The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 465: ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS

Episode Date: February 27, 2026

This week on The HighWire, Del Bigtree tackles the MAHA moment head-on, starting with rising backlash over the Trump Administration’s recent action on glyphosate and concerns about expedited production tied to Roundup.Del is joined by Vani Hari (Food Babe) to discuss what’s happening right now in food policy and reform—and what it means for families.Plus, Jefferey Jaxen takes us deeper into the Epstein files, focusing on what’s coming to light around medical/science publishing and influence.And in a must-see in-studio interview, Del sits down with Dr. Michael Nehls on lithium—asking whether we’ve been missing (or denying) a truly essential element.Guests: Vani Hari, Dr. Michael NehlsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

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

Yeah. Action. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening. Wherever you are out there in the world, it's time for us all to step out on the high wire. I'm moving a little bit better this week. Got my wings back. I'm driving and I'm putting on my own socks. If you're wondering what I'm talking about, of course, just over a week ago, last week I was

talking about having broken my ribs skiing, but thank you for all of your support out there. I've got, you know, light panels and heating pads and castor oil and all sorts of homeopathics going and I feel pretty dang good. So I feel like I'm healing great. I want to thank you to that great community out there, all of you that have been supporting me through this moment. It's been a really wild week, I think, in many ways. I don't know if you're feeling it. Maybe it's just me, but it does feel like there's some big tectonic plates shifting below the feet of the Maha movement. Of course, the biggest move and perhaps the most shocking and surprising was this conversation about glyphosate that broke loose because of an executive order by President Trump. This was it promoting the national defense by ensuring an adequate supply of elemental phosphorus.

and the cancer-causing glypacet-based herbicides. Of course, I added that last part myself. I feel like I have to, since that's about the only thing we've ever said about this product. And I've been investigating it long before the high wire, even back on the doctor's television show when I was a producer, I hosted a debate over what I think is one of the most toxic products on Earth should not be on our food supply.

So suddenly he's saying it was in the public's interest, really national security interest, interest to stockpile this poison was a little shocking to me. I don't think I was the only one, though. This is what the news had to say about it. President Trump has expedited production of a key ingredient in the weed killer Roundup. Trump signed the order last night. He invoked the Defense Production Act, saying the herbicide is critical to economic and national security. The chemical is described in the order as essential to maintaining crop yields and controlling costs. On Tuesday, agreed to propose $7.25 billion settlement to resolve thousands of lawsuits from people who say the product

caused their cancer. Bayer denies claims and says it is safe when used as directed. The problem is that it's so widely used and has been sold as being non-toxic and safe has been repeatedly reapproved for use, but in actuality tied to a number of different diseases. This doesn't just affect farmers. This is omnipresent. They would probably find it in yours and my urine right now if they tested for it. I was really surprising to see this statement made on a product that has been doing so poorly in courtrooms around America, tens of billions of dollars in losses in multiple cases, proving things like it causes non-Hodgkins lymphoma for people that are handling it. God knows what it's doing inside of our stomachs. But even HHS Secretary Kennedy weighed in on

the conversation. This is what he put out in a post on X. I will always tell the American people the truth. Pesticides and herbicides are toxic by design, engineered to kill living organisms. When we apply them across millions of acres and allow them in our food system, we put Americans at risk. Chemical manufacturers have paid tens of billions of dollars to settle cancer claims linked to their products, and many agriculture communities report elevated cancer rates and chronic disease. Unfortunately, our agricultural system depends heavily on these chemicals. The U.S. represents 4% of the world's population, yet we use roughly 25% of its pesticides. If these inputs disappeared overnight, crop yields would fall, food prices would surge,

and America would experience a massive loss of farms even beyond what we are witnessing today. The consequences would be disastrous. I support President Trump's executive order to bring agricultural chemical production back to the United States and end our near total reliance on adversarial nations. His EO protects two pillars of national strength, our defense readiness and our food supply, when hostile actors control critical inputs. They directly threaten the security of the American people.

The Trump administration will secure these supply chains to eliminate that vulnerability. All right. So from that, I get the sense that Bear must be saying, if you, you know, don't stockpile this. We might just stop making it. There seems to be a threat on farming across America. A very complicated issue. And I wanted to talk to, you know, I've been, I'll tell you, I've been talking to lots of newspapers that are reaching out to me, obviously, because I was a part of Robert Kennedy Jr.'s campaign for president. They're asking me what I think. You know what they keep asking me is, what do the maha moms think? So I thought I would bring in one of the power

of maha moms here in America. Vani Hari joins me now. Bonnie, you know, you're up there at the top of the list of the Maha moms, and I'm sure you're getting these calls too. What do the Maha moms think about stockpiling glyphosate in the national interest of America? We are more unified than ever at this very moment in understanding how much our government is under siege. at every single level by this company bear. Bear through a hand grenade right into our movement to shake us up, to take our eye off the ball, to make this political, honestly. And it is important for people to recognize and understand that glyphosate has increased over every single president in our nation. It was the issue,

that I rose when I campaigned for President Obama and was an elected delegate and was on the front row of the DNC protesting for GMO labeling in front of the Secretary of Agriculture. It's the same issue that landed me at the top of a hit list that was a privately funded and government-funded database to docks my information and to make me an enemy of bear so bad that I had paid detractors.

I had people following me to my speaking engagements. I had people trying to discredit me and my credibility. This runs, this is something that I have been watching and been part of for over a decade in seeing the insiduous relationship that this company has with our government leadership with our government leaders, with every single branch of government,

how they spend over $9 million that's tracked. I think it's a lot more than that. That's actually tracked on lobbying just in the last few years, how they have 16 different people in the admin that have ties to this company, how there are 25 to 40 lobbyists just working on their issues alone in Washington,

Washington and in and out of our government agencies, defining how the government agencies respond to things that they are responsible for. And now I think the most important thing that this has taught me is that there is nobody in government that is going to come to our rescue, that we the people have to do this. We have to rise up.

have to rise up. We have to educate as many people about what's happening in Washington on this issue, on the fact that Bayer will do whatever they can to cover up over, you know, they have 180,000 cancer lawsuits since 2018. They've already paid out $10 billion. More than 60 cases are pending And this is a chemical that has been found in 60% of our food that is sprayed on wheat before it is harvested. And this is something that they are attacking every branch of government. They got the EO this week through President Trump, but they're also trying to get favoritism in the Supreme Court by getting the Solicitor General to defend their key. case. They are trying to do state legislation. They have 21 different states through the met, what they call it, the modern ag alliance group, that they are pushing for immunity for the

products causing cancer in 21 different states. Let's really quickly, Bonnie, I just want to point out, we're looking at this on the screen. This is from bear themselves. This is their measures at a glass and what they're focused on. Their number one goal is to seek a positive ruling for the U.S. Supreme Court. This U.S. Supreme Court is looking at giving them liability. protection, just like vaccines, where you could never sue them for the cancers that would end all of these court losses. Then number two, engage with policymakers for clarity outside the courtroom, continue to manage current cases, new lawn and garden formulations for the U.S. Safety Study webpage. I mean, down the list, maybe make a better product, you know, is that somewhere between four and

10? But first is, why don't we just protect ourselves from liability for this product? And look, Bonnie, it's not like they just suddenly got shocked. Oh, my God, we didn't know this product causes cancer. This has been being litigated since back before. When I was working on the doctor's television show, I did this over 10 years ago. So for 10 years, Monsanto's had an opportunity to improve this product, work out the issues that are being discovered in courtrooms, where we see the internal memos where, you know, you got Donna Farmer, the head of toxicology, came onto my show on the doctor. saying, oh, it's perfectly safe. And then we see the emails where she's saying the exact opposite

inside of court documents where they're saying they do know that this product, you know, causes cancer. And so how are we in this place now? And why now? Why while Robert Kennedy Jr.'s HHS secretary and you had Trump that was really seemed to understand the power of the Maha vote, this really is, I think, shocking that Bear would make this move. It looks like some sort of, we're going to pull this product from the market unless you protect us right now. They are making a real push going to the Supreme Court. I would have thought they would have waited, but it just doesn't, I think to your point, is it just they're so big and so arrogant they just don't think it matters, that the people don't matter?

I don't think they've seen the power yet of the people. And I think this is a true inflection point in our food movement. We really have to come together on this. This cannot be a left-right issue right now. I agree. The entire food movement needs to organize and tell our stories and tell the voice of what this company is doing to our farmland, to our farmers, to our future, to our children's future. And the fact that one Supreme Court case that, you know, a Missouri man sued Monsanto saying Roundup caused his non-Hodgim's lymphoma. And then the company basically failed to warn about the cancer risks.

And so that's what was decided. And a jury awarded him like a million dollars, right? And this is what's at the Supreme Court. So if the Supreme Court decides that the EPA is the. ultimate authority and that because they approved a label without a cancer warning label that Monsanto should get away with this. They shouldn't be responsible for this cancer-causing chemical that they have on the market. This has an implication to 50,000 plus chemicals that the EPA regulates. And so I don't know if the American people or even, you know, I understand what kind of

implication that has for our future, allowing corporations to systematically poison us using flawed procedures and underfunded agencies that don't have the capability to look at third party data, that they get the data straight from the manufacturer to make these decisions and to make them the ultimate authority and not to give states the right to hold these companies accountable. I mean, this is, this is the moment that if we want to stop being poisoned as American people, we have to stand up to this. We can, we have to say this is not okay. It's not okay to have an executive order that puts a chemical like this at national priority. There's got to be a different way.

It's not okay for the solicitor general to side with a chemical corporation. It's okay for the government to side with farmers. I understand farmers have a complicated issue. They need access. They need to be able to keep farming. But we need to provide them with true policies on where they can off ramp off these chemicals because we know they cause cancer. We need the EPA to tell the truth and say that this product causes cancer.

They had the opportunity to do this 10 years ago, but they chose not to. They chose instead to use ghostwritten Monsanto science to make their determination, which has now been retracted. Right. And so there is an inflection point where people that have never been involved in Washington, like myself, are now in Washington going, what in the world is going on? The fact that having this amazing movement that has created people that now care about policy and specific issues and what congressmen are doing and senators and calling all of their state legislators to get these amazing bills done to remove artificial. food dies and get junk food off snap bills and to get chemicals out of our food and ultra-processed foods removed from schools, all of that has created an army of people that are now involved in the government that have never been before. And now our eyes are becoming wide open to the

corruption that is occurring there. And we have to get louder than we ever gotten before. And so I can't think of anything more important than this very moment. where we now have the EO, we have the Supreme Court case, we have the farm bill on Monday that's being marked up and talked about where senators think it's okay to give these pesticide companies immunity. And then we have all the different state legislation that's happening.

And so it's too much. It's an attack on every single branch of government. And I think what has been really interesting in for almost like the first time, ever I'm seeing in Washington, people talk about this issue like never before. Thomas Massey did an impassioned plea on the Congress floor this week. I hope you have it because it is absolutely incredible what he's doing. We do. Let's take a listen right now, Vonie. Take a listen. Here we go. Madam Speaker, I rise today to let the American people know that this government is under siege.

All three branches of this government is under siege by lobbyists and lawyers from a German company named Bear. They spent over $9 million lobbying the executive branch and the legislative branch so that they don't have to be liable for any damages that their herbicide causes, otherwise known as Roundup. And they're having some success. Now, they haven't had any success yet in this chamber to get that immunity. They've had some success in the state legislatures, which are also under siege to get this immunity from liability. Look, the Constitution guarantees people a trial if they've been harmed. Why are we contemplating going against the Constitution? The Attorney General has opined favorably for this German company in front of the Supreme Court

about getting rid of any liability that they should have for any damages. And the most recent thing that we've seen, the executive branch. By the way, the President's Chief of Staff and the President's Attorney General worked for, one of the biggest lobbying firms that's received hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars from Bayer. And maybe that's why we've seen an executive order that says that the production of this chemical from this German company is a national defense priority. And we know why they're doing that. It's to keep them from having any liability. Everybody in this country deserves their day in court. This is wrong. We shouldn't succumb to the lobbyists, not in the executive branch,

not in the judicial branch, and certainly not here in Congress and not in the state legislatures, but there's a lot of money at play. And I implore my colleagues to resist it and do not give them immunity. You know, it seems like Massey really is foreseeing something we've been warning about here on the high wire. I do think this is all leading towards immunity. protection. We've seen this game played out before to the letter. He's talking about the people very close to President Trump. You know, who, you know, who's you referencing when he's saying, is Attorney General, was it part of a lobbying firm for Bear? Have you looked into sort of these contacts very close inside of the White House that have been friends of Bear for, you know, years,

if not decades? Yeah, I mean, there was an amazing investigative report. that came out this week. You know, I'm trying to put the puzzle pieces together. I'm having conversations in Washington's at the highest level to find out what exactly happened behind this EEO. Nobody can figure out. It literally happened between President Trump and someone else and are a couple of other people behind closed doors.

And that's it. Nobody knows anything. And that's really, really troubling to me. Also, I've found out that basically, you know, we have a situation where our government is colluding with bear. And we've seen this in the past, in past evidence with the dealings with the EPA. I think we were, I've seen things happen with the Maha Commission Report and how the initial Maha commission report had several references to pesticides in it and why, you know, those could

be implicated to cause cancer. but in the recommendations for how to implement that that Maha Commission report, there was nothing said about pesticides, right? So I've seen the influence of these big agricultural companies like Bayer making their way into data that is coming out of our government. And if there is anything that I think is the most important thing of my role in all of this is to bring light to what has happened and expose it all so that we can make sure that our government leaders know we are eyes wide open going in this. We are going to pay attention to this issue

that glyphosate is going to be the issue of 2026 because not because we made it the issue. It's because they made it the issue, right? I agree. I mean, this is something that trumps all. other progress in the food movement. We don't really care about eating real food when it's being sprayed with glyphosate and Roundup. We do not care about all of the other progress that's made the day. And I'm not discounting what has happened because I think what has happened within the last year in our government, it has been more than we've ever expected to happen. We have more transparency, more truth coming out because of Secretary Kennedy's voice. Yeah. But I can

tell you this, that no matter who is in office, I will always tell the truth and I will always fight for the people and I will always fight for our children and fight for my children not to be poisoned. Well, I'm totally there with you. I'm glad I had you on because my ribs are still too sore to be as emphatic as you're being right now, Vani. I absolutely think you're right. It doesn't matter who's in office and frankly, this feels like one step forward, two steps back. We've had so much progress, but who cares about whole food if that whole food is covered in toxic chemicals, and I cannot sue the manufacturer. I cannot get. And then what happens to safety? Why does the product evolve? Why change out the product if they can't be sued? Now you are stuck with these products. It's an amazing argument they're making. We lie to the EPA. We give them bogus data from bogus studies that we fund ourselves. And if we manage to do a three-card Monty game with the EPA, and have them say it's safe. Once they say that, we're safe forever. You can't get any new information. You can't find out that we lied to you. We are now exempt. We're immune. It's crazy.

It cannot happen. And Bonnie, you know, on one hand, maybe this is a huge mistake by the Trump administration. It certainly does, it seems unenlightened when you think of the power of the Maha vote. I'm not sure what that's going to do in this election coming up. But you know what I do love and it's always been, I've never really been political. When you say this political, in some ways this may be the greatest thing that ever happened, because I think this crosses party lines. This may just be that topic that all of us can get back to talking to our loved ones with, where we got divided over the election, who's good, who's bad. Well, one thing we know right now, Monsanto bad, Monsanto bare, bad, poisoning us. Can we all agree on this? It seems

like it's time for a rally. It seems like it's time to step up and do something. Do you have any thoughts on that or plans on that with all this. It feels like we need to make our presence known. This court case that is going to the Supreme Court on April 27th will decide the future of whether it is okay for chemical corporations to poison us, to systematically poison us and get away with it. That is the moment that we have honestly been waiting for to come together in a way that the world has never seen. And I have a vision that we will all go to the Supreme Court that day. It will be the people versus poison. And we will make our voices heard. And the biggest grassroots movement the world has ever seen to stand up to this foreign corporation that is poisoning us

and threatens all of the other chemicals that are going to be approved by the EPA and all of the other assaults we're going to have on the human body from people who are putting greed before humanity and greed before our health. And it's up to us to make our voices loud and to prove to Washington that we will, you will deeply regret these decisions that you are making. This is not okay. And you have to understand that we need to stop poisoning our American citizens. Wow, Bonnie, that sounds like breaking news. The People versus Poison, Washington, D.C., April 27th. Vani will be there. I will be there. So that's two. Now let's build on that. Let's make this. I'm absolutely with you. This cannot go a step further. We can no longer live in this country where they keep pulling what I call the too big to fail. Let's bail out bear. Let's buy more of their products. Stockpile poison. Because God forbid, our. Our farmers have been addicted to this product. You know, farming, it's time to evolve.

It's time for American citizens to come first. And by the way, I think all the American citizens will go out and help those farms. We want to see our taxpayer dollars go and immediately start moving all these farms in regenerative farming, organic, so that we know the food that we're eating and that we're giving our children that's going into the baby food supply and all of it's being affected. I keep talking to holistic, you know, food makers like you can't. cannot keep the heavy metals and poisons and toxins out of baby food because there's just so many crops that are covered with this stuff. So, Vani, you've been a voice. I think this is a huge moment. And really, it's not political. This has always been the problem. The government's never

going to be the answer if we don't step up and show we are the people of for and by the people is the mandate of this country. And the government thinks that they can, you know, create safety clauses and protect giant corporations from liability and then keep us out of courtrooms, which is our right as Thomas Massey, you know, just stated that they've got another thing coming. I think this is going to be huge. And I really do think this is going to cross party lines. Yeah, I mean, I give an impassioned plea to every single person who has sat on their hands but believed in this issue for the last year because President Trump is the one leading the conversation

on this issue or the Republicans are doing or because of the Maha movement. I have an impassioned plea for you. Help us stop the poisoning of our children. Let's all come together and let's show Washington that this movement, these voices of everyday moms and dads and people out there deserve to be heard and that we have an opportunity like we've never had before because of what's happening in the political climate, but also what's happening at the Supreme Court to make our voices heard, to make the entire courtroom shake as Monsanto Bear is giving their arguments. That is what I want to see that day. I want them to feel our energy in that courtroom, the rattling of our voices and the passion and the and the sheer

might of the God Almighty people coming against this and saying enough is enough. Vani, from your mouth to God's ears and the people's ears will be there. We're going to be there in huge numbers. Thank you for your passion. I'm sure we're going to cover this more as we get close to those dates. Marking your calendars, everybody, April 27th, People v. Poison. Look, you don't want to be one of those people to say I wasn't there the moment the world changed, the moment the earth shook. And the people stood up.

Vani, we'll be in touch. Thank you for your passion. Thanks for joining us today. Thank you. You know, I think one of the things that's happening in this, and I watch these polls, Jeffrey Jackson's about to come on and talk about some of the polling around vaccines. The way they manipulate the polls, the entire media cesspool that is against us, that's owned by Bear Monsanto and all of the other corporate oligarchs are shifting this conversation. And I think it's really hard as a president. You only see, especially if he's got people right in his cabinet that are essentially spent their lives working for Baron Monsanto.

What voices he hear? And then he sees these polls and these polls tell them everything. Oh my God, vaccine's a loser or whatever. And it is starting to affect, you know, this year and what people can do. So we decided, you know, how important is this glypacet issue to you? We decided we wanted to run our own poll. This is a poll you can share worldwide. There's a bunch of ways that you can do it.

You can text and tell all your friends just text 72022, right in the word poll. There's a bitly right there. you can grab this QR code and it's just a set of questions about what your knowledge is of this glyphosate issue and what your passion is. We already have people signing up right now, filling out this poll. I want to check in with it later on in the show and we'll go through some of the answers that we're getting from the public. But it's time to show Donald Trump real polls, polls of the people, not polls run by the toxic corporate chemical-driven news agencies. So I hope you'll make this huge. We want as many people to sign up for this poll.

And by the way, we need your email to prove that you're a real human being, that it's not just a bunch of bots putting this together. And in that email, we will keep updating you on your email of where this poll is at. And we hope to submit it to President Trump so we can see what real people really think about these issues here in the United States of America. Don't you love it? This is the high wire. We're not just some news agency complaining about the problems.

We're getting involved. We're promising to march on the Supreme Court. I love it. That's activism. That's what it's all about. Power to the people. And speaking of one of the powerful people in America, it's time for the Jackson Report. I know you jumped right on this, Jeffrey, threw out a couple reports coming in early

the week over the weekend discussing this. This isn't just your average news story, is it? It just feels like something much bigger, much more important as a foot right now. now. This is a firestorm moment, though, and it has arcs and tentacles throughout our entire genetic memory in America when we're searching for justice when it comes to the poisoning of our children and our families and our communities. And I want to paint a picture here because we've been down this road before, and I hope everyone pays attention. So I want to look at New York Times. This was just this December, just almost a couple months ago here. And New York Times wrote this article

and they said the war over a weed killer might be headed to the Supreme Court. Well, we know it is now in the Supreme Court, but it quotes the CEO of Barron here. And he says this, the stakes could not be higher as the misapplication of federal law jeopardizes the availability of innovative tools for farmers and investments in the broader U.S. economy. So he's saying, this Supreme Court case, these lawsuits are threatening the tools of farmers in the very economic viability of the United States. So I want to say this arc of justice has a long memory, and we've been down this road before. Lobbyists have stabbed American children and families in the back when it came to their health

before, and it looked like this. In 1984, early 80s, we had headlines that looked really similar to what I just read you. Look at this one, 1984. Fear of lawsuits prompts D.P.T. Vaccines shortage and rationing. They're saying all these lawsuits, these vaccine manufacturers are receiving, we may have from vaccine shortage, we have to ration vaccines, there's going to be outbreaks. Here's another one. Same time frame. Vaccine liability threatens supplies. Well, I want to take the executive order Trump just signed last week on glyphosate. Look at the wording. It's the exact same thing. The same wording, ensuring adequate supply of glyphosate-based herbicides and the Chemical manufacturers want legal immunity from the harms their products cause.

We've seen this before. It was 1986. Ronald Reagan was the president, and this is the bill he signed. National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. You go into this bill and it says this, provides that no vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death, resulting from unavoidable side effects.

These shots are unavoidably unsaleighed. but the government and the manufacturer is they're not going to be held liable. And then, and then, Jeffrey, just to that point, and this is so critical, right? You know, the art of war, know your enemy, know their strategy. We've seen this strategy so we know how this play, this playbook has been written, but just that point, that they know they are unavoidably unsafe there, that they have known side effects, but after signing that bill, did our government go out and start giving us informed consent, saying just so you know,

some of your kids are going to be maimed and injured by this product? No, they went on a campaign after giving liability protection to lie to the American people and go with the slogan, safe and effective, safe and effective, and if anybody questioned safety, which Ronald Reagan and that bill says right there, it is not perfectly safe for everybody. This will destroy lives, and for that reason, we're giving liability protection, then they should have been honest with American people and saying this product is not perfectly safe. There are going to be lives destroyed by this. And instead, every doctor, every scientist, every government official since that moment has been gaslighting America and lying to us and frankly around the world

saying totally safe. Anybody that questions it's a lunatic. Really? Because we gave you liability protection because it's not safe for everybody. And this industry operation is happening again right now on our watch. And it's important to learn from the people and the parents and the mothers that were there in 1986 and in the early 80s who went through that fight. One of them is Barbara Lowe Fisher, the head of NVIC, the National Vaccine Information Center. Here's what she had to say about that time. Take a listen. Okay. They say we're going to leave the country without any vaccine, and the Congress said, we've got to protect the vaccine supply in this country. And they said to Jeff, you can come to the table and fight for what you think the parents and the children should get.

Or you cannot come to the table. But we're going to pass this legislation to protect the vaccine supply. And we're going to do it with or without you. So we said, we'll come to the table. But there is three things. We will never agree to complete liability protection for doctors or for manufacturers. Number two, if you're going to protect the vaccine supply, you have to protect the children by safety provisions. Safety provisions have to be part of this law.

Equal emphasis. And the third, because they immediately went to a federal compensation program. We said if there's going to be a federal compensation program, it has to be an alternative to a lawsuit. In other words, parents can choose to either go to court or they can choose to get compensation. We understood they couldn't do both. Amazing when you look at that and I think those are, you know, we really need to think about what she just said. There was basically three provisions. Not one of those provisions ended up holding up. They wanted there still to be the right to sue outside of vaccine court.

That ended up being taken away. It was the only way forward. All the safety measures disappeared, which was the heart of the lawsuits that started the informed consent action network. As you know, those were the first lawsuits against FDA, CDC, NIH. We proved they never did the safety measures. They never put forward the task force that was supposed to improve these products. Nothing happened. There was no improvement of the product, just a total gaslighting of America, and the poisoning of America, and a ramp up of the amount of vaccines

that were then forced on our kids through mandate. It actually increased the toxic level into our children. And so I think as we look at this right now, let's not make the same mistake. I think Vonny Harri is right. We're not going to send five parents in to negotiate some part of this that'll be okay for America. for America. We're going to stand as one loud body as we should have back in 1986 outside the halls of justice. I think we have to stand up, shout, and make sure that our voices are heard that we are not going to accept this here in this country.

Adele, this goes beyond Glyphosate. So right now, lobbyists are leveraging the midterms to drive a wedge between Trump and the Maha-focused agenda that Kennedy brought in, that really propelled Trump into the presidency. Without Kennedy, clearly Trump would not be sitting as a president right now. And this is no clearer than in this political article from just a couple days ago. And listen to this. It's literally framed by lobbyists, the entire articles of victory lap by the lobbyists. It's titled RFK Jr's days of going wild on health may be over. They say this about RFK Jr. For Washington lobbyists, the move was an early glimpse of how midterm realities are forcing the administration to shift away from Kennedy's anti-vaccine and anti-chemical plans.

Instead, the agricultural and pharmaceutical industries he's long targeted are breathing a sigh of relief as the White House signals is raiding in Kennedy's attacks on their products and tasking him with touting healthy eating in the President Trump's efforts to cut drug prices and deals. Kennedy's not there and Trump are not there so lobbyists can breathe a sigh of relief. But I want to go on. And then it goes on and say they actually get quotes from lobbyists. So they're running circles and victory laps in this thing. This guy says, picking on farmers.

Now, they're talking about trying to get this harmful chemical glyphosate out of our food supply, trying to get the lawsuits that and get people that were damaged by this to make sure they don't have immunity to keep doing this. This is what they say, picking on farmers. That's how they frame that. That's the base of your party, said Sam Goldig, managing partner at CGCN, a Republican lobbying shop that has worked for foodmaker, Kraft Heinz. You don't want to mess with that before an election. So that's the kind of conversation Trump's getting in his ear. But then it goes on to say this.

Drug makers and manufacturers of chemicals, including pesticides, are some of the biggest spenders in Washington, typically outpacing food makers. The pharmaceutical research and manufacturers of America, which represents brand-name drug makers, spent nearly 38 million on lobbying last year. It's highest on record. The American Chemical Council, meanwhile, spent almost 19 million last year. These are not mom-and-pop farmers. This isn't your local person at your...

down the road selling you eggs. These are big ag. This is the biggest of the biggest of chemical manufacturers, big pharma manufacturers. They're attempting to essentially bubble wrap Washington at this point and the president and insulate him from the American people and the MAHA focused.

So when we talk about polls, the midterms are coming right around the corner and there's a lot of polling you're gonna see out there right now. And so they're trying to get the pulse check of the American public and also influence the elections at the state levels. Here's one of them that's coming up and they can be deceptive.

Polling agencies should be unbiased. Listen to this polling agency. This is the intro before they even present the data that they pulled from. They say this, in the districts that will decide the control of the House of Representatives next year, Republican and Democrat candidates who support eliminating longstanding vaccine requirements

will pay a price in the election. Goes on to say vaccine skepticism is bad politics. All right, well, so much for unbiased. Let's look at their question. they're asking, the respondents, the respondents were asked, what do you think about this? Please tell us whether you agree or not. Do vaccines save lives? They also say, vaccines are the best defense against many infectious diseases. There's no nuance there. There's no room for maybe they save lives sometimes, but what about safety? We'd like to see more safety.

We wouldn't like mandates. We don't like those things. No room for nuance. So these are crafted. These polls are crafted. But at the same time, we really know which way is going to see. Despite the media trying to divide us, despite lobbyists trying to paint pictures or polling companies trying to pay pictures, America is actually more united than they tried to tell us that we are. So here is a 2025 Gallup poll going right into this year. And it talks, they're asked what your view of business sectors in the U.S. are. And you can see a list of business sectors there. Look at the bottom.

Pharmaceutical industry and the federal government, least favored businesses, in the negatives. And that, clearly federal governments in Washington, and they're being assaulted by pharmaceutical lobbyists. This is not America. This is not the American people, what they wanted. And now let's continue. This is a Brownstone Institute article by Jeffrey Tucker. What the polls say about the pharmaceutical industry and vaccines.

And you can see there it starts right out. Public confidence, here's another way of putting it. In key U.S. institutions, you can see pharma right there down from the year 2000, 60 percent of people loved big pharma. Now it's 28% in 2025 compared to other industries. But now let's go to some real polling. Here is a poll that everyone should pay attention to. This green, the green spot right there, represents giving families a choice.

People said families should have a choice when they respond to this in their vaccination decisions. You average that across, that's across the entire political spectrum, independent, Republican, Democrat. Average that across is almost 50% say that, that they would. want that. And then if you look at the red, the red tells you basically that vaccines are unsafe. You average that across, it's about 8 or 9% across the spectrum. Just straight up vaccines are unsafe. But here's the real slam dunk, the home run, the closest to a sure thing in an uncertain political environment. This is the poll everyone should be looking at. It crosses all party lines. The opposition to giving vaccine manufacturers blanket immunity. Just how we

started this section. There's the red. across the board, you average all that together, across the entire political spectrum. You're looking at high 70-something percent. Everyone wants this, everyone wants this immunity gone from vaccine manufacturers. So why would we put it on pesticide makers? Why would we allow them to have that if this is so unpopular? Well, the only way is if we don't make our voices known, right? And look, I am into issues in this country.

I really have said I'm politically marooned. I still am politically marooned. But I see a president right now that is vulnerable to public opinion. That actually cares about public opinion. And I think he's getting some bad polling from, you know, not public opinion, but lobby opinion. I think we all need to make our voices known. I think the best thing you can do if you believe you're a part of Maha is to say you're

absolutely not happy with this and not being represented. And this could affect your vote that we want to see a different, we want to see a different outcome here. We want to see a different strategy towards our front of our vote. farming practices. We would love to see massive investment into regenerative farming practices and teaching tools for farms. I think we all care about farmers. You know, it's not necessarily their fault that they've been manipulated, manipulate over years and really made to be addicted to this product and its weed killing, you know, properties. When there's all sorts of new

technologies, there's lasers that kill weeds and bugs and all of it. Why aren't we modernizing like that? We're going to have AI take over the world, but we can't have some robots go out and clean up the weeds. Come on. President Trump, let's get on this. And the lobbyists, my message, the lobbyists will speak for you if you don't speak for yourself. Amen. And that's at the federal level and that's at the state level. So I present this not to demoralize, but to show people that it's time to get involved.

It's really time to stand up and do this, whether it's phone calls, emails, however you want to activate. Because it's not just glyphosate, it's not just vaccines. Lobbyists are already rolling back what we reported as Maha victories in the past. So in 2025, I want to show this article here. Trump moves to tighten rules on risky research on viruses. So we put it in executive order together basically to end risky gain of function research. That was a celebration. And right after he did that, you had the National Institutes of Health.

They already began terminating networks aimed at stopping these pandemics before they start. They tried to frame it as a bad thing. This is the Center for Research in Emerging Infectious Disease. This was a Tony Fauci-led initiative. This is an initiative that gave Peter Dazic, EcoHealth Alliance grants. Christian Anderson, he's part of the authors of the Proximal Origins saying, no way this virus came out of a lab, but in private emails as we've shown, we're saying, it kind of looks like this might have.

These are the people that were getting the grants from this. Trump, Kennedy, they shut that down, NIH shut that down. Here's the new article, the most recent article. Congress forces NIH to reverse policy, continue funding Fauci's unsafe and infectious disease centers. And it says this in the article, University lobbyists have struck back. Managing a slip language into,

managing to slip language into the Congressional Appropriations bill that forced the NIH to spend $18.2 million to fund Creed centers once again. It doesn't just stop there. Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, started by funded, seed funding by Bill Gates. We celebrated this when it happened. The Vaccine Alliance has its billion dollar grant

cut by Trump administration. Now here's the more recent headline U.S. Congress backs Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, despite Trump administration cuts. And it's now slipping a rider in a foreign assistance bill. And you can read the language for yourself right here. And how much does it carve out for Gavi? Well, a total of over $3.5 billion. You can see that number right there for Gavi and other initiatives.

These are lobbyists at work. This is how it's done. They slip things into bills. And they basically do this outside of the view of American people, unless journalists spotlight this and people try to activate in Washington at the state level and say, do not do this.

These are victories that we voted for. Do not reverse these. Amen. Huge, huge importance there. And again, we're waiting for journalists that are funded by Bear, Monsanto, Moderna, Sinofi Aventis. That's why your work is so important, Jeffrey,

and the work that we're doing here because obviously we're not getting any money from any of those people. Really, you know, unbelievable. moment. Yeah, absolutely. And I want to go, I want to finish off here with kind of the story that just keeps on telling itself, and that's the Epstein files.

In order to paint this picture, I want to start here with really Jeffrey Epstein's confidant friend who's sitting in a jail cell right now, Gisley Maxwell, her father, Robert Maxwell. He basically is responsible for the for-profit, controlled peer review research, journal system that we've lived under for decades, you know, the stuff that settles science. So this is the article that kind of lays this out really to give you a quick hit on this. It's titled, Is the Staggering Profitable Business of Scientific Publishing Bad for Science? It says no one was more transformative and ingenious than Robert Maxwell who turned scientific

journals into a spectacular money-making machine that bankrolled his rise in British society. It says scientists occasionally questioned the fairness of this hugely profitable business to which they supplied their work for free. But it was university librarians who first realized the trap in the market Maxwell had created. The librarians used university funds to buy journals on behalf of scientists. Basically what was happening.

Universities were forced by these journals. These journals were extremely inflated in their price. They were blown their budget on this. But then the scientists basically had to kneel before this because in order to get things published, they had to jump into this system. And it became this self-prepared. This self-perpetuating monolith, and he was sitting there reaping all the profits.

So now I want to bring that to present day because these are monopolistic men. And that's Robert Maxwell, connected clearly through Jolene to Jeffrey Epstein. But then we have Bill Gates also connected to Jeffrey Epstein, and he's a monopoly man too. Despite all of the charitable work he's done, here's a headline here, because it's hard to find bad press about him unless you go to social media. A document show Bill Gates has given 319 million to media outlets. You can see here how many of the almost 60 media outlets the Gates Foundation money has gone towards to skew reporting about the foundation and to report favorably about things that's

near and dear to the heart like vaccines. Well, let's go into the Epstein files here because we have Gates' chief scientific and technology advisor Dr. Boris Nicolik. He's been in the Epstein files before we showed you. more he started something called Biosysa capital partners in 2014 and he was its managing partner while still working with the Bill Melinda Gates Foundation and you can see here this picture they invested Bill Gates invested ten million dollars in something called Research Gate now Research Gate we reported some of

the research during the pandemic this is a the 25 million plus members worldwide it's kind of a hybrid between social media like LinkedIn social media and a science publishing clearinghouse. And what they do is you can upload, any researcher, scientists can upload their information there. So Bill Gates tried basically to monopolize this with the help of Jeffrey Epstein. And we go to ex post by an account named Science Guardians,

and they give a really clear view of what's going on here. They said, why would billionaires like Gates and Epstein crave this kind of power? They said, owning a hub like Research Gate lets them shape what research explodes into the spotlight and what quietly fades away. control the feeds, and recommendations equals quietly steering. You can see scientists chase and publish which next,

what projects get grants and funding, and what the public is told is solid science. So now it's not only monopolizing a key part of science, but also incentivizing to hype it. So Gates bills himself as someone who, he really cares about charity first. It's not about making money. But here's Dr. Boris Nicolik,

is basically his right-hand man, speaking to Jeffrey Epstein after the investigation, after the investment of $10 million in ResearchGate. He begins hyping the company. So here's one of the emails. This is Dr. Nicolick to Jeffrey Epstein. He says, some good news. ResearchGate is making major progress.

A flurry of news just started. Another one. When we talked earlier in the day, I mentioned you about ResearchGate. I sent you several articles last week, but an addition one came out. And this is in science. It is incredible.

After Nature and all other magazines, I will know in two to three weeks, when is next round plan, and for how much. So here, Dr. Nicolick, who's connected to Gates, is feeding Epstein sex trafficker, real-time insider information and advice, trading advice, essentially.

Sounds kind of illegal, but then he goes on to say this in another email. As we watch this, read this, Jeffrey, just try to wrap my head around, why would Epstein care? Right? I mean, why is Bill Gates and his little henchman, you know, dancing for Jeffrey Epstein? Hey, guess what?

We got research up at Gate. Oh, we're affecting the news. Who is Epstein? Right? I mean, I know this is simple. We're all sitting here, but every time we read this stuff, who is this guy? Why is Bill Gates and his little henchman dancing for this guy? Who are they all really working for, I think, is what we're starting to try and paint a picture here. Because I thought, you know, Bill Gates was in charge during coronavirus, but he'll dance for Epstein. Why? Why does Epstein care if these articles are being published? It just shows you something much darker, bigger, and more sinister going on in all of this stuff. Yeah, when you go through the emails, Epstein and the people that were controlling him and directing

him had an extreme interest in monopolizing science, medicine, pandemic planning, physics, new physics. He wanted to control things. He was looking into these things. So now, a final one here from Dr. Nicolick to Epstein. He says this, Researchgate is getting there with an explanation mark. This week, the nature, one of the competitors, published this article essentially demonstrating that Researchgate is winning. So he's just hyping this and hyping this and hyping this. But again, as you look across the waterfront of all of the emails, there's some pretty ugly stuff in there. And one of them dealt with Bill Gates. We spoke about this a couple weeks ago and some girls. And so here's the headline. Bill Gates denied it. Just just a couple

weeks ago. He said, Bill Gates denies sex accusations in recent Epstein files release. It's about a couple Russian girls he met. Now, that never happened. Well, that didn't work. That limited hangout didn't work because here he is now. Bill Gates admits affairs with Russians but denies illicit behavior. So I'll give you, this is the Bill Gates apology tour. I'll give you a little bit, but I'm not going to tell you everything I did. I guess I did something with some Russian girls. I had a couple affairs, that's fine, but I didn't do anything else. Trust me. Well, that doesn't look like the truth. And here's an article, What Gates knew? And this kind of throws it out there in this opening paragraph. Says the Epstein files reveal a system, not a scandal, across eight investigations and thousands

of EFTA numbered documents. The pattern is not one of compromised billionaires making bad choices. It's an operational infrastructure. Financial instruments, intelligence channels, diplomatic access, personal placement, and narrative control, structured in a way that concentrated influence. That's the key right there, concentrating influence, monopolies. And I want to end this segment with some breaking news right as we're going to air. That president of the World Economic Forum has just stepped down due to his ties to Epstein. Wow. This is Borg. Brand. He is out. He is stepped down himself. He has resigned. He has put his letter of resignation in there. He was under-investing investigation by the forum, by the World Economic Forum, and we were actually not holding

our breath on that because the World Economic Forum investigating its own people, but it looks like he was given the option to step down and he has done that. So again, Domino's are continuing the fall. This isn't, these are some serious people that are stepping down. Many of them in Europe we're seeing just day by day, it seems like there's more and more. Wow, Jeffrey, amazing reporting. These are amazing moments we're in. in many ways, you know, I feel like, you know, we talked about the end of COVID that we had won.

We're not walking around with tracing, you know, our vaccine passports not on our phone. We can get back on planes. The masks came off. And I said, you know, they've retreated, you know. The dark forces have retreated over the hill. But I said, mark my words, they're over there, planning and scheming their return. In some ways, this bare moment and what's going on right now, it be. feels like they think it's time to come back over that hill and begin their attack again,

probably a little earlier than many of us realized. But it's okay, Jeffrey. We're waiting for them. We know their plan. We're going to keep laying it out. Really great reporting. Appreciate it. All right. Thank you very much. All right. I'll see you next week. Let's take a look at this poll. We really want to get as many people. You should be helping us get. Let's just get huge numbers on this, that we can show what people really are thinking about this glypacet scandal. if you will. You can text the word poll, P-O-L-L to 72022. You can grab it at Bitley-Slas

I-Can poll. You can take a picture of this QR code. Please share it widely. Tell all your friends and family. Why do you take this poll? I think it's very important that, you know, we see where is the Pulse of America at on this issue. Here's some of the things where you'll find that the Glybosate Public Health and Federal Policy and I-Can public poll. Are you, you aware that glyphases is one of the questions based herbicides have been associated with cancer claims that result in more than 10 billion in jury verdicts and settlements. Do you believe manufacturers of glyphosate-based herbicides should have legal immunity from lawsuits related to alleged health harms? Should federal policy allow the stockpiling of glyphosate-based herbicides

as part of national preparedness planning? Does the November 28, 2025 retraction of a foundational study published in regulatory toxicology and pharmacology and used to support the safety of glyphosate affect your trust in current safety claims. That was, by the way, the one study they've always relied upon and say, see, it's safe and that was just retracted. So where does that leave us now? Again, you know, polls are also used as training guides to send it to everyone. You know, it might be a good test of, you know, where's my friend out? We may be arguing about vaccines, but are we arguing on this? Why don't you take this poll and let's see, you know, it's at least a conversation starter. I want to point out, we didn't need to

Jeffrey Epstein here on the high wire or for our investigation team to know that health was going to be used as a center point to control the world. I said it before I really knew there was any Epstein files out there. Before there was a pandemic, I said I believe there's going to be a pandemic. I said things on stages like the largest lobby in Washington's, the pharmaceutical industry. It's also the most powerful lobby around the world. And I would say if there's outspending oil and gas two to one, we're fighting wars in the Middle East for oil and gas in that lobby, what do you think the pharmaceutical lobby is buying? I said they're buying you. Not your children. Your children are already being forced vaccinated while you're asleep at the

wheel, but they want your body forced vaccinated, 50, 100, 100, 1,000 vaccines in their dream world of the future where you become human ATM machines for them, pin cushions, if you will, filled with every product that they can stick you with. That is the future that they still believe in. That was what I was talking about. And now, you know, we're just getting corroborating evidence that exactly what we thought Bill Gates was up to now involves Epstein and government officials

and more and more is coming out. Thank you, Thomas Massey, for being one of the true North stars in our government that doesn't seem to care who you're threatening and what's going on out there. But this work, to be good at what we do, to predict things even before we have Epstein files opening up, to be fighting for you and opening the Pfizer files,

the data the FDA tried to hide from you for 75 years, the Moderna data, the FDA tried to hide from you forever, the V-Safe data, all of that is open. It is now transparent. Pandora's box is open and scientists around the world. Books are being written like the Pfizer papers. You know why that book exists? And I want to thank Naomi Wolf for that work.

that book exists because of you, every one of you out there that is donating to the work that we're doing here. You're donating to a news program that is not like anyone you have ever seen. We are not just reporting on the news. We are suing government agencies. We are suing states. We are bringing back religious exemptions. We are changing the map that we live on. That we, you know, the food that we eat and that we, the air that we breathe, we are affecting change. And if it's not obvious, we need you now. They're coming back over the hill. They're armed.

They're ready. They think they own this. They think they outman us. They think their lobbies are more important in this country than you are. I hope you'll recognize this right now and say, you know what? It might be time to double down on the funding of ICAN, the high wire because they're the only ones that really seem to deliver results on a constant basis. We're fighting for you. We're investigating for you.

So become a recurring donor. At the top of any of the pages of the websites that we're on, $26 a month would be awesome. You can't imagine. You know, what is that one lunch? You know, maybe in this economy, skip a lunch, a little intermittent fasting and say, today I'm starving for the future of America. And really, I think we're the beacon of light and hope for the world. So they're all watching.

It's an incredibly critical time. We need to be loud and proud. No matter what you think of Donald Trump, love him or hate him, he needs to know that you care and you're watching and you're ready to make your voice be heard. This is one of those ways to do it and fill out that poll. Get everyone you know and fill out that poll. If you're listening right now on a podcast, let me make it really easy for you to donate. You're going to pick up your cell phone. You're going to type in the number 72022 and then just write in the word donate.

And I'm going to respond with a text directly back to you. All right. I'm really excited about this next interview. This is a doctor, a scientist that came on our show first during COVID. He's been on here twice. And every once in a while, there's just one of those people that just has a way of putting things and understanding how he does his research that I think is incredibly captivating. He brought forward how important vitamin D was, not just why, but the mechanism with which it worked. He provided one of our top-selling books, the indoctrinated brain. Well, he's got a new book right now, The Conspiracy to Stop Lithium. The Conspiracy Against Lithium, there it is. His name is Dr. Michael Nells. And if you haven't heard of him or haven't been watching him on our show, take a look at this.

Dr. Michael Nels? Dr. Michael Nels. Dr. Nels. He's a medical doctor, physician. He's a molecular geneticist, specializing in immunology. Dr. Nels advocates for a strong mental immune system. His studies look at the critical portion of our brain, as the hippocampus, which processes and indexes memories.

What does the brain need to think at all? Was the topic of my work the last 10 to 15 years. Humans are so eager to learn narratives. Narratives are the food of our mental immune system. 2018, the World Economy Forum, told us, depression is the number one cause of ill health and disability worldwide. And from this low, after six months into the COVID measures, we had a three-fold increase.

People who've taken the MRNA back seem different psychologically. We're not imagining that. That's what's really happening. It's not about health really to undermine the human ability to think, and it's even worse than that. It attacks part of the brain that is responsible for decision-making, for the ability to doubt what's going on. If you want to install a new operating system in a computer, for example,

you have to erase the previous system. That's exactly what the spike protein helps to do. The greatest long-term threat, in my opinion, is the collapse of the individual, mental, and thus, social immune system. But there's hope. I've shown recently that with low dose essential lithium, you can block GSK3, and people with brain fork, it disappears. Lithium is really extending life. But the essentiality is not recognized by the world community. He's the author of The Conspiracy Against Lithium.

It's my pleasure to be joined right now by Dr. Michael Nels. Hi, Dale. Good to see you again. Yeah, thanks for having me again. Welcome back. You know, the last time you're here, we're discussing this book, The Indoxinated Brain. You've got several others you've given me to take a look at.

But the last time you were in studio, we were talking about vitamin D and a lot of things were going on with, you know, COVID. But you had touched on lithium. And we got so many people writing in that just wanted to know more about low-dose lithium. I started sending it to my parents. We started taking it at home. but in all honesty, like I don't feel like I have the whole picture. And then in looking at this book, I mean, you talk about this,

like it may be one of the most important elements in the world for our health. Well, I mean, it's like all the elements that are essential are essential. So it's not something special by itself. What it makes it special is that it's one of the first trace elements in the existence of life. Maybe I tracked it down to the first, to the Angester of all life, we called Luca, last universal common ancestor. So what I could show is that lithium regulates key molecules that are important for life in all animals, in all plants, in fungi, you know, in mash mushrooms, in every life, and

it does it by the same mechanism. And this mechanism is vital to life and particularly vital for our brain. And so for me it was astonishing that this particularly trace element has not been recognized for hundreds of years already as an essential element. What does that term essential element mean? Essential means that if you like it completely, you are dead. It's incompatible with life. Wow.

1970s, people tried to reduce lithium content in the diet of animals. And immediately the litter size shrunk, fertility it went down, the death rate of the animals in the first few months increased dramatically. The size of the piglets or whatever they tested, the red little red babies were smaller. They suffered from diseases. They were not able to completely shut down lithium in the diet because it's pretty much everywhere. the reduction itself had a traumatic effect. So it was clear it's essential in animals and there is no reason to assume it's not essential in humans. And if you are lucky to live here

in Texas where the lithium content is usually a little bit higher than, for example, in eastern United States or in Europe, then you have a lower likelihood of being admitted to a mental hospital because you don't develop mental disease more likely, as in an area where the lithium content is lower in the daily food, particularly in the food. So is it food? Am I getting it through vegetables? Is it coming out of the earth? Is it in my water?

Where is it? It's pretty much everywhere, but of course you can't have anything in the food or not much in the food if the soil doesn't contain it. So old geologically old regions have been washed out. It's pretty much like with iodine. For example, I come from the Black Forest area in Europe and Germany. an old, geologically old area. So people have endemic iodine deficiency, for example. And you know, iodine deficiency leads to severe compromise in brain development, for example.

You also get the gairobi here, you know, it's because the thyroid gland tries to make thyroid hormone, which you can't because iodine is essential for it. Again, the word essential. And the same problem with iodine you have with lithium. Old geological regions have low levels of lithium and more volcanic earlier regions where the earth is younger, they have still higher content of lithium because lithium is washed out over the millions of years by rainwater and so the lithium content in sweet water is in fresh water is about a hundredfold lower than in salt water. Wow. So in salt water is where you find most of the lithium and that brings me to the book.

I explain where our brain has developed to the today's current abilities. It was about 200,000 years ago when the whole whole mankind went through a needle and a bottleneck. And in this bottleneck area, a time, people only survived at the coast and South Africa. actually this area where the people survived became a world cultural heritage site in 2024 for that reason. And the main food at the time was mussels, muscles they could find on the seashore. And they could find out, it was found out that in the caves where the people lived, there were meters of these shelves, you know, left over 200,000 years ago.

They could find out that people were highly advanced already. based on the stuff they could find from their time. They had symbolic thinking already 70, 80, 90,000 years ago. And their main food compared to the food they had in the land in Africa, because they had living in Africa was not possible at the time anymore because there was ice age, about 70,000 years-long ongoing ice age. Africa was completely dried out. People had to survive essentially.

at the beach and this time they got something which they didn't get in inland and that was enough lithium. And lithium, besides aquatic fatty acids, omega-3 fatty acids that come from mussels and fish, they had every nutrient required for brain health. And that's the reason why we are used to a certain amount of lithium and Once we move to other areas in the world, like the Alps, like my Black Forest area, not only lithium levels dropped in the food, but also iodine levels dropped. So it's a close parallel, and similar to iodine, it took many, many decades before people realized

that iodine deficiency is detrimental, and you have to supply as a supplement. And now I'm fighting for the understanding that the same goes on for lithium. And while iodine deficiency makes a general impact on the brain, lithium deficiency particularly causes an impact on the hippocampus, meaning what I call the mental immune system. Pretty much what makes us human. The ability to change position, to see the world from the eyes from other people, put yourself in the shoes of other people. Wow.

You can use that. It sounds like we're definitely deficient of that in America right now. Yeah, absolutely. I can prove actually that the ability to think peace, you know, to be curious, to see the point of other people, to actually be willing to see the point of other people because you have this psychological resilience. All these are functions of the mental immune system residing in the hippocampus. And it's interesting that I was able to show in the book that the hippocampus, particularly

it tries to accumulate lithium because lithium is important for the proliferation of cells. So cell proliferation, the telomerase, I don't know if the word makes any sense, what is what we like longevity is when everyone's trying to extend those telomerase to extend life? Exactly, so if you live in an area where you have a little bit more lithium in the drinking water, you have a longer life, a healthier life, less likely Alzheimer's, less likely cardiac diseases, all kinds of chronic diseases human kind is fighting are dependent on the amount of lithium and lithium accumulates in those organs which proliferate. And the hippocampus as our mental immune system is the only region of the brain which produces new nerve cells on a daily basis. And in my book, the Exhaustive Brain, which also came out last year, I showed that our

our problem that we have during the day that we start to exhaust, you know, in the morning we are fresh, we want to do something, but in the evening we kind of exhaust, the scientific term is ego depletion. And ego depletion resolves overnight when we sleep. And part of this resolving... You say ego depletion? Ego depletion, self-depletion. We are exhausted.

You know, in the evening we don't make good decisions usually anymore. We should refrain. I remember when I was CEO in a company in Germany, I told my assistant, I don't want to make any difficult decisions in the evening anymore. So no invitation of, yeah, employees or whatever, where we have to discuss important things, do that in the morning, you know, because I'm not that fresh, fresh anymore. I might make mistakes. Even emails are usually right in the evening, but I don't send them off.

I wait until the morning. Good idea. Until ego depletion has recovered, you know. And I have tried to find out what happens, what happens in the brain when our, our, brain depletes overnight and as you know a decision-making is better when you have what Daniel Kahneman got the Nobel Prize for that in 2002 the psychologist when unfortunately died last year but he got the Nobel Prize for defining System 1 System 2 you know the different types of thinking System 1 is when we think

actually we don't think we just follow essentially yeah behavior that that we are used to behave, you know, a standard behavior, learned behavior or even inborn behavior. And system two is when we are able to critically think, you know, consciously making decisions, change our behavior if necessary. This is system two. But system two requires energy, and this energy depletes over the day. So he got the Nobel Prize for identifying this two differences, this difference. But what he didn't identify and was unknown for decades after is what type of energy

is that? What feeds that energy, what creates it, what nourishes it? Yeah, what energy is depleting, you know, and how does this energy recover during the night? And I was able to show in my book the exhausted brain that the exhaustion is diminishing overnight because new nerve cells are produced, which are required. to make new thoughts without overriding former thoughts. You know, that we are willing to be curious again, that we have psychological resilience,

it all depends on these cells. And these cells are produced from stem cells every day, and this production is requiring lithium. So that's why our mental immune system, our ability to do these things that humans do, You know, be social animals, so to speak, interact with others, find solutions to problems without, you know, killing each other, usually. All these abilities which define us as humans are depending on the activity of what I call

the mental immune system, and that goes down to the ability of the hippocampus to produce new nerve cells. And this ability depends on the presence of lithium. So your book is called The Conspiracy Against. lithium. I suppose we're all sitting here thinking this sounds really fascinating, very important. Why have I not

heard this? In fact, why is my only understanding of lithium? I swear I feel like it takes me back to one flu over the cuckus nest in a movie in an insane in this island where everyone's being giving lithium and we think of it as something that just like dumbs you down

null, you know what I mean, is used as a sedative, I think, in psychological or you know, I guess, psychiatry. Yeah, especially for bipolar disorder. It's used. And for severe depression. But the amounts of lithium used at that point are so high. I have a picture in my book where you show just a visual,

try to visualize what concentrations we are talking about. So I have there are two skyscrapers, you know, the Bush Caliphatea north in Dubai, as with like 800 meters and about 400 meters, the Empire State Building. and 400 and 800 is like 4,000 microgram per liter to 8,000 microgram. This is the range people are given when they are treated for bipolar disorder depression, 4 to 8,000. When I talk about lithium in essential doses, you have to look down, you know, far down from the sky scrape, when you see maybe people running around.

And the concentration that people need to stay healthier their whole life and have to long, health life expectancy is the size of people. That means compared to this height of the big buildings, this is the size we need. And if there's a little mouse besides these people, this is a concentration people actually have. So what people require is the size of the house, what people actually have in areas where you have a low concentration of lithium.

I can show here. You have that example. It's a great way to look at it. It's the way to look at it. So it's somewhere between 10 to 20, yeah. And you're saying we're at about 2. 0.2. Yeah, so we measure 0.2 in children in Germany.

The average officially is about 1 microgram we have in Germany. On average, when you test people. When we test people, that's the average. But of course, you have a difference, of course, in the population. In children, depending on how they eat, we have even lower levels. And if we give these people, or these children, a concentration that brings them up to the 10 to 20 microgram, we see major effects, really major effects, kids, children with autism, you know, the people who treat them or suddenly ask, you know, the parents, I think we have maybe made the wrong, you know, diagnosis. It wasn't auto-autism to begin with. We see major effects in social life and, you know, in anger, you know, containment, you know, in interaction with other people. Irritability is dramatically reduced.

One of the reasons is that lithium is not only important for the production of new nerve cells in the hippocampus. It's also the target of lithium is also, for example, GSK3, which is the major drive of inflammation, particularly neuroinflammation. So when I wrote the indoctinated brain and people ask you, what can we do about example the spike protein causing neuroinfloration and cutting down the hippocampus by this means because all pro-inflammatory cytokines that are produced interleukin 6, interleukin 1, TNF alpha, all these cytokines are produced when the spike protein is recognized in the brain,

which is one of the reasons I talk about indoctrination because then the mental immune system is shut down without a mental immune system. We are prone to accept any narrative as true and cannot, you know, fight against it. The mental immune system is here that we have a better understanding of the world and are not believing everything that we are told, you know? So that was kind of the weaponizing of this. So you think that's what it was? They saw that lithium makes you a critical thinker, more likely to challenge the system,

not be just a robot, just do what you're told. If you want people to do what they're told, you deny them lithium and they just sort of go with the programming. The programming. Lithium brings you back to the mental immune system. I mean, it's part of it. It's not working on its own. Of course, it works on its own if lithium deficiency is the only deficiency.

In my book, you find a picture of what I call the law of the minimum. You know, the law of the minimum states that every growing, it was discovered in 1828 in Germany by a researcher on production of plants, you know, in agriculture, and he identified 12 essential components that a plant needs to grow. And if one is missing, it doesn't grow, it's obvious. And if you add more of a second one, not the one which is missing, it doesn't help. It doesn't know good. So you can take all these vitamins for deficiencies, but if you're not feeding it with the ones that help...

That's really missing, then you don't get the effect. So the law of the minimum is a fundamental law to understand everything in life. And I think it's the fundamental law of life itself. And that's why it's probably not taught in med school. It's not taught in med school. And the reason is quite simple. All chronic diseases have usually at their core a deficiency. One of them is lithium.

Now if you understand the law of the minimum, then you understand that no drug in the world can replace lithium. So when you understand the law of the minimum, then doctors would ask themselves, why would I prescribe a drug against Alzheimer's if the deficiency of lithium is the major cause? So they would start thinking about their practice. So again, this is one of those places

when you look at America, Robert Kennedy Jr., the Maha movement, trying to get better food, diets taking place. We're learning a lot more. I've talked about on the show for years, that the education in nutrition in supplements doesn't exist in medical school. Everything is just, it has really been taken over by the pharmaceutical industry.

Everything is a new drug to put a band-aid on a problem instead of get the essential core issues. And you're saying this is one of the core issues that if we knew this, if we were getting this into our bodies, we wouldn't be needing all these drugs and other things that we're having side effects and problems with. I was asked by the, by actually the, yeah, by Ignatio Kassiz, he was at the time the foreign

minister of Switzerland and he was organizing a big, big event called the International Cooperation Summit and the topic of the event in 2024 was peace. And I just wrote the exhausted brain and it was inspiring enough. for these guys to invite me to give the keynote. And I had to explain it 15 minutes, and I gave the talk in English so we can maybe link it. And I had to, I gave in 15 minutes, I had to give essentially the answer to the question,

what does the brain need to think peace? And I said what the brain doesn't need, because if you want to think peace, you have to think at all, if you have to be able to think in the first place. And thinking for me is in using system two. But system two requires a mental immune system based on the production of new nerve cells and the hippocampus.

So spike proteins undermine the production. So spike protein injection by M RNA is not a good way if you want to make people thinking peace, you know, because it undermines the ability to think peace. It also undermines democracy. Because democracy means that people are able to make their own thoughts up, you know. Their own decisions, power of the people, people vote, the government run by the people versus just being dictated by a government. Exactly.

And at that time in 2024, it was pretty much the time when we met first time. I said, but I will make it my goal in the next year, and that's what I did, to prove that lithium is essential for mental health. And it was in Basel, you know, this is the heart in Europe where all these pharmaceutical industries reside, Roche, you know, Novartis all around there. And I really felt when I was on the stage, you know, 1,500 people from over 100 countries worldwide were present, you know, that I put, you know, like a target here on my press because, because honestly, 90% of the pharmaceutical market depends on lithium deficiency.

Really? Yeah. Because lithium targets, and I show here in the book, which I tracked down to the origin, Luca, the last universal common ancestor. The lithium targets... Last universal common ancestor. Yeah, lived about 4.2 billion years ago. And he is essentially the father cell, you know, it was a single cell for all living

beings. And this cell already had lithium targets. The same lithium target we all used today. And one of these lithium targets, for example, is impase. Inositol monophosphate is a strange word. I just name it impase. And actually you can see it here. On this slide, the central core of the protein has 2080 amino acids.

These are about 80 amino acids. And you see here a few of these amino acids that are highly conserved from human on the top to bacteria down. So, two seeds, zos, bats, yeah. So you can go down essentially four billion years and you still find impase in the common and register and this in this core amino acids here they are conserved because they bind lithium and if they bind lithium then impase is inactivated which is important and by inactivating impase it's the same actually

was Eva Maclean is doing even McLean's target is impase and if impase here can see that is binding magnesium that's what it does then it's active when it's active it shuts down autophagy If it binds lithium. So autophagy being cell death, build it clear things out of the body, you know, clean up the body. So if lithium is missing, you have a lack in autophagy.

And autophagy is one detrimental a detrimental mechanism, for, for example, viruses. If a virus enters your body, autophagy is the key process of digesting the virus and killing him. Right. So that's how evamectin works. And lithium does the same.

So if, for example, somebody has a severe respiratory infection, give him 20 milligrams of lithium two times a day, and in one experiment it was done with 40 milligrams two times a day, and people were out of the hospital in half the time. Wow. Because it immediately shuts down, what we call the cytokine storm, because it acts on one of other targets, and that's called Gsk-Sk3, glycrotinthase kinase-3. Just to all it GSJ-3. GSJ-3 is the main pharmaceutical targets that we know of.

The pharmaceutical industry invests since the 1980s billions of dollars each year to find a target that inhibits GSJ-3. G-SK-3 activity is at the core of every chronic disease that we know of. So lithium is the natural inhibitor of GSJ-3. So if you remove GSTL lithium out of the system, out of the society, if people don't know how important lithium is, then all people have a high level of GSC3 activity. And high GST3 activity is the cause of chronic inflammation, and that is the cause of chronic disease. Are you saying that was done on purpose?

Absolutely. That's why it's a conspiracy. They knew this. They knew that if they denied us this, we would have all sorts of health issues to make a fortune off of us. At the time when the conspiracy started against lithium, people didn't know how exactly lithium works, but they knew it is important. So... What time period are we talking about? We talk about exactly about spring 1949. Okay. In 1949, the concept of treating people with bipolar disorder at these levels of 4,000, 8,000 microgram was rediscovered by John Cade, a psychiatrist from Australia.

He published a paper in 1949 showing that with high levels of lithium you can treat people with bipolar disorder, in particular the manic portion of the bipolar disorder. It's depression in manic phases. The manic phase is best treated with lithium. And then he concluded if that works so good, then maybe a lack of lithium in childhood might have been the cause of bipolar disorder. And then he concluded further if that's the case that biopoly must, then lithium must, be an essential trace element. You can read it in his first paper. So lithium must be an essential trace element. That was the first time in history that people believed lithium

might be essential. And the same year, it was, it was a ban on lithium as a supplement was implemented by the FDA. At the same year. And it was done in a very awful way. So first of all, maybe a little side line here. Because lithium was so important for people, all natural springs which contained lithium were usually places where people went to when they didn't feel good. So it was recognized for centuries that there are certain areas where a lot of lithium or certain fountains, you know, sources of water were more helpful than others. And then in the mid of the 19th century it was identified that the common denominator was lithium. A little bit higher lithium content. People who

felt more happy, chronic diseases, inflammation all dropped. So in the beginning of the 20th century, they took the water from these fountains and from these natural springs and brought them into the cities. I have pictures in here where they took, it went with, you know, with horse carriages, brought the lithium water into the cities that for people to drink. seven up you might know seven up was lithiated soda it's actually really shown here you know it's lithiated lemon soda that was the original recipe it had one milligram of lithium per class of of of seven up was that was it as a was it supposed to be a soda drink or was it in a hospital

it was a soda drink and it was up means up regulation of the mood and so it feel better yeah and seven uh hints to the atomic weight So Coca-Cola was delivering cocaine and 7-Up was going with lithium. Actually, there was also a Coca-Cola version with lithium. Oh, yeah? Yeah, there was one. And as you could see on the slide, in 1949, it was forbidden. Actually, this is Londonary Water.

This is a book about Londonary Lithia. That is a spring, I think, north of New York. And all the diseases are in this book named already. That was in 1903. They knew it then. They knew it already. And then when... And now it's illegal.

Right. There's places you can't. Like we can get a supplement of lithium because I get it for our house. My family. It was forbidden by the FDA in 1949 based on the fact that on three different centers in the United States, clinical centers, three different centers at the same time. This is the paper here, 1994, stopped using this dangerous poison at once. What they did is they had patients in these three different centers. And the doctors told their patients, well, we have a heart problem.

Sodium chloride is not good for you. So we stop, you have to stop using sodium chloride. But of course, the food doesn't taste very well without salt, you know. We have something better for you. They gave them the lithium chloride. But instead of this one milligram of lithium that is essential, in my opinion, they gave these people so much that the food tasted good. That means not milligram, but gram.

Wow. So they went above the skyscraper, way above the skyscraper, and they killed them. And they knew that they are going to kill them. This is actually the – there are three different papers here. You can see them. All three of them published back to back in the Journal of the American Medical Association in March 12 or so, I think, 1949. And that was the reason the FDA was able to essentially put a ban on –

With hydroxychloroquine, with the couple of trials where they give lethal doses and then see it's dangerous even though the whole world new hydroxychloroquine. It's copy-paste. It's the same scheme. Same scheme. Since this time, 1949, it was not only banned as a supplement in America and the United States, it was banned essentially worldwide. In Europe, the ban is still existing.

I gave a talk at the European Parliament in June last year to tell, you know, in one and a half hour talk, And it's, I showed what, how absurd it is, you know, that this ban still exists. In the United States, it was resolved when the FDA, when the food and the drug portion of the A was somehow new regulated. I think it was around 1987. And between this new regulation, lithium as lithium orotate fell between the cracks, you know, and it is now possible in the United States to sell lithium orotate as a as a supplement.

Yeah. But because the FDA cannot forbid it anymore, it's not, but of course you, as the seller, you are responsible for any side effects, you know, but this is now almost 40 years, you know, and so nothing happened regarding side effects. So just to wrap this up, if someone's watching right now, especially our kids, it does seem like, look, if this is important to a child's, you know, if there's a deficiency that leads to issues as they're older. Obviously, we all want our kids to be, you know, as the brain developing, you know, well, their immune system of their brain, their ability to critically think,

especially those that watch this show and are living in a world where we feel like our kids are being dumbed down by the school system on purpose. Do I have to go to a doctor and do a blood test and figure out how much is there? Or can I make an assumption that there's a deficiency and there's a safe amount. Is there a safe amount that if you just take this amount, you'll be doing yourself a benefit and you don't have to worry about it? Yes, put it this way. I've concluded in the book, the whole chapter three is about this issue, also for children. And I had to come up with what is the dose of lithium we need. Yeah. And I was not the first who asked this question. There was actually Gerald Schrauser. He was a German scientist. He was a German scientist,

worked at UCSD had his own institute. He was in 2002, he published a paper about the essentiality of lithium, even though he didn't have all the facts that I put in my book now, 20 years later. But he already mentioned at that time that one milligram of lithium per day for a 70 kilogram average person. I don't know if there are many average persons with 70 kilograms nowadays, but anyway, he said that one milligram. What is that in pounds in America?

America, 70 kilograms. 70 kilograms is about 150 pounds, I would say. 150 pounds, okay. Yeah, it's a little bit more than the double, you know, based on the 450 gram per pound. Okay. Yeah, so in the book you will find a chapter 3 what I recommend for children. But we see when we use that, and I work very close with children, with petiatricians. I have a network of far over 100 petriotricians now in the German-speaking world, and I would

like to extend this, maybe with Kennedy's children's health defense to the whole world, that what we measure in children, what they should get, and what the effects are. The effects are so traumatic. I put a quote in here from one of my friends, a pediatrician Christian Schellenberg, and he works with children. He gives them omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin D. He gives them everything children need, so he understands the law of the minimum. When I introduced him to the concept of lithium, he said, the list of, he said, the listing

was the major factor from all supplements he gave children the last 20 years. This is the most game-changing one ever seen in the behavior of children, how they behave in families, how they are able to do their schoolwork, you know, interact with other children, being able to think as humans, you know, what we hope what humans do. It means, yeah, being able to put yourself in the shoes of others, you know, don't fight about nothing, you know. Think about problems and solve problems. And yet, that's what humans should do.

And with neuroinflammation based on the fact that lithium is missing, G. That lithium is missing based on the fact that the hippocampus is not growing. And in the long term that lithium causes Alzheimer's, I think the people in the world should know about this. There was a paper two months after I gave my lecture at the European Parliament. Two months later it was on the 6th of August 2025. The Harvard University published in the prestigious Nature journal that a lack of lithium causes Alzheimer's.

A lack of natural amounts of lithium causes Alzheimer's. And it might be the element against Alzheimer's. I published this already as a scientific paper 10 years earlier. 2016, I published a paper Unified Theory of Alzheimer's disease, which in my opinion should be the basis for Make America Healthy again because everything that's in there based on the, because you can look at the human body and say, okay, we want to have a healthy heart, we want to have healthy kidneys, liver, whatever. But at the end of the day, I think a healthy brain is the key.

And once you have a healthy brain, then the heart will follow, you know. I mean, everything that's good for the brain is good for the rest of the body. So when I look at the unified theory, you find everything that causes Alzheimer's when things are lacking, everything that causes Alzheimer's when you give enough to much of something, no toxins, environmental toxins, glyphosate, whatever, you know. And I show how they all interact on the hippocampus and damaging or supporting. you know, the production of new nerve cells and if the production goes down, Alzheimer it follows. So this was all published and then a paper came out by, on the sixth of August

2025 by the by published in nature by a study, a study from Harvard University and they conclude essentially that lithium is essential without, and you have a lack of lithium, the brain is damaged and it causes Alzheimer's. But even this paper didn't make it happen that Lysm is recognized as an essential trace element. So one of the reasons I came here to you is because I know you have also connections of course to Robert F. Kennedy, Oslo Fondaline has no interest, you know, for the health of the people. He is, she's the major lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry and does everything that

essentially is against the human brain by officially saying I want to help people just to give you an example one of the reasons the hippocampus is dying off while we are going getting older is because the production of new nerve cells is inhibited by our lifestyle lithium is one of the reason lithium deficiency but not the only one but altogether we can make become healthy of stay healthy up to the highest age. Alzheimer's is not natural. I've shown this several times in the whole recipe

how to preserve the brain from Alzheimer's is here in the book in chapter four. But people don't want that. They want to make money with it. And the major money you can make with Alzheimer's is by injection of antibodies, immunization. They immunize against the protein that we need for thinking. And it was the, the,

this treatment, antibodies, monoclonial antibodies against the key molecule that we need for thinking, our system two thinking actually, for brain function, was defined as this is the protein, this is now our drug target, and we devise antibodies against this target and then we cure Alzheimer's. It's the biggest fraud in history in research that ever happened. It has made me at the National Institute of H-H at the NIH. And it was all published, it was published in science last year. This is the biggest fraud in history. But it continues. Then the European agency, similar to the FDA, we have the EMA, the European Medical Association, is that these drugs that are actually allowed in America, in the United States, we don't allow them in Europe. Because they actually

let the brain shrink fast. It's shown. It's published. The brain shrinks faster. Alzheimer develops faster. The Mayo Clinic published in spring 2025, the major side effects of the drug against Alzheimer's, and one of them is Alzheimer's. Yeah.

And one particular one is you cannot change false beliefs anymore once you got this drug. Wow. It's almost like immunization against misinformation. Wow. Yeah. So the EMA, the pondon to the FDA, said no. Six months later, Frontaline said, yes, I don't care what my agency is saying,

I allow this drug to be on the market. Wow. And I was showing in my speech at the European Parliament that lithium, and there are many, many review articles about this, lithium works cheaper, better, more efficient, to against Alzheimer's. Actually, it was shown already in 2013, trace amount of lithium, 300 microgram, that's not even a milligram, a day, keeps people

stable for 15 months compared to control groups. So I've tried it in different ways to convince people there, and that's my big hope now, that's why I'm here, that maybe, yeah, Kennedy does a trick, because I need only one country in the world which states lithium is essential. And then it's like a domino, you know, it's... All right, well, look, why don't we... Why don't you stick around for off the record, and I want to hear what you you would, well, your advice Robert Kennedy,

would be for the United States of America. We'll get in the details on that. How does you have four books now? This one, by the way, is a top seller still in our store. That's the indoctrinated brain. You've got the algae oil revolution, the exhausted brain, and now the conspiracy against lithium. Is there a website or someone who wants to track

all that you're doing? That's the best place to go? The best is to grow on my substrate, you know. Okay. your substack? Yeah, because I'm a substack and... And your books are all on Amazon and everywhere else that you can find the book. Absolutely, absolutely.

And so, yeah. All right. Wisdom is easy to find. Okay, very good. Well, look, here it is. The conspiracy against lithium, it just seems like such a simple thing. And you know when you hear something and it just rings true, that's the experience I'm having right now. I've had that every time you've come on.

There's something about your research and the way that you're being. putting your thoughts together that always makes me excited when you call and say hey I want to come and talk about get deeper into a concept in this case lithium really exciting stuff so if you're out there make sure you buy this book and speaking of books you know we are excited because this month is all about getting books and we want to make that easy for you at our store take a look of us February is National Library Lovers Month and we're celebrating the power of books the tell the truth. This month, all books in the Highwire merch shop have special limited time pricing. The more you buy, the more you save.

These aren't just books, they're tools. Every medical freedom fighters should have them on their shelves at home, to learn from, to reference, to pass on. You're supporting the courageous authors creating useful, truthful work in the time of censorship. So stock your shelves, support the book. movement, exclusive deals only at the highwire. Dot shop. We're getting reports that lithium sales are going through the roof right now as we speak. I know I'm going to run out of here and make sure that we are stocked up at our house. But speaking of reports, I want to check in on that poll that we've started. This is a poll that anyone can take anywhere around the world on this glyphosate issue.

Once again, if you haven't taken the poll, you can do it right now. You can share it with a friend. You can type 72022 as the number and write in the word poll. And you will get the poll right there. You can go Bitley slash I Can Poll is another way to get there. Or just click on this QR code. My understanding is there's several hundred people during the show have already weighed in. So let's see some of the earlier results.

Are you aware that glyposate-based herbicides have been associated with cancer claims? Looks like 95.7% of you watching the show. right now knew that. You know, we're going to have to have some retesting of the 3.5% there. Have you not been watching the high wire anyway? No, that's a great score. Look at this one. Do you believe manufacturers of glyphosate-based herbicides should have legal immunity from lawsuits related to alleged health harms? Hell no. We should have had a hell no, I think, there instead of just no. And then the next question, should federal policy allow the stockpiling of glyphosate-based herbicides as part of national preparedness planning?

8.5% of you are saying no, 9.7% are unsure. And yes, 1.8%. And there's one more. Does the November 28th, 2025 retraction of the foundational study used to support the safety of Glybosate affect your trust in current safety claims? Yes, 79.2% of you, that's a big deal. No, had no. I was just sort of wondering on that no, 14. 14.3% are probably like, no, it didn't have any effect.

didn't trust them, but unsure is 6.5%. It's a lot of fun, really cool, but there's even more data that is going to be drilled down inside of there so that as you're filling it out, we're going to make sure you get emailed the final results and all of the different things that we learned about the population and what we actually think on this issue. And if the numbers are big enough, why don't we send it off to Donald Trump and say, you-hoo, you may be making a mistake here. All right. Well, I want to thank everyone that took place in that poll right away. I love how you guys all jump on top of this. And I hope you are, you know, marking off in your calendar, April 27th. I think Vani Hari's got a big thing going to people versus

poison. It's going to be an amazing moment. It's obviously it was just brainstormed. I think, right here live on this show. So a lot of work to do there. Let's all reach out to Vani Hari and get our different groups together and see if we can't make that a spectacular event. I had a wild week on top of everything else it was reported. This article came out at the Atlantic. I've been telling you, I knew it was coming, an article about Del Bigtree. Look at this headline. I genuinely am upset that your kids are vaccinated. Del Bigtree, a long time ally of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. isn't just anti-vaccine. He's pro-infection. I'm actually going to Tom Bartlett wrote the article. Tom, you know, I'm getting lots of reports. Lots of my friends are getting a kick out of this

article. I even texted Tom about that earlier. I would say it's a hit piece, but look, Tom, thanks for taking the time. We're going to continue the conversations. We actually have a real debate going on. And there's a few things that happen in that article. Finally, for the first time ever, Tom admits that pertusses does not stop transmission. He admits polio doesn't stop transmission. I think those are huge things. So, you know, there was some awareness there and understanding that we came to together. He also points out how I think that I should be allowed to have the Ferrari of immunity, which comes from having an infection versus the Ford Pinto of immunity, which is what you get from the, you know, fallible vaccine program. Anyway, it's a wild

article. And I'm going to use my social media next week to deal with some of the points that are probably going to be shocking to a lot of Americans that happened in that article. So, stay connected with me on Facebook, X, Instagram, at Dell Bigtree. That's where I refute some of the claims are being made in this case, where I'm going to discuss some of the issues that come up that weren't really given the total context in the article. So I'm going to do that on my social media. And a first of its kind tomorrow on my Instagram, I'm going to do a live Q&A. So if you're on Instagram tomorrow at 12 p.m. Pacific time, 3 p.m. East, Stern to here central time on Instagram at Del Big Tree. I'm going to spend an hour taking any

question you might have and answering it. I thought that might be a fun interaction. So many people, you know, want to have that opportunity to have a question answered. So I'm going to do that. We'll see how that goes. Maybe I'll start doing more things like that. I want to bring attention to a really dear friend that, you know, Vax, the film that I made that, you know, changed my life forever and put me in the center of this. Wouldn't have been possible without the chiropractors out there that were really supportive. And one of them was the president of Life University who just passed this last week. Dr. Guy Reikman, a good friend, president of Life University from 2004-2017, from 17 to 20. He was chancellor. Just an awesome guy to all the

chiropractorers that knew him. There I am. One of the early screenings of VACs. He's super. great champion. Honestly, it was probably a medical freedom champion before I was. We're going to miss you, but man, you left a mark on this earth, which is all any of us can dream to do. What a great man. And so many of you great people out there are part of the informed consent action network. I feel the water is starting to boil. It's starting to heat up. They think we've gone back to sleep. Are you ready? Are you ready for it? Are you ready to step up? You're ready to make your voices heard. You're ready for another battle?

This is what's going on. It's for our children. It's for our time. It's for our lives. It's for the future of the earth. You're here for a reason. Don't complain. These are interesting times and we're in the middle of it.

We're going to keep reporting on it every week on the Highwire. I'll see you next week.