, once you've expressed this illness, your rates of heart disease, cancer, all sorts of things come down. So where I think we're going to be completely aligned is I think we are beautifully and wonderfully and powerfully made by God and don't have an effing clue. Really, we have tiny little brains that are trying to make sense of something so beautiful and complex and incredible.

But these little tiny brains did isolate something, put it in an injection, and managed to stop this infection from happening. Why does it work? So there's a lot of context to get into there. One question that I have regarding working, because if we look at modern vaccine studies, for example, and look at their primary efficacy endpoint, most of them are dealing with symptom reduction. So really the question that we need to ask is, is symptom reduction a good thing? Do we actually? I'm asking that question to this reporter right now. I totally agree with that.

And I think, I think actually the measles, measles, mumps and rebella, those vaccines were designed to prevent infection. What they're not, they're waning. They're not working as well anymore. It appears to be, and that's what, you know, immunologists and people who are kind of questioning vaccines, that's what they would say. This is waning immunity.

These vaccines are not as effective anymore. And the idea of, you know, not getting the rash from the measles, there's actually evidence in dissolving illusions from Dr. Suzanne Humphrey saying that the rash is evidence of the virus, like expressing itself in the skin and limiting itself and dying in there. And that was something that she brought up in her book. And I think that's a really important point to fully express the, the, um, symptoms of these viruses has effects on chronic disease. There's evidence at least for that where, you know, measles infection or even chickenpox can decrease the incidence of heart disease, like you said, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and other things. So I think just because, you know, I agree with the sentiment of like these vaccines, you know, may not be fully effective. And I think that's dangerous. I think we should experience.

the full symptomology of a virus in order to have its benefit. But they obviously were able to put something in a product that stopped the rash. Well, obviously, I would question that notion, though, because, again, when we look at these different skin-related illnesses, let's say, these different rashes that occur, yes, I would agree that there is some regularity and specificity in some cases. But even if you go back and Mike Stone from Viral L-I-G-G-com, and that's Viro-L-I-E-G-Y-D-com, has done incredible work showing that these different skin rash-related illnesses have so much crossover in terms of their symptomology. Like even you were showing the story earlier, like where one guy had told some of your patients, I think, something in the effect, I don't want to misspeak here, that it was one thing. And then you were like, no, I think it's this thing.

And then they went back and tested and ultimately what you said was correct. But the point is, we're looking at observation and then we're presupposing a distinct viral cause. When I tend to look at it as this is the body expressing health, again, and it's a complete flip on its paradigm, expressing health in trying to get toxins out or just expressing an upgrade, whatever you want to call it, in its own unique way. Sometimes there is overlap with symptomology, but when we look at, for example, monkey. But I think it's the lack of unique that is what is the confusion. Yeah, and I agree with you. But it's not so unique.

That's my point. You know, it's shared. The Brady Bunch, they're all having the same symptoms. I would guess most of the people in South Carolina right now are having very similar symptoms. Look, I'm not, I'm not, yeah, it's not like they're having their own unique little experience. It's very similar to their neighbors, their brothers, sisters, and, you know. And so, and again, I'm not here, I've got no, I really don't have, not fighting this battle for myrology. Your's asking.

I'm just really genuinely asking, but we are seeing the disease being shifted by these injections. It's a totally inferior immunity. As I said to this reporter, my kids, I want them to have the Ferrari of immunity. I want them to have lifelong immunity. They come in, they express this disease that we're going to say once, and then they're good for life. You want my kids to be driving around in a Ford Pinto. that they have to keep injecting these things over and over and over again to make them work, then they're failing, maybe they're just stopping, you know, the symptoms that they're still carrying it,

which is a huge part of science that I think needs to be done. But I still struggle, and let me put it this way. Let me assume you're correct. Let me assume that they've done a terrible job in using all, I don't think we'll have time to get into it, but you lay out all the chemicals that are used to extract what they call a virus. They chop up brains a monkey, whatever, tissue. They extract, and then they use all of these chemicals that are carcinogenic, all sorts of other things, to pull out this stain that say, see that, that's the disease.

And you're saying couldn't those chemicals have caused that, but that process has also showed different stains and brings out these different, that's mumps, that's measles, that's blah, blah, blah, blah. They have done this on some level because I've asked the guys that come on this show, the Ryan Coles and the Robert Malones and the though they're with me on a lot of things, they don't want to sit with you guys and have this conversation. I mean, let me not call out their names, but the people that don't, they just don't, they don't see what we're talking about. So I would say this. Let's assume you're right. They never did the proper, you know, scientific method to prove that that is the virus.

It's really rough. It's really raw. Let's say they grabbed something that was close to it or they mixed it up, but they're injecting something into us that's working on some level. It means it's coming from the outside. And if I'm to understand the general principle is viruses don't come from the outside. They are my toxic body. If I'm to understand this, if I'm correct, your body uses bacteria first to try and, you know, to get, you know, mucus and things to get toxins out of my body. If that experience fails to deliver, let's say it's 5G, let's say it's, you know, we got mold in our house or, you know, all these different things I think we agree are outside toxins that can come in.

my child needs to express these in the best way is a fever, a rash, that's a very extreme response, that that measles that we are talking about, am I correct, is coming from inside me, exosomes. It's already there, and it's something that triggers from inside me. I didn't breathe it in. My body created it to send my body into a fever to burn these toxins out. Is that an accurate description? I would say that's largely accurate.

Of the perspective of terrain theory, right? I would say that's largely accurate. Ben, I've talked a lot, and I have so much more I can say. Yeah, Ben, I'd love for you to try in here. Basically, again, going back to, you know, it's always toxicity deficiency, right? I don't believe that viruses in the new definition of virus live outside the body. You know, I'm old enough to remember when the, you know, germophobia used to be a mental disorder. You know, now it's considered a virtue.

We have sanitizer, this and that, and I don't fear this bacteria in this world. I mean, I wash my hands and I shower and I use good hygiene. But, again, understanding the cause of disease, and to say that these vaccines are actually helping. Is it helping? Yes. Blocking, limiting. They might. Limiting disease expression.

That's it. Suppressing symptoms. You know, they're limiting. But what I always say, what the seeds are to the farmer to bring a crop, vaccines are to big pharma, to bring disease, meaning that it might prolong a symptom, but look at all the other disruptors in the body that these vaccines cause. Look at all the autoimmune disorders

that come about from these vaccines. Like chickenpox. I argue that the chickenpox vaccine is part of the glioma family and of cancers. And when we have this chickenpox introduction, look at the gliomas and cancers and children rising. And I think that there's a direct correlation there, and that's my theory.

But again, they might not be getting the rash, but again, you're going to increase shingles. you're going to increase these cancers in the body. And you might, like I say, hinder that expression of that type of disease. But again, it always goes back to, it always goes back to toxicity and deficiency. That is the causal factor. It's not because some virus I breathe in or some bacteria. Yeah, there might be toxins or spores that I breathe in that increase my toxic load,

my allostatic load, and then it spills over and I have I'm expressing disease now. But that is not the sole causal factor. It's not just bad luck. Because what we're saying is if we zoom out, at 30,000 sky a foot view, the world is telling us that we're sick because of bad genes or bad germs or bad luck. And that is truly bad science. Amen. What is immunity? That's a great example.

Immunity, to me, it's the nervous system. When we have a healthy functioning nervous system, all systems are healthy. We have to understand that we live our life through the nervous system. What controls the immune system? All other systems are controlled by the one system of nervous system. That controls every cell, every tissue, every organ in the body. God put that innate intelligence inside our body to tell ourselves to communicate,

our lungs to breathe, our heart to beat. If I break my arm, I go to the doctor. Thank God he sets the bone. The ribs, they don't set the ribs, but they'll set the bone. They cast it. Did the doctor do the healing? Did the cast?

Do the body? You see, all living things have innate intelligence inside that body. The whole flaw that I have with vaccinology is that they believe that the body is inherently deficient and weak without these vaccines. I don't have a measles vaccine deficiency.

And so we have a disease. We have to understand that. That God, you said it, we are fearfully and wonderfully made. And I know full well that our body's ability to heal itself to overcome disease like the measles and chicken pox is far greater than our government's permitted us to believe. And we have to understand that. And once we understand that concept, it removes all fear out of the equation. Okay.

I mean, my little guy got sick here. And what is the onset of symptoms of measles? You fever, all these different things. And then we can go on to the faultiness of this PCR test that uses the diagnostics, not really based on subjective or objective findings, and I can go in on in a clinical setting, and it should be withdrawn. But again, you know, this is why I think we should just call it, you know, almost the flu versus a cold. If you have a fever, you can call it the flu. If you've got a cold, it's a respiratory issue. But my point is, my little guy got sick here, and, you know,

he's a year old. And I didn't fear the fever. I didn't fear this. I just trusted that his body was going to be well. I adjusted him. You know, we gave him some zinc, and we gave him some probiotics, and we trusted his body would fight it off. We didn't interfere with the fever. And I know a lot of people in the world would be fearful of that. So there's nothing you just said that I disagree with. I raise my kids the same way. I see it the same way. But still people will yell at me on this show and say,

Del, why won't you admit viruses don't exist? So let me bring this in. When I'm saying immunity, again, you know, why is it that once we catch, once we express, Yes. Catching may not be the right word, but once we express measles one time, we never have to do it again. I could still have a troublesome relationship. I could stress, all the stressors, 5G hasn't gone away, all of these things, this is where I get really confused.

All of these things that are still there. And, you know, all happened to one school at one time, and then they all suddenly had the same 5G experience together, and then they never had that again. Mama, you know, Brady doesn't have to worry about being around her kids because she knows I already did that one time. So if it's not, you know, is, how do you have immunity to something that happened from inside of you? Is that a part of this conversation? I would say there's immunity to that. And I think that once we have that immune system, there is a difference between natural and artificial immunity, 100%. And what you're described as natural immunity.

But immunity, to me when you ask the question, what is immunity, is the body's ability. to heal itself. And that really... But to what? So here's what I think. Yeah. Again, I go back to the foundational claims, right? The foundational claim is that

insert definition of virus, which I've said a number of times on the show already, exists and causes illness, right? When we look at the lack of scientific evidence for that claim, we have to then go back to the drawing board and say, well, what might be the cause of this phenomenon? I am totally comfortable

and okay with saying, I have a lot of plausible ideas that might work that need to be looked at. And I think that most people, the problem is they get comfortable or uncomfortable with sitting in the, I don't know. And I'm okay with saying, I don't know. And what is happening with respect to when we show people, like, look, Dr. Stefan Lonco, he mentioned earlier, already demonstrated that there is no evidence for the measles virus, and he won in court related to that. Likewise, Marvin Haverland recently, another German guy, deliberately got in trouble in Germany, got fined related to the COVID measures because the German government has a clause that allows people to question the scientific basis of whatever medical things they're mandating. And he ended up having his case dismissed because they didn't want to see it.

So there is like legal precedent for this idea is what I'm getting at. And ultimately, when we question those foundational claims, we have to come back to you, okay, what are the other possible, explanations. But what people are doing when they say, well, until you can tell me what does cause this phenomenon, I'm ultimately going with this viral paradigm, although I acknowledge there's no scientific evidence of the foundation for it, is akin to this analogy that I like using. Let's say that Chuck is being brought up on murder charges for killing Bill at a local gas station in Ohio. Someone that's around Chuck's stature is on CCTV footage, leaving Chuck's apartment complex, driving to the gas station in a truck that appears to be like Chuck's and shooting Bill at point-blank range killing him. That's the evidence that's being brought forth in court to make the claim that Chuck killed Bill. The problem is Chuck has direct evidence to demonstrate that he was actually in Jamaica that whole time. He has CCTV footage. He did an Instagram live while I was in Jamaica. He has all the plane receipts. He has the hotel receipts. He has

multiple people to corroborate his story. He has then thoroughly falsified the idea that he is the cause for Bill dying. What people are doing when they say, well, I recognize that there's no foundational evidence for this viral paradigm, but until you can show me what did cause this phenomenon, I'm going to go with that,

is akin to saying, well, I recognize that Chuck has thoroughly falsified. He's the guy who killed Bill. But until you can tell me who did kill Bill, we're just going to go with Chuck because he's the best fit model

that we have. That's ultimately what's happening in the space. There's no foundational evidence for the claim, and ultimately, multiple lines of that so-called evidence have been falsified tremendously.

There has been, Stefan Lank of that same virologist, by the way, he was a virologist that you mentioned, did the exact same cell culture isolation technique that virologists follow, following the exact same concentrations of those materials, except he did not include any sputum from a sick person, meaning any human sample, meaning no possible source of a virus, and the exact same foundational evidence that virologists point to as evidence for a virus, he achieved without any possibility of a virus present, meaning he's falsified the found, evidence in the field of virology. Likewise, we have multiple examples of molecular biologists, microbiologists, and other researchers finding particles in electron micrograph images that are not viral, but are morphologically indistinguishable from what virologists refer to as viruses, but they even claim in the paper they're not viral.

For example, this one right here was published in a journal called Kidney 360. We have observed morphologically indistinguishable inclusions inclusions within potocytes and tubular epithial cells, both in patients negative for coronavirus disease 2019, as well as in renal biopsies from the pre-COVID-19 era, meaning that those black and white images that people refer to that we see shared on the media, shared by the government, a lot of fear conjured up related to them, are ultimately able to be found in sources morphologically indistinguishable from what virologists refer to as viruses are found. So those are the two foundational pieces

of evidence in virology that have been thoroughly falsified. So again, we have to go back to the drawing board on what is the cause of these various phenomena. So then we're in a position now where what you're saying is we don't know what's causing this group event. Dr. Cowan takes a stab at it in the truth about contagion saying at one point residence. It's like a guitar string when you pluck it on one guitar, another guitar, that same. string rings that note that maybe we're resonating with each other. Totally beautiful concept. So as I start to wrap this up, I just want to talk about what science is for me or what,

you know, because I think that this has been pointed at me. It gets pointed at me and I've expressed my questions on where we're at and the audience is here to decide, you know, know, what they think of this conversation, you know, but, and by the way, we're going to have an off the record after this show. We're going to do something a little different. If you have questions that I didn't cover that you want to get into on this very complex issue, I want you to whatever you're watching, whether it's Rumble or on our website you're chatting right now or on X, write the questions you want us to ask. I'm going to ask them on off the record, and we're going to let you cover some of these questions because obviously we couldn't cover it all. But, But my issue is that, first of all, I don't like it when we have a movement that I think we've shown here we are all really trying to keep our children from being poisoned. Amen. We want to have the right to have complete and total natural God-given immunity, that that is the best way forward, that God had this right.

Nature has its right. And I'll say, whether you believe in God or you believe in evolution, we're coming to the same place, which is, I believe, you could say we've been in it. evolving with viruses and bacteria or whatever. If they're mutating, I don't know, but we are perfectly primed to live in this earth, that there's this beautiful, delicate balance. There's millions of bacteria and viruses and strepto-coccus in my throat, in my stomach. I think we've made a huge mistake. I think we are journeying, you know, I've been saying in my talks, go back to the very first story ever told Adam and Eve, do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,

less you shall surely die. I think medicine has played God and it is thinking it can kill one virus. It can find whatever it's calling is this measles code injected into me and keep me from expressing measles and I'm healthier. We are clearly not healthier. Whatever you're doing, it's the sickest kids we have ever seen. We're still in some sort of semantical, and I would say it's semantical, to be honest, to say that no, it's resonating, not breathing in. Well, either way, if your kids are not feeling very well, I'd rather you keep them home. Because I don't feel like right now, Patrick, a guy I work with, he knows I have crack ribs right now. He's got a pretty serious cough.

He's like, I'm going to stay away from you because the last thing I like to see you doing is coughing right now. Now, does it matter if he's going to resonate that thing to me or if there's a particle I'm going to breathe? I think we're really splitting hair. Sure, it could affect science out there into the open. But why are we attacking each other on this? Why are we, with all the focus we need on, we have got to end these vaccine mandates. We have got to all focus on an authoritarian government that is taking over the world. And it is deeply, deeply funded by the pharmaceutical industry that owns the WHO and owns the WF,

is attacking us from every direction, and I am sitting here fighting with everything I can, with the help of donors, the only one that has won the Pfizer data, the Moderna data, the V-Safe data. I am making transparent every piece of baloney that they have said to us. I won back the religious exemption, I meaning I can, in Mississippi, so that you don't have to vaccinate in Mississippi any longer. We won back the University of California school system, the college system, so you can go to college without being vaccinated in California. I'm trying to win it everywhere. Yet when I watch some of your podcasts, this is what ends up being the point of contention.

They always set up two sides, right? So there's the pro-vaccine side and the anti-vaccine side, but they believe the same thing. And when you have a chance to get some of these prominent so-called anti-vax people who say they're pro-vaccine, but what safer vaccines and all this, I mean, you need to ask them, how do you know there's a virus? How do you know measles a specific disease? Right. Because they don't know. They don't know.

What is it going to take for this information to get out? It's going to take the next time. Dell Bigtree comes on your show, you're going to say, Del, we need to start at the beginning. Beautiful. Tell me how you know, you've been talking about engineered viruses for five years now. Tell me the evidence that there is a virus. How does a virologist prove the existence of a virus and show that it causes disease? And we're not going to the next step until you do that.

Now, he may quit and say, screw you, I'm out of here. But in your position, I can't talk to these people. They won't talk to me. So you can do that. And maybe they know, I'm fine. If they say, here, we took somebody who's sick, we did centrifugation, had pure particle, we examined it, we got the chemistry, of it. We got the DNA or the RNA. We sequenced it. We showed that that particle causes disease

when exposed to healthy people in the normal way or animals, right? And then we could purify the virus out of those people. That's simple logic, right? So I don't think I'm running away. I don't think you're running away. No, not at all. I do agree with what Tom said there regarding the getting to the foundational claims, but I don't think you're running away, nor do I think it's helpful to attack people. I don't think Tom was attacking. I'm not saying it's attacking. And Tom, you're welcome on the show anytime.

And the truth is, everyone said, oh, he'd be afraid to have them on the show. I forget what date. This is the email exchange that I had with Tom Cowan and Kaufman. And I said, we are happy to fly you and Tom to our studio and lodge you at our expense to make this happen. This will ensure the highest quality is February 24, 2023. We hope this will provide an opportunity clearly and concise to represent your position. As you may know, we like to cite sources and show them during the show, so please send

us files or links to any documents or video you want to utilize during the discussion with notes on what we should pull for still shots. This is especially important to have ready as this will be live, so we want to ensure we have everything you want for the show. They essentially came back and said, Tom and I are willing to travel there for the show. Tom will be traveling mid-May from Idaho. Ideally, that would put us filming, but what's the next part? I want that next line.

I also want to clarify that we are not presenting a theory of our own. We don't have one. We are refuting the theory of virology. Here's the main topic we will be discussing. Have pathogenic viruses been discovered, or is it a tragic misconception? And so I said that's not, everyone's saying, Dell, viruses don't exist, terrain theory is what. forward, but the two biggest guys aren't going to come on this show and explain what is happening.

You've said that today. I'm not here to replace germ theory. Okay, so it gets down to why have I not covered this up until this moment? Because my goal and the mission statement for the high wire is an ICANN dedicated to eradicating man-made disease. My goal is to make sure that my kids never live in a world where they're being forced to be vaccinated. And the way I have gone about that here it is, eradicated man-made disease, our mission at the informed consent action network. You are the authority over your health choices and those of your children. In a medical world manipulated by advertising, financial interest, true information is hard to find and often harder to understand.

Our goal is to put the power of scientifically research health information in your hands and be bold and transparent in doing so, thereby enabling your medical decision to come from tangible understanding, not medical coercion. My nonprofit is the informed consent action network. I believe informed consent is everything. You can do, look it, it's a free country. Right. You should, you know, once you've been informed, what you do with your kids, that's your decision. I obviously to a certain extent.

My issue and especially at COVID time and prior to Robert Kennedy Jr. running for president of the United States is I still, and I'm going to be honest, lack, I do not see, I don't know why you guys would want me to deeply involve this show into an investigation that ends with, we don't know what's going on. When my goal is to use everything we do know to stop a vaccine program.

Right. Okay, that's what I have been focused on. And I'm really good at it. And the talking points make sense. See, Peter McCullough doesn't come on this show because I'm bringing him on to say viruses don't exist. I'm bringing him on to meet him where he's at. And at that moment was COVID's a bad vaccine, but the childhood vaccines are good. Come on, Peter, let's have a conversation.

I'm going to talk, I'm doing the same thing you are, I'm going to show you that the science that you think exists does not exist. So we're playing the same exact game, but what I believe is slightly different with the game that I'm obsessed with, which is ending mandated medical products forever in this country, is that I don't believe that by saying there's never been a placebo-based trial of any of the childhood vaccines, And I've proven that, that that vaccines are dangerous. It doesn't. What it proves is you can't say that they're safe. I agree. That's it. I agree. That is all I have there.

Okay? What does prove that they're dangerous is that I went the next step into what is the next step. After we've proven you didn't do the proper science, what science is left that we can prove. prove. It's the heart of the movie that I have out right now. I went to the authority on the other side compare vaccinated kids to unvaccinated kids. Because if there's a signal, if I'm right, that vaccines are because you didn't do safety tests, how am I going to prove that they're actually maybe more dangerous than the disease or dangerous at all? Compare kids that got them to kids that don't. And now that's taking signs and that study's now been done 10 times. And now with the Henry Ford study, done by the opposite side.

I am into science, and I can now say, I believe unequivocally vaccines are dangerous to a lot of kids. When you see the rise, 57% of the kids in that study that are vaccinated are going to have chronic disease. I don't think your story's there yet. All you have is you're saying they didn't do the science to prove its existence. I don't think you can say because of that, that doesn't mean viruses.

You can't say viruses don't exist. You can say they haven't properly isolated it. They haven't been demonstrated to exist. And this is where I would come back to, again, the burden, this is a maxim of law. The burden of proof lies on the individual making the positive claim. The positive claim are all those three things that I brought up earlier. Virus is an obligate intracellular parasite consisting of a proteinaceous coat surrounding a core of genetic material.

COVID-19 is a disease caused by the SARS-CoB2 virus. And then the third one being, to put it, you know, in layman's terms, two or more people become sick or healthy people become sick when exposed to sick people or their bodily fluids. Those are the foundational claims not only for the germ theory, but ultimately for vaccinology. So when we talk about the burden of proof lying on the individuals that are bringing forth that claim, which is what the establishment is making, and we look at their foundational so-called evidence for those claims, it doesn't add up. And not only does it not add up when we look at, for example, Daniel Reuters' book, and there are countless other people

who have covered this as well. In the attempts to demonstrate that healthy people become sick when exposed to sick people with bodily fluids, they fail drastically. And then ultimately, when we look at the cell culture isolation technique, which they claim is direct evidence of a virus, and we do the exact same technique without any possible source of virus present and get the exact same results that they get. We falsify electron microscopy.

We show that the genomes are based on computer algorithmic assembly. Ultimately, we're falsifying the foundational claims that they are making, thus saying, how can you ever say that we need to receive literally any of these injections? And it's great when it's paired with what you're doing too. It doesn't have to be like only one or the other. I still talk about vaccines.

I make posts that don't even get into the virology thing and talk just at the level of people who are ready to hear about the vaccine thing. But I also feature, because I'm passionate about it and going back to why I do what I do, I believe it's important to talk about for me. I talk about that because I think it is important because it cuts at the core of vaccinology itself

if there is not evidence that healthy people become sick when exposed to sick people or their bodily fluids. So as I travel around, and I get this, people will come up to me of you. And I think what, I mean, it's weird to be signaled out. Like, of all the problems in the world, Calvin wants Del Big Tree is the solution. If we can get Del Big Tree. So I guess I should take some pride in that. That must mean he's really good at talk about what he's doing.

He's able to get action in government agencies. He got Bobby Kennedy, HHS. So if he would just pick up this conversation about virology is a sham in doesn't exist, we could take this to all other levels. Is that what he's saying? I mean, I would say, yeah. So I think the real issue here, going back to this is that we're uncovering many, many lies.

And my real issue here is diagnostics. Understanding the clinical 101 on how we diagnose some of these diseases like COVID-19. Who had the first COVID-19 test laying around? And Kerry Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, the polymerase chain reaction test. He even said that this test is not telling whether you are sick or not. This should not be used in a clinical setting.

And so how many false positives do we have of COVID-19 during the pandemic? We had a massive amount of false positives. And it was such a deadly disease, but you had to have a test done to find out whether or not you had it. And I want to just state this too. I'm not, I'm very thankful to have this dialogue. Because to me, you know, I'm very appreciative of this. And I'm a huge fan of you and your show and what you're doing. I stand behind you. And I don't want this to be so dividing. I don't want, and that's not my goal here. I don't want to cause more division.

I want people to come together because, yes, if I have patients, I'm not going to say, hey, viruses don't exist. I'm going to start way back from the elementary principles of the immune system, how God made the immune system, and why these vaccines kind of go against that, and why we should breastfeed these babies, and that's really God's vaccine, and start there. I'm not going to just go guns ablaze in. This is a little bit more advanced, right?

And so I don't want this to be dividing. But again, going back to the PCR testing, during COVID-19 and what I saw firsthand and what I observed. You know, if you were to get audited as a clinician, the auditor is going to say, I want to say your soap notes. Okay, you have that soap note. That stands for subjective, objective assessment and a plan. And let's say I have a PCR, a positive PTR test, but I have no subjective findings.

There's nothing, no complaint. There's no, you know, there's nothing there to see. And so now I have zero objective findings. I can't see it, I can't feel it, I can't measure it, there's nothing there. So there's zero subjective, zero objective findings to correlate and correspond to that positive PCR test, that means that that test should be withdrawn. That should not be used in a clinical setting. So my question is, why were we using that during the clinical test?

We could do a whole show on PCR tests and be in complete in total agreement. I agree. It was a sham. It's a sham, but we use that test for a lot of these vaccines. Yeah. And again, so like measles, we see the same. increase in measles. We're using that for measles and HIV, all these other diseases that we have vaccines for. So I think this is an important topic because, yes, we want to get rid of

these vaccines and like, hey, no mandates. Well, we need to expose this flaws in biology and the flaws and PCR tests. And we need to talk about it because science is having that dialogue, whether I don't care how uncomfortable it is, we need to have that conversation. Amen. Yeah. And so just because, you mean, it's been stated, Dell is afraid to have this conversation. I'm gatekeeping this conversation. I'll be honest. In the lawsuits that were hanging on a dime, and by the way, I never talk about them prior to us winning. I don't raise money just because we bring a lawsuit. We are moving the needle. We've won back to religious exemption now in West Virginia, but it's going to the Pellate Court. We've got ACLU fighting us. I also worked on talking points with Robert

Kennedy Jr. as his Director of Communications. I'm very happy that he's landed in government, whatever he can achieve there and everyone's allowed to judge it. But if I was to say why did I not have this conversation all the time, which it sounds like I'm supposed to be having it all the time, it's a long conversation, as we just pointed out. We still haven't even covered. And we still haven't even covered and so we'll have to have more of it. And what I've said at people that stand up at places I'm speaking,

why won't you address this? Because what you're asking, what this does is changes the entire conversation. completely. This is no longer football inside of this stadium with this set of rules and these guys in black and white stripes. You're asking me is how I saw it while I'm winning, while I'm winning lawsuits using their language, their belief in their own virology, whether it's real or not, proves that their vaccine is doing more dangerous in their world than the virus that they say that they've isolated. I don't really care. What I know is their science in their own world is a disaster for them, and I'm turning it on them.

I didn't go to med school. I somehow ended up on a medical talk show as a kid that never got any of these things. I was trained in their language, and then I felt like God said, Del, go get him with the language you just learned. And this attack has been, Dell, stop using that language. That language is false language. I don't care. It's their language in their sport that I learned how to play and I'm winning and I do not feel

like turning it to Chinese, you know, shuffle board. Like it's not, that is not going to win this. And I will tell you, Robert Kennedy Jr. does not, not last year, you know, certainly not right now. He does not get to HHS secretary with his main talking point being viruses don't exist, as you said. You cannot lead from that. You cannot start from there, especially if under congressional review and Senate hearings,

your answer to then, you explain how it's working and you say, I don't have a theory of my own. Okay? That is not a win. I'm sorry. That doesn't win lawsuits. That doesn't get us into politics. And if I decided that was the route I wanted to take, no judgment for everyone that does, because God is guiding you to do that investigation.

But if I decide that's where I'm going, then kids in Mississippi are going to be being poisoned right now because I decide it was more important to fight biology and its existence than to save these kids right now. And it's really frustrating when we all recognize we're created by God. It's a huge part of what this is. My eyeball cells are not doing what my heart is doing. I am been guided with this show and the work that we do. I'm a new show. I'm showing you what is happening, what isn't happening, what they're lying about, what I can catch. And I'll be honest. I don't know if the COVID virus was created.

I don't know if it did anything. We did make a decision early on. I said, look, if this is a bio weapon made in the lab, it's not a very good one. And so I said, go out and catch this cold. Whatever that means, go out. Do not mask. Do not buy any of this. So I don't know what Dr. Cowan, I don't think he watches my show on a religious basis.

I certainly haven't been celebrating germ theory, but I would be cautious to say, are we just, I mean, the next conversation we can come back, should we just let biolabs all over this world do what they're doing? Because if viruses don't exist, what risk is there? Let them do whatever they're doing in these labs. We didn't even get into that. And by the way, let's take away our only opportunity to have Tony Fauci arrested. Because if viruses don't exist, we got no problem with gain of function, and that guy walks free after killing. millions of people around this earth.

So I have a problem with that argument there too. All right. So I'll let you guys have a last word. Let me say this. I am guided by a mission to do what I'm doing. I will fully accept that we may someday recognize this virus has never existed. But I don't believe you've proven that to me today. I think you've shown me really crappy science.

and I do nothing but point out crappy science. I think there's more steps that are needed. And in order for it to be useful information in what I feel like I'm on this earth to do to actually move needles, change politics, you know, hold back an authoritarian takeover, though I recognize it would be really great if the whole world has said

there's no such thing as a virus. I agree that would be the end of the vaccine program. But that did not look and still does not look like the fastest route to win the lawsuits I'm in. It looks longer. It needs more money. I hope Dr. Cowan and Kaufman and whoever, you guys are raising funds to start doing the science the right way, to challenge it. What is happening? Is it residents? I'd love to know. Is it the water in our bodies being affected by 5G? Please invest in that science. Please do that so that when my kids are in the

position to have kids, this is better understood. All right. Last words. Yeah, so I'll say, just comment briefly on the gain of function thing, just very, very briefly. I interviewed David Martin for my podcast, who a lot of people refer to to sort of reify this idea that there was a man-made virus that was created in a lab. And on my show at about the 45-minute mark of that episode, he clearly articulated that there is not an ever, never has been a transmissible particle created through gain of function, which was like a pretty shocking addition.

Didier-R-R-R-Ot, by the way, said that on my show, too. I was gonna play it, but a super well-known virologist said, we don't know how to make things infect people. Yep. Okay. The other thing I want to comment on is again, going back to Stefan Longk's court case and then Marvin Haberlund's court case. I hear you that if you're coming in with a positive claim, viruses don't exist, okay, then the burden of proof is on you to prove viruses don't exist.

But the irony is you can't prove a negative, and ultimately the burden of proof lies on the positive claim. So really, when we're coming into a court situation, if we choose to go that route, You could say, where is the evidence in accordance with the scientific method that this virus exists and causes illness? And there is court precedent related to that with Marvin Haberlin and Germany and also with Dr. Stefan Lanka. I hear you, though, that I don't know how much more challenging that would be. And I agree that there is another route to take with respect to showing that there is not sufficient science for the vaccine paradigm itself. But to say that this allows Anthony Fauci to walk off Scott Free, I don't think that that's necessarily true because ultimately it turns from

plausible deniability, oh, we were just trying to do these things in a lab and ultimately it got out of hand and it created this bioweapon to, oh, there actually never was a thing in the first place related to these mandates that, I'm not a legal expert in my mind, would turn into a plausible deniability case that we have into straight up genocide because they're encouraging people to receive a product and do all these measures related to something that has never been demonstrated to exist or cause illness in the first place. Good argument. So, I mean, I agree with I think he said it very, said it very well, but going back to Fauci, I mean, his crimes go back to HIV and understanding this, a lot of corruption. And I just want to be very clear, we're not

on two different teams, we're on the same team here. And I don't want this to cause division. Again, I come from a chiropractic philosophy, and I understand that our system, we believe that the nervous system is the key to health. And it's also what Hippocrates said in all disease, to the spine first. Okay, so I don't believe in this outside boogie virus coming in and causing problems. You know, just this whole philosophy around this, it needs to be talked about.

This is not crappy science, this is fact. This is, again, science is observational, and we can observe this as factual. In fact, if you really look at the science and you expose the vaccine science, that's pseudoscience. So when they, and I've been called pseudo-scientific my whole career,

because they said that for kiro- ever since we've been put in jail since day one. And we understand that God made the body, he heals the body, and there's no other way. And so understanding that concept, that principle, that's where I come from here. And I understand that we, I have more questions than answers. And what I came here to do is have dialogue, have questions, raise questions, because I don't have all the answers. And I'm not going to claim that I do have all the answers. Again, we need to ask questions and we have authoritative doctors out there on the field like Fauci claiming that he has all the answers and telling us that we need the vaccine, we need to mask up. He is a, he is a tyrant,

he is a criminal. Why did Biden pardon him in the last few hours of his presidency? Again, this argument goes back, and I don't, not denying the fact that we have biolabs out there. I mean, I believe that they could be toxins or poisons that are trying to poison the population. That is a, I'm not saying they don't exist. I mean, we had a Ridley lab found in L.A. here. They found contaminated COVID-19 tests. They found other contaminants in these vials, and they were owned by Chinese nationalist. To me, that's very concerning. That is a question of public safety and public health. Again, going back to this, to me, it's a foundational principle that God made the body. We either accept that, that the body has self-healing, self-regulating organisms or mechanisms in the

body, or we don't. We believe that the body is inherently deficient, flawed, and deficient without these vaccines, and we need that. But again, my point is that our body's ability to be well to heal itself is far greater than anyone has ever permitted us to believe and understanding those systems that there is an innate intelligence inside the body that's telling your heart to beat your lungs to breathe and your cells to communicate. Medicine entertains the patient, but it's the innate intelligence inside the body that does the healing, and that's my whole stance. I would say, you know, you said something again to just motives and why we do what we do. I'm really thankful you guys are deep on this conversation, and because I'm not trying to get someone to office anymore, I'm open to,

you know, pontificating here, but we're in courtrooms. Right? And it's how I see the world. It's how I see chemtrails right now. You may say that line is definitely geoengineering. I'll say prove it. And if you've got the way to prove it, then come and see me. We'll be the first ones to take it in the courtroom. But we're not there yet. We're not there. And to your point, and I think the number one rule in a courtroom is never ask a question you don't know the answer to. And so that is where this conversation's at. It's a lot of questions that we don't have the answers to.

Super interesting, super fascinating, and can tell you're as passionate about that investigation of the fraud around virology as I am around the fraud around vaccines. But I know the answers to the questions that I'm asking, and they're winning in courtrooms, and they're changing governments, and I think we can win here. And so I hope you'll sort of stay on board with at least making that happen too.

I'm going to give you the last words. sit here. Well, this has been such a fun and interesting conversation for me. I think as a health care provider, we always have to be learning and open to new, you know, science and facts. And I'm kind of with you where it's like, if it is residence, if it is water, that's great. Tell me how I can help my patients in that situation. So my goal as a clinician and as a mom with is just to provide like you say informed consent the risks of or just the the looking at your child's baseline health their their toxic burden their their bucket of whatever they were exposed to you have to take all of that in account because that's the basis for terrain theory right is like

what is their terrain what does that look like because if you received antibiotics in labor or if you got a vaccine while you were pregnant, that's going to affect their terrain, right? So there's different things that can affect your child's terrain. So you have to assess what affects your child's terrain, and then you assess the risks known and unknown of vaccination, right? Because CDC is willing to acknowledge that there is like a one in three thousand chance of a seizure with this vaccine or that, you know, they do acknowledge some side effects to vaccination. But the understanding, but the unknown risk comes from what is the actual rate of those side effects happening and we don't know that and it's because we've never been a placebo controlled trial demonstrating the actual

rate of these serious adverse events. So that's, you know, I'm boots on the ground here like talking with moms, they're trying to just wrap their mind around like what, how can I best protect my child and my main philosophy is you are fully equipped to make your child's terrain, make your child the healthiest they absolutely can with the resources that you have. You don't necessarily need vaccination. Now, are there phenomena, whether they're viruses or whatever happens, that happen to children who are not vaccinated? Yeah, like there's protestus that happens. There's these rashes that happen, whether you think they're viruses or not. It's kind of like there are things that happen

two kids who are not vaccinated and you have to be fully equipped and educated on how to help support your child through those things. And you can do that. Like you absolutely can do that. And we shouldn't be afraid of just living in the world around us as, you know, as God created it. We shouldn't feel like we have, I agree, we're not deficient in vaccines. We are deficient in the things that are, you know, supposed to help our bodies support us through. whatever phenomenon we're going through. So I'm kind of with you where it's like, whatever it is, we need parents to be educated on how to keep their children healthy,

and we need to stop these mandated vaccines. Like that's just, that's where we have to go. Yeah, mandated anything vaccines. All right, well, look, I want to thank you all. What's that? Cameron Form over here. For everyone that's still watching, I think this is a very interesting conversation.

and offer some maybe not interesting at all. But I do believe that we have to have these conversations. I've never tried to stop any conversation. This isn't the first time I've had this particular conversation, but we should be allowed to ask questions. There's nothing in science that is ever so settled that we cannot question where it's at. What I would say here is this is a table full

of four really beautiful dynamic individuals that are waking up passionate. in an investigation and sharing information as they find it the same way that I am. And so here's how you follow them. This is Dr. Ben Tapper. You can catch his socials there, Katie Collins and Alec. I want to thank all of you for being here today for this really great discussion. We're going to see what people, what questions maybe they have that we didn't cover.

I hope you feel like you got to at least express as much as we did. And I wasn't filibustering too much. So all that being said, there is a movement, a very important worldwide movement that I hope what we're realizing in this conversation should spend more time focused on what is actually our enemy than each other. There's nuance here. There's a lot to learn. There's a lot that is unknown for sure. But one thing I do know is that authoritarianism is afoot. that health is the weapon they're going to use, most likely like they tried during COVID to take all of our rights away.

And not just here in America all around the world. In fact, it seems to be taking hold even in stronger ways in Europe. And that's what I found out when I was just in Europe on a tour just last week. Take a look at this. We're on a tiny little prop plane heading to Guernsey. Apparently Guernsey is one of the highest vaccination rates when it comes to COVID in the world. Hello everyone. It's lovely to be here talking about the truth, the necessity to confront the fact that we're being lied to. Is there anyone here who feels their rights were violated during COVID-19?

I thought there'd be a few of us. Until we understand that freedom and morality are directly proportional, we will continue to walk down the path of tyranny and slavery. tyranny and slavery. Really? We have to keep these vaccines on the market because you're afraid of being impeached? I don't accept it for a minute. You heard about ICANN, the World Council for Health, the McCullough Foundation, we have formed successful entities.

What's the commonality of all of us? We're not fearful. Who is ready to speak their truth? Who is ready to change the world? Let it be so. What a discovery is it wasn't just autism and it wasn't just even in the Mar-M-Ax. There was an ocean of vaccine in the future and you know what it was talking about it. I'm backstage, we're here just outside of Amsterdam.

It's like 15 of the superheroes of medical freedom, scientist transparency. It is time to bring people to justice and bring the manufacturers to justice. know that the injections they were designed by the military. Military knows how to manipulate people. It is Psiops. In London I was arrested because I was the one who said to the public they planning a world-wide pandemic and they want to vaccinate them all. It's a pre-planned crime.

How many of you in the audience know someone in your circle who's been injured, disabled, or has died due to the COVID? 19 vaccine. Let's show a hand. Wow. That's your answer. We are beyond the tipping point. They are lying to you and they are controlling you and you need to start stepping up

talking to each other and rise up as the humanity to be. I watched your inconvenience study. A second time the other night, tears to the eye, shocking. Maybe our top summary of that lack of proof behind not just COVID, but most

vaccines. It's time for us to stand up and to show that we are there, to speak out, and also to celebrate our success, because we are the winning team. Can I have a big applause? It was an amazing journey and amazing to see how like-minded we are in different nations. If you follow me on my socials, then you would have seen as I was reporting on that journey, the discoveries I was having. The central point that has affected me from that trip and is really making me sit with my team here saying, what do we need to work on next?

What can we achieve? How do we take this to the next level? What really grabbed my attention was when I was in the UK in Guernsey, that island was like 97% vaccinated, and they're having all sorts of health issues. It's really bad, which is why they're packing that room, trying to understand what happened to them, really great people, just trying to do the right thing. being compliant. But what I discovered wrong there is that the UK, the COVID vaccine uptake rate was about 70%. 30% of the UK did not receive a single COVID vaccine. And then I was talking to Denmark and all the different people from all around Europe and they were all saying the same thing. Yeah, we're about the same place. Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, all around the world. I think Africa, 70%, which I think is really interesting. We can just hear. We can just hear.

those numbers, you know, well, 30% is the ones that didn't vaccinate, this tiny little group. Think about what that means. Think about just for a second that 30% of the entire world, of all the human beings in the world coming from different cultures, races, religions, religions with the propaganda like we've never seen in every nation, the WHO, all the fear, You aren't protecting all of the guilt and the, you know, the jealousy of whatever they could use to turn us against each other. 30% just said, hell no. No matter what you say or what you put on my television all day long, I am not doing it. And then think about the fact that that 30% didn't know that there was that many of us.

We didn't know. And so what's my message as you heard as I speak in these crowds? you realize that if any business tried to make you vaccinate, if you'd have talked to everyone, every employee there, and found the 30% that would most likely be there, you could have said 30% of us are walking out of your company if you decide to bring a vaccine mandate. No company would go through with that.

They couldn't afford it. They couldn't do it. It wouldn't work. If every nation said 30% said, oh, hell no, we know we're standing together. And guess who we're voting for? Not you next time. You want to go against the 30%

that's solid, that's here, that has some natural, God-given rebellion to propaganda. I mean, it's really truly astounding. And then add to that the fact that of the 70% that remain, how many got the vaccine just because they were forced to? Didn't believe in it, didn't want it, didn't like the science, would have rejected it if they felt like they could. Maybe they needed to see a loved one that was in the hospital or they believed that they would lose their job so they did it. How many was that?

I have to believe that puts us over 50% that all said this is BS. But 30% can change the world. In fact, 30% is going to change the world. but we have to start talking. We have to start standing up. We have to start expressing what it means to be that 30% of thinking people. So that those other 70% or half of them or the others that went along with it because they didn't think there was anyone else out there,

they know we're there. And if you're in that 30% and you're being lazy, you're not supporting groups, if you are into the investigation of terrain theory, if you're not supporting Alex Zach, or Ben Tapper or Katie Collins and the work that they're doing, then what benefit are you bringing? These people are putting their butts on the line.

They're putting it out there. If you're in that 30% that is worried about AI and is worried about the authoritarian and surveillance state, but you have a ring camera on your door, I know you're there. I know you're watching right now. I know how convenient it is to be able check in on your door, but you are putting the bars on our prison.

And so many of you that are worried about AI, they're even telling me I'm writing using AI to figure out how inhuman it's going to be. I'm using my chat GPT or checking my science against AI. And I'm really worried about AI, but AI is telling me I'm on the right path. I get it. There's an advantage to using AI right now. There's an advantage to getting a leg up on the other business until they start using it to, and eventually this pyramid will all come collapsing down.

But where will we be? Who will we blame? AI can't be stopped. It certainly cannot be stopped if you're using it today. And the surveillance state certainly cannot be stopped if you're installing the cameras today. I'm not going to sit here and have some litmus test for purism or quality. I don't have a Lexa in my house. There's no ring camera on my door.

And so far today, call me stupid. I don't know how to use chat GBT. I'm not going to do it. I don't want to do it because I don't see how it brings benefit to this earth. I'm involved in the conversations that do. I'm involved in fighting the cases that I know we can win. And I'm using the language that I know can work. And I'm proving that it works.

I'm not going to tell you what you need to do. God is speaking to you too. But one thing I know for sure, God needs all of us. We need to be inspired. And we need to do the right thing. right now. This is the high wire. I'll see you next week.