The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 472: RFK JR.’S ACIP REWRITE, GLYPHOSATE SHOWDOWN, THE SCIENCE OF HOMEOPATHY

Episode Date: April 17, 2026

Today on The HighWire, Del breaks down a major shift in vaccine policy after HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. rewrote the ACIP charter following recommendations submitted by ICAN’s legal team.Food activist Vani Hari (“Food Babe”) joins the show to discuss the upcoming People vs. Poison rally and the growing legal fight over glyphosate and corporate liability protections now being debated in the Supreme Court and Congress. Toxicologist Alexandra Muñoz joins the conversation.Then Del sits down in-studio with classical homeopath Gabrielle Traub during World Homeopathy Awareness Week to discuss the documentary Introducing Homeopathy and the science and research behind this centuries-old system of medicine.Plus, Jefferey Jaxen covers a Politico vaccine safety poll, measles vaccine effectiveness data, environmental chemical exposure risks, and new research raising concerns about erythritol and ultra-processed foods.Guests: Vani Hari, Gabrielle Traub M.Tech (Hom), CCH, Alexandra Muñoz, PhDAirdate: April 16, 2026Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

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

Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you are out there in the world, it's time for us all to step out into the high wire. I have a confession to make. Growing up in Boulder, Colorado, my family were environmentalists. We ate organic food. And I remember sitting around the table with my mom and my dad. dad, my brother and sister, and we would talk about the fact that Monsanto would do things like, you know, sue organic farmers when their seeds blew over onto their property. And I remember my

dad saying, I think Monsanto is like Satan incarnate. So I grew up with a bit of a chip on my shoulder towards Monsanto. So when I was a producer on the doctor's television show back in 2015 on CBS, and I read that the WHA committee I arc, which is the International Agency on Research of Cancer ruled that glyphosate is the main chemical in Roundup was probably carcinogenic to human beings. I wanted to jump on that story. I felt like, you know what, this may be an opportunity to finally, you know, get towards Monsanto and do something about it. And so just to be clear, to say that, you know, IARC, they put a two-week committee together, by the way.

Monsanto got to weigh in. International scientists from all over the world were there for these hearings, and at the end of it, they decided probably cause it to human beings, which is the second highest cancer rating there is. Second only to does cause cancer. What kind of cancer? Non-Hodgans lymphoma, exactly what we would see through the years since then, winning in courtrooms.

But I reached out to Monsanto, and I said, hey, I just read that your product, glyphosate has, you know, gotten this new ruling, probably causing jaded to human beings. Would you like to send a representative from Monsanto to be on the doctor's television show? I had never seen a scientist from Monsanto ever defending anything they did. I thought it was a long shot. And then when they said, yes, we actually would like to defend our product, we will send Donna Farmer, our head of toxicology, from Monsanto. And that happened.

And I reached out to Jeffrey Smith, who was a GMO activist, who had written books about Monsanto, I said, hey, I got Donna Farmer coming onto the doctors. Would you like to debate her? So that show went down. Years later, I was actually talking about the Dwayne Johnson case where he won hundreds of millions of dollars. I forget the exact amount for his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma caused by the glyphosate that was all over his back, all over his skin. and Brett Wisner, the attorney on that case was there. And I was telling him, you know, I've been on this since 2015 when they had the ruling.

I did a show on the doctors about it. And he said, wait a minute. You did the doctor's television show with the debate between Donna Farmer and Jeffrey Smith. I was like, yeah, he's like, Del, that is one of the pieces of evidence that we use in the courtroom. It is so powerful because after discovery, we have Donna Farmer admitting an email. She knows that this product is toxic. and then we play your video where she's telling the world, this stuff is as safe as water,

and there's ooze and ahs and gasps from the jury. So you never know when the things you do or how they're going to play out, but I want to say that it is now 2026. Over 10 years ago, the world knew this product caused cancer, and yet it stayed on the market, and now we find ourselves in a moment when instead of making a better product or even polling that product when you realize

oh my God, it's poisoning people. Instead, we sit at a moment where they've decided, you know what the best thing to do? We need liability protection. Let's just keep this deadly chemical on all the food, like 90% of our crops in America. We'll just get the government to protect us from liability so no one can ever sue us again. And that is why we are marching. That is why we're going to be in Washington, D.C. for people versus poison. Take a look at this. For decades, Bayer and Monsanto have poisoned our food and our families with glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup. And now, facing over 170,000 cancer lawsuits worth 16 billion, Bayer wants the Supreme Court to bail them out. It's time for the people to take a stand. On April 27th, we will march together

at the Supreme Court. America demands equal justice under the law with no immunity for chemical companies. It's the People versus Poison, April 27th in Washington, D.C. Well, it's my honor and pleasure to be joined by the organizer of People versus Poison, Bonnie Harri. Vani, thanks for taking this on. As I said, this has been something that's bothered me for decades. This company has bothered me for decades, but this is going to a level we never imagined possible. Our government's getting involved with it. We've had, you know, briefs written by the Department of Justice in favor of liability protection. But how is this rally coming along? Because I know you've been working hard, you know, to get it all together. I've been in the background a little bit, but I love that you've

sort of taken charge here. Well, it's been the incredible collaborative effort of so many different individuals and groups coming together for this cause. It is absolutely incredible what every is volunteering to do with their time, with their money, with their efforts to make sure this is the biggest food movement rally Washington in the world has ever seen. Right now, we are up against Bayer, which has enormous power in Washington. They have been taking over every single branch of government, the executive branch with the amicus brief that they submitted to the Supreme Court in favor of Monsanto Bear. They've taken over our state legislators having 21 different states look at pesticide liability shields. They have taken over our Congress with a farm bill

that has provisions in it with pesticide liability language. They are taking over everyone in Washington, and it may seem like we are David versus Goliath, but I've been part of this fight for long enough to realize that when we all come together and we put our political differences aside, we put people over poison and we do what's right. We can be louder. We can be more organized. We can be more powerful, even more powerful than the most money in the world, which I feel like they have at the moment. I mean, their market share increased by $35 billion since that brief was submitted to the Supreme Court in favor of them. And so, you know, this is something they are taking very seriously. I'm actually a little bit nervous because for me, this fight is very personal.

This company, Monsanto Bear, you related them to Satan. I think they are just as evil as Satan in a way because they know their product causes cancer. They're causing people harm and they want to get away with it. But also they try to shut up scientists. They try to suppress science from coming out in our government and in the press and in the media and through advocates like me. I mean, they took over my Wikipedia page. They created a social media database called, be fluent where they docks my personal information and put my family information on it.

They harassed me at my speaking engagements to the point where I'd have to have security. They went over and they hired scientists that looked independent and were, you know, experts to come after me in every single article that was written about me when I was making my raised, you know, raise as a, when I was making my career as a food activist and they did whatever they could, to try to destroy my credibility. The best thing that I did when this was all happening instead of retreating and stopping what I was doing is I got some great advice from some incredible activists

who had been doing this a lot longer than I had. And they said, Bonnie, this mission isn't about you. It's not about what they say about you in the press. It's about what you're doing for all the people that are hurting and that need to hear this message, you need to keep going. And so I started to call the, energy of the leaders before me, the Rachel Carson's of the world and others, to like bring

in that energy into me and so that I could literally turn off my Google alerts and turn off the filters to all the things these evil people were getting people to say about me and trying to stop me and stop this information from getting out so that I could keep going. And so people ask me, you know, why do I want to create this rally? It's because we've had enough. We do not consent to being poisoned. We do not consent for a company to continue to get away with causing cancer and not be held liable. We also don't consent to our government lying to us. The EPA needs to tell the truth when they do their glyphosate review this year that's expected at the end of this year. They need to tell the people that this product causes cancer. We already have seen the science

and we know that this is the truth and we expect the truth. We, the American people, are not stupid. We deserve to know the truth. Farmers deserve to know the truth. And so that the truth can create the marketplace that we need to live in and everything can happen organically from there. Amazing. Vani, you put together a, you know, a heck of a list of speakers that people can check out at people versus poison.org. It's going to be a spectacular day. Speakers going all day while we continue to march right out there in front of the steps of the Supreme Court. We're going to make our presence known, but we're joined now by one of those dynamic speakers, Alexandra Munoz. Alexandra, thank you for joining me. Tell me you're a toxicologist. Why is a toxicologist,

is this an issue that you're interested in? Well, as a toxicologist, thank you so much for having me here to talk about this important topic. As a toxicologist, I study toxins and different types of poisons and how they enter into cells and lead to the events that produce cancer, chronic diseases, neurodevelopmental damage, endocrine disruption, and all kinds of other impacts. And so I became interested in this issue because glyphosate is a carcinogen. And as you guys have mentioned, that information has been heavily suppressed by Monsanto for decades. And the tactics that they have used have been incredibly aggressive.

And now for the first time, that information is really breaking through. through the silence that Monsanto has tried to put onto it. And so this issue came to my attention that Bear was pursuing immunity at the state legislatures at the beginning of last year. And there was no toxicologists providing testimony against their legislation because it's such a risky thing to do. And so I took it upon myself to review the literature of glyphosate's carcinogenicity, evaluate it for myself.

And I saw that, yes, this is definitely a carcinogen. It's genotoxic. damages DNA, and there's a lot of evidence to support that it really is causing the non-Hodgkin lymphoma and people that have been exposed from Roundup. You know, when I was just looking up that IARC decision back in 2015, and even when you Wikipedia or, you know, AI, Google it, it says that there are scientists that say that this information was manipulated, it should never have been given this cancer rating, that just because it's losing in court, doesn't mean there's lots of scientists, including the EPA, does not believe

this causes cancer. So to all those, that is the argument they make. They obviously use a very powerful media machine to put that out there. What are the odds that this product does not cause cancer? That they're right, we're wrong. I mean, when you've looked at it, when you look at the science, is it possible they're right we're missing something? Absolutely not. This 100% causes cancer. There's there's really strong evidence showing that it's genotoxic, that it causes something called DNA double strand breaks. And that type of DNA damage is very hard for the cell to repair, and it can lead to a lot of other events in the cell that then precipitate the cancer in forming.

And that's what we see in the animal model studies that have recently been released, where long-term exposure to glyphosate on its own and glyphosate as a formulation, in different versions of that formulation, cause multiple types of cancer. see it right here in this chart. There's numerous types of cancer, skin, thyroid, liver, urinary cancer, and there's also different types of leukemia's. And we're seeing this from any version of glyphosate in formulation and on its own and at a number of different doses, even those that are regulatory, regularly low considering. So there's really very strong conclusive evidence now showing that there is a causal link between glyphosate and cancer.

Well, it certainly appears that's what courts have decided. Yeah, Vani, what are your thoughts? Alex, when you're going to these different state legislators and you're giving your testimony, who's the person in the room that's against you? Like, what is the, how are they organized against you? I'm really interested to learn that because it's, it's amazing how much money they have and how they've infiltrated all of our branches of government. And it's just important for people to recognize, like, what we're up against.

Yes. That's so important. They have an incredibly strategic, well-funded operation pushing these immunity bills. They have lobbyists from organizations like Farm Bureau that are advocating for the bills. They have lobbyists from Modern Ag Alliance, which is Bears Front Group. They're trying to make it seem like it's coming as a request from farmers, but they have essentially convinced the farmers in different states that without this immunity bill, they are going to remove glyphosate from the market, there won't be any glyphosate available, and it threatens their businesses. So they have all the farmers in these states very scared. They get them to contact their legislators. They get them to

come to the committee hearings and provide testimony saying that they need glyphosate to farm. They also have representatives from Modern Ag Alliance and Farm Bureau representing their interests and speaking to the fact that farmers know how to read labels and a number of other things that are not relevant to the question. And oftentimes, really what they've done is they've heavily misrepresented the legislation to legislators. So a lot of times you have legislators that are advocating for the legislation that don't even realize it's a liability shield. They don't believe it when we tell them and they argue with us about it in every state. And that's what they're doing now with the Farm Bill. G.T. Thompson is telling people that Section 10205 is not a liability shield when it

most clearly is. And so that's part of their strategy as well, is to simply trick everyone into avoiding for this. It's very deceptive. You know, one of the difficulties, Vonney, which sort of comes up there is they're trying to pit, you know, citizens in this country, they have to eat this food against the farmers, the American farmer, which is, you know, the backbone of this nation, such an important group. And, you know, and we've even, you know, when I've talked with you, we try to talk about the language. This isn't about farmers. They find themselves in the middle of this. but, you know, and I think about they're the ones suffering the greatest health issues in their families.

They're seeing higher rates of cancers in their children, in their families. But how do we, you know, do you think about the future? I mean, obviously we don't want liability protection, but how long do we think it would take to get off of this stuff? What is the mission to sort of speak to farmers? And, you know, what do you think has to happen there? I mean, there's a chart that I just published on Foodbabe.com just showing the differences between the roundup regulations in U.S. versus Europe. And even if we got to the European standard, which is to remove all desiccation use of glyphosate, the spraying of wheat and oats and beans and other produce right before harvest, that would eliminate a lot of the human exposure. That's one way that we could reduce the amount of glyphosate, but,

have that biggest health impact. Also, we could do things like making sure that the formula is safer, like the one that they use in Europe. There's certain adjuvants and other ingredients that they take out of the formula in Europe. I mean, those are common sense things that could happen as a result of our widespread awareness here. I mean, I think the most important thing that I am looking for

is the truth to come out of our government agencies. We have for too long, had captured agencies that have not told the truth about these chemicals. And as the American people, we deserve to know the truth. Just like Secretary Kennedy has been so incredible at telling the truth about artificial food dyes and food additives and certain other things, we need the same kind of truth coming out of our other agencies.

The USDA and the EPA need to tell the truth about these farming chemicals and tell the farmers. We need to look for a way to start to reduce these chemicals. No one's looking for a ban overnight or to do something out, you know, that would hurt the farming economy or hurt, you know, our food system overnight. It's really about, like, how do we really truly get people off of the chemical food that's being produced? When we look at what it's producing, it's largely ultra-processed foods, right? It's a lot of ethanol. It's a lot of feed-to-feed animals, but then the other stuff is also being used for ultra-processed foods.

So if we really truly want to make America healthy again, we need to get off of this type of crop, the corn and the soy that's very, it's not nutritious when it's boiled down into these small additives that end up in these ultra-processed foods. And it's not nourishing. We need biodiverse farms, more regenerative farming in this country so that we can get a wide variety of produce and vegetables that are farmed through the United States, that are local, you know, nutrient dense into our bodies. And I think that's ultimately what we want to get to. Now that obviously takes a long time, but we need to start making some of these common sense things

that are European counterparts that see better health outcomes are already experiencing. You know, Bonnie, I've been sitting on, you know, some of these Zoom calls with the speakers. One of the things I find really amazing by this conversation is it really is crossing the political aisle at a time where so many people are finding they cannot have any conversation when it comes what might be politics. Obviously, this is an issue that is in the news. But there's real crossover here between organic consumer groups, environmental groups, and then, you know, those that want medical freedom, all of it. It's really, you know, so tell me a little bit about that. What has it been like putting together one of the first coalitions I've seen probably

in the last decade that does cross the aisle? It is really incredible. Everyone's putting their interests aside. We're all coming together for this one moment. We realize how powerful bear is. We realize that the only way to defeat them is to all come together. We've got speakers like Representative Thomas Massey and Shelley Pingree, both different sides of the aisle, coming together for a no immunity for glyphosate act that they are sponsoring in Congress. We have nonprofits like Friends of the Earth. and Center for Food Safety, and the Center for Biological Diversity and Beyond Pesticides and Farm Action, Children Health's Defense Front, of course I can, moms across America and others, all coming together under this large tent

to showcase that we've had enough. We're all, former Congress people are coming forward like Dennis Kucinich and Tim Ryan. We have farmers coming, which is so incredible, like Joel Salatin. So you're going to be here. from some incredible people. There's gonna be a ton of advocates

and people that you recognize from social media, but also really important people and visionaries that have been very vocal in this space, care deeply about what's happening. And I think it's gonna be really interesting to see all of our voices come together that day in front of the Supreme Court while the arguments for Monsanto versus Dernel

are happening inside the building. And I think that energy is gonna be something that cannot be replicated anywhere else. So if you can get to deep, and march with us, put on your walking shoes, bring a sign, just make sure it doesn't have a pointy end. You know, we don't want any weapons. And make sure that you come and use your voice.

You're going to be marching. You're going to be hearing some amazing speakers. You're going to be part of history. This is something that I know the press has been calling nonstop about. They're all going to be there capturing this moment. This is going to be a moment that is historic that we've never seen before that we are putting this together to say, enough's enough.

enough. It's not okay to submit an amicus brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of Bear. It's not okay to have an executive order that puts glyphosate as a national defense priority and gives them any kind of immunity. It's not okay for a farm bill to have pesticide immunity language or to put off pesticide reviews for five more years by the EPA. It's not okay for these state legislators like the one in Kentucky that just passed to give these pesticide companies liability immunity is not okay to do this and so you can go to people the people versus poison.org and you can do a lot of things first of all you can rsvp to come to the rally this is also where you're going to watch the rally if you can't come and you're at home you can live stream

it from there many people are going to be live streaming all over x in social media but that's the one place you can go um then also you can go and you can get a t-shirt to support us all the proceeds go towards the production costs of this event. It is an enormous thing to pull up, pull off. And it's taken everybody's, you know, nickel and dime to make it happen. And it's just incredible that everybody is coming together to chip in to make this happen. You can buy a t-shirt, you can buy a hat, something to help support. It would be incredible if you could. And then the most important thing you can do, because what we are hearing is that the farm bill is going to the House the week of that rally. I think all stars are aligning Dell. We have a really interesting

situation where we're all going to be descending upon Washington and that farm bill is going to be right there being heard. And so we need to make our legislators or representatives in the House understand that we will not support candidates that support pesticide liability shields. All of that language is under the take action link on the people versus poison.org site. Bonnie, thank you for your great work putting this together. Alexandra, I want to thank you for being a part of it, bringing your knowledge and your voice to this, your expertise. I also want to thank you for taking your morning to just inform all of us about this incredible event. I will see you April 27th in Washington, D.C. I want to say to all of you out there that are watching, this is what makes me who I am.

My mom used to drag me to these things. Bring your kids. Show them what it means to be a part of the civic, you know, connection with, you know, a nation of foreign by the people. We have to represent ourselves now because it looks like, you know, the courts may not, or our Congress may not. The more people that are there, the more powerful statement that we're making. So it's going to be beautiful, you know, end of April in Washington, D.C. I hope we'll see you there and certainly go and get a T-shirt or a bag or a hat because that's going to be, you know, once in a lifetime merch.

You can say, hey, I was there. It's also helping us put this whole thing together. So Vani, Alexandra, thank you so much. I'll see you in Washington, D.C. Thank you, Del. All right. Thanks. Well, look, we've got a great show coming up a little bit further down.

I'm going to interview a homeopath that is responsible for World Homeopathy Awareness Week, Gabrielle Trowb. And did you know that it's possible that homeopathy might be the answer when it comes to pesticides and herbicides? You can imagine if basically something. as safe as water was what was being sprayed in our plants, but stop pesticides. We're going to, that's just one of the conversations and things that I'm interested in, homeopathy we're going to talk about. But first, it's time for the Jackson Report. All right, Jeffrey. It certainly feels like we are fighting on multiple fronts now, once again, in America. Yeah, the fight never ends. There's never an end to this. It's kind of just a

generational torch handoff to the next generation, the next generation, and we keep it moving, And we do it with a smile on our face and knowing that we're in respect and honor of standing on the shoulders of the people that came before us. This is a beautiful thing. And it's such an amazing rally. There's so much happening in the United States right now. It's hard to just pick the news on a couple of topics. But in the U.S. right now, from a regulatory agency standpoint, some big shifts are happening in the notorious position of CDC director. Remember, we had Suzanne Monterez, Dr. Susan Monterez. she was let go in August of 2025, and there's kind of been a vacant position.

Jay Bajaria was kind of serving as interim director of the CDC. But now we have from the journalist masters in corporate media, sources, unnamed sources have come forward and said, Erica Schwartz, Dr. Erica Schwartz may be the frontrunner. This is Reuters, White House favors former deputy surgeon general to lead CDC. It says Schwartz, who served as a deputy surgeon general during President Donald Trump's first term, was directly involved in the federal response to the COVID-19 pandemic overseeing national preparedness and public health coordination.

So she wasn't frontline, obviously, doing public messaging alongside Fauci, but she was deputy director under Jerome Adams at that time. So, again, the PCR rollout, the 15 days of slow the spread that went into lockdowns. I'm assuming that was one of her roles. But we go to her job description here from her CV, and this is it right here. This is when she worked at the Coast Guard, we're Admiral Erica Schwartz, Director of Health Safety and Work Life at U.S. Coast Guard.

And it says as an expert in health care policy, she wrote the first ever force health protection policies to include the pandemic influenza force health protection policy, the anthrax smallpox vaccination policies, the quarantinable communicable disease policy, and it goes on from there. So let's look at some of those. We have some of those that she helped with.

This is the smallpox vaccination program for the Coast Guard. And you can go down there, section 10, the policy, point five, it says mandatory vaccination with smallpox vaccine. This is for Coast Guard personnel. Absent and exemption, military personnel who refused to be vaccinated may be in violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for failure to obey a lawful order. And then we have the Anthrax vaccine immunization program that she allegedly helped on. And same thing, basically cut and pasted policy level 10, subsection 5, and you may be in violation of the Uniform

Code of Military Justice if you fail to obey. Now, in fairness, those are biological agents, biological weapons agents, and the military does sign up to, if you sign up for the military, you kind of give away your rights in that space, but there are exemptions available, and she helped write those. So looking at this, we're hoping as a society to move on from some of the failed pandemic policies that led to a lot of the distrust in the government, a lot more vaccine hesitancy, but we're kind of re-upping allegedly, this is a person that may be in the pick now in the making for CDC director. So she's going to still, she hasn't been confirmed, of course.

She would have to get confirmed. And, you know, I think when we look at this, what I see is sort of a reading, the tea leaves, is you see really what Robert Kennedy Jr. is up against when he holds that position at HHS. It's really been clear from the time he's got in there. And we've watched Donald Trump wanting, you know, crying for praise for his warp speed vaccine, the COVID vaccine. Obviously, you know, there's people that want to see that vaccine just eradicated from existence because of all the harms it causes. But, you know, what do you do when your boss, you know, has a soft, you know, sweet place for this vaccine and for his accomplishment there?

And I think here this pick looks like someone that really championed that warp speed moment may probably makes Donald Trump feel really good about the COVID vaccine. It's hard to imagine that this is like a top pick for Robert Kennedy Jr. But I know him. I know Bobby, of course. I've worked very closely with him. And I know he's, you know, he's got to, you know, take the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune and still try to achieve and accomplish as much as he can. But I think for all of us, it gives us a sense of we've sent our brother in there. But, you know, it's complicated, right? How do you get things done when, you know, your boss, as I said, Donald Trump has certain places of favor that don't necessarily fit the agenda.

We were just talking about, you know, the glyphosate protections and the DOJ writing amicus briefs in behalf of that. So, you know, Maha, I think, is, you know, is confused inside of the White House. I doubt it's confused for Robert Kennedy Jr., but this is politics, right? This is how this all goes. So, you know, personally, I guess I hope she doesn't get confirmed. Have to have to imagine there's better people out there. that, you know, have more awareness of, you know, really what's taking place in this space.

Right, right. And we're going to speak more on the U.S. space in a second, but we have news coming out of the U.K. breaking. Right before we went to air today, this is the U.K. COVID inquiry. And this is an independent inquiry that has come out. And this is part four, basically, looking at the vaccines and therapeutics. And I want to point the audience to some really key points that came out here. And just some, looking at some words that came out of this, basically says this. The inquiry acknowledges the suffering of those for whom vaccines led to serious injury and death. It is an imperative that a sufficiently supportive government scheme is in place to help the minority of people and their loved ones who suffer serious injury following vaccination. They were looking at this vaccination and what is done to people and how it was rolled out, all the aspects of this.

and this is what's what they pulled out, this independent group. It goes on to say this. The inquiry was also told that when the COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out, little was done to publicize the scheme. That's the compensation scheme. And a significant number of those who had been injured or bereaved as a result of the vaccine were unaware of it. Del, how many times have we heard that, even here in the U.S.,

with the vaccine injury compensation program, doctors, nurses, giving the vaccines, don't even know about the program, let alone the people getting the shot. So they knew that with the COVID vaccine. The people that were injured by it said, I didn't even know I was, I could seek redress from the government for compensation here. So that's a big admission. And then finally they go on to say this.

This is the recommendation, the overarching recommendation, reforming the vaccine damage payment scheme as soon as possible. That's what they're calling for, with an increase in the minimum payment awarded to those injured by the vaccine in a fair system for determining payment. This now puts the US- almost like Robert Kennedy Jr. as HHS Secretary in the UK. I'm sure you love to have that achieved here, right? I mean, what amazing juxtaposition between those two stories back to back, right?

We're going to bring in a CDC head that will probably champion the COVID vaccine. Over in the UK, you know, more and more information is coming out. They're recognizing, you know, we've hurt some people. Yeah, which makes officially today, which makes the U.S. kind of a global outlier when it comes to just acknowledging that the COVID vaccine has caused this much harm. So there's a big space open for that. And it was going to happen at the ASIP committee just a few weeks ago until a judge, if you remember, came forward and stopped that. But here's the space in the U.S. right now. This is Politico. I want to say again, Politico, reported on political for a long time here, but we never seen headlines

like this. More Americans doubt vaccine safety than trust it. Political poll fines. And it goes into this article. It says results from a March poll of 3,851 U.S. adults conducted by public first show that a polarity of Americans question the safety of vaccines, support reducing the number administered, and believe that people's right to decide what they put in their bodies is more important than preventing the spread of disease. Now, what side of the aisle you're on when you read that depends on how you take it in? But wow, that's amazing. Because we've been beaten over the head. And so the politicians, and especially, the Trump administration saying, don't talk about vaccines. They're not popular. No one cares.

Midterms are coming up. Maybe we'll get to him afterwards. That's not what the mainstream is signaling anymore. And that's probably a little truer to what's actually happening with the American public. But back to this ASIP committee because we were going to get a conversation about the vaccine injured from the COVID vaccine. And a judge blocked that. That was the headline here, federal vaccine panel in disarray after this was a Massachusetts judge blocks changes. Well, right when that happened, our attorneys at the informed consent action network sent a letter to HHS Secretary Kennedy, and we urged him to amend the ASIP Charter. He had the chance to do that. It comes up every two years.

April 1st was the deadline, and this was on March 26. We said, please act on this. You can amend this. This is within your powers. And that is what he has done. Now, the new ASIP Charter has some big sweeping changes here. I want to go over. And this is the charter that governs the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Now you go in there and it used to be just expertise. You can only pack this panel with expertise in vaccination, vaccination policy. Now it says this. Members shall be selected from authorities who are knowledgeable in the fields of medicine, vaccines, of course, immunization practices.

But then you go on toxicology, pediatric neurodevelopment. You go on even further, and this is the big one, recovery from serious vaccine injuries. They're going to put experts in there on that. Public health, of course. and you go even further at the very bottom line there, experts who have expertise in assessment of vaccine safety and efficacy, the word safety appears several more times than the original charter in here. So that shows the emphasis on where this expanded ASEP charter is going. But then it goes on to say something really interesting in this next segment here.

It says ASEP shall provide advice and guidance to the CDC director, whoever that is, regarding use of vaccines and related agents for effective control of vaccine preventable diseases. So related agents, does that mean homeopathy? Does that mean something that's not a vaccine but can control vaccine preventable diseases? We're going to see how that moves forward. But last line here, it goes on to say that they want to look at the gaps in vaccine safety research, including adverse effects following vaccination. So again, there's a directive to look after these things. So we may be behind the UK inquiry right now, the COVID inquiry, but the ASIP charter has been amended and they cannot change this for two years. now. So that will have to be looked at. One of the things it also has done was it added trade groups. So we know, of course, the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, these trade groups that take money from Big Pharma have been there influencing policy. They don't vote,

but they're part of the discussion. They do public comments. They're part of the question sections. Now we have kind of a balancing of the field with these new organizations in there. We have the Medical Academy of Pediatrics special needs. We have physicians for informed consent. of American physicians and surgeons and the Independent Medical Alliance, all organizations that do not take money from Big Pharma to balance the field and put the deck a little more stacked to the middle row. So we're not so up balance. This is a massive, massive move. And all lies in the next ASEP meeting. That's all I can say. I love this so much. I mean, I want to talk about, you know, taking lemons and making lemonade. I mean, the judge essentially disbanded Robert Kennedy Jr.'s

ASIC committee, siding with the fact that they're supposed to all be pharma shills that have made vaccines themselves. So that lasted, what, two or three weeks? We submitted this letter, say, hey, Bobby, by the way, you haven't, he probably knew this. I don't want to say, you know, I don't know how much, you know, but of course, Aaron Siri helped us draft that we really looked into the rules. And what we suggest is, hey, just broaden it. Now that you have the opportunity, now that the judges, you know, said, well, because of this narrow definition it has, why don't you broaden that definition and look at now we're seeing conversations about safety, which people assume that was in there, right? Jeffrey, it's not like he's adding, I don't know how the media

is going to handle this. Oh, my God, we're going to have someone that worries about the, like, specialists on the side effects of vaccines? Well, yeah, didn't you always have that? It's going to be a very difficult thing to try and fight, but it's amazing to watch Robert Kennedy Jr. just turn this around and again, shifting, you know, how the government works, how this regulatory agency that's been captured, how that's going to work in the future. Really great news. And I'm glad he's made the decision because he was down to days. He had to do it quickly, and sure enough, he did. That's right. Absolutely great news. Let's switch now into environmental toxins. So when it comes to the Maha report, this was his initial report. When Kennedy got in, Trump directed the Make America

Healthy, again, initiative to look at environmental toxins, especially when it comes to pregnant women and vulnerable children. And so we have this massive outcropping now of new science that is looking at what we just regarded as kind of background noise of our civilization. One of those is a sweetener called erythritol. And if you have been looking at the editorial section on the highwire.com, you already saw this article. It's also on our socials. But this is the headline here, crossing the blood-brain barrier, the erythritol problem. This is a zero-calorie sweetener. it's a fermented sugar alcohol and you go to this study here it gets a little sciencey but i'll try to break this down pretty simply it says the non-nutriative sweet erythritol adversely affects

brain microvascular endothelial cell function and it goes on to say this that summarizes in summary arithrotol adversely affects oxidative stress eno production eti one production and tpa release in brain microvascular endothelial cells potentially contributing to the increased risk of ishemic stroke associated with erythritol. So basically it's crossing the broadband barrier. It gets in there. It shouldn't be in there, but it does. It gets in there.

And it kicks off this cascade of events that are negatively impacting the vasculature of your brain, and it could lead to stroke. This is just something. Now, arthritis, so the next question people are asking is, where do I find it? Read your labels. So you're looking at this in non-sugary sports drinks.

You're looking at some keto diet products. And until the federal government acts, because this was snuck in there, I shouldn't say snuck in there, there was a wide open door from the FDA under the generally recognized as safe grass designation. Oh, this guy was grass. And the company said, you know what? Wow. Yeah, you know what? Trust us.

It's okay. And the FDA said under grass, we trust you. It's okay. Come on in. And that's why it's in our product. So until the FDA acts, just for people that are passionate about this or maybe want to avoid this because they have a family history of stroke or whatever the reason, they can just look at the back of labels and try to avoid that. One of the things that's a little tougher to avoid that's not on labels are forever chemicals,

and that's our next study here. And this is out of the Daily Mail, this is the headline here. Chemicals found in everyday products could cause facial deformities in unborn babies, study finds. Now, I just want to pause for the audience and say, we're doing this as kind of a social warning. We're not trying to scare people, but this is just information to help you navigate life. This is helpful and it shouldn't be looked as a negative. But this is a big story here. Forever Chemicals have really received a lot of press over the last couple of years.

This one in particular, as the headline shows, craniofacial abnormalities, these account for roughly a third of all congenital birth defects worldwide. What are those? Well, we're talking about kids with like a cleft palate, cleft lip. Sometimes children have craniosinotosis where their skulls are elongated. these are all birth defects. And a lot of people question, unless I'm a science question, well, how is this happening? Maybe we can point something in the environment. This is what this study does. Here is the study. And again, a little science here, but our audience is not scared of that.

And this is the new mechanistic evidence. So this is interesting because they're actually proposing a mechanism for how this works. And this is the PFDA per fluorodiconic acid. And it's looking at, basically they looked at, I'm just going to read the, the quote here, and then I can show you an image. It says PFAS, that's that forever chemical disruption of maternal heptic A-T-R-A. That's a form of vitamin A. A-T-R-A metabolism via CY-P-26 may represent one pathological mechanism for the significant birth defects associated with prenatal exposure.

So we have this image here from the study, and this C-PY-26 is a group of liver enzymes, and it's responsible for keeping maternal, the vitamin A. A levels in check for pregnant women. Well, this Forever chemical takes that balance out of check, and this is a key, a critical signaling molecule for a developing fetus. So once that molecule is out of check, we have problems. And that's the mechanism scientists are saying this potentially may be it, and they actually finalized it with this and their conclusion.

Based on our data, the ATRA, that's the vitamin A derivative, metabolic pathway through CYP-20 A-6A-1 regulation is a target for prenatal PFDA exposure, likely invoking irreversible consequences for the vulnerable fetus and neonate. This is a massive, massive finding, and you got to wonder why it's not on every news organization right now, just as a warning. If it turns out not to be right, okay, no one's going to sue because there's not forever chemical makers that are out there going, you're not taking our products in your food.

They're accidentally getting in the food. And that brings me to a question here, how do we get away from this stuff? Well, the first thing you want to do is at least, at least filter your water. That's at least what you can do. And I would say get rid of your nonstick pans and things like that.

I mean, all these things that, you know, get back to, you know, a nice iron skillet if you want, and season it well, it works just as well. But we gotta watch these things. And you know, I think anyone that's been pregnant knows, vitamin A, I mean, it's interesting, the study, you're careful with vitamin A, because you know it can cause birth defects,

You've got to watch your intake your levels. But here what we're finding out is that that regulator inside of you to make sure that that is the right amount getting to your baby is being thrown out of whack by this. So again, it's another strike against these chemicals that have just been put on the market by, you know, I mean, today there's been, you know, a hearing with Robert Kennedy Jr. And again, you watch people just railing on him, especially the Democrats, to just don't seem to want to have any answers to a question but want to scream at him. And I just want to say, where were you? When some of these same people have been there forever, when HHS secretaries were approving forever chemicals, we're approving bisphenols and plastics and fire retardants and fluoride and, you know,

chemicals in our baby food and dies in our children's food. And now we finally have someone doing something about all those things. And he deserves to just be screamed at the whole time. It's a little disconcerting and somewhat disingenuous, I think. And Secretary Kennedy, when he took office, he was handed a food guide, a food directive that was 453 pages long that was written by food lobbyists directing Americans to eat ultra-processed foods. And that brings us, so he has a lot of work to do.

And that brings us to our next study here, and this is the final study in this segment. Ultra-processed foods may raise risk of preterm birth and pregnancy complications study finds. Listen to this. Researchers found each 10% point increase in ultra-processed food calorie intake. So just 10% increase during pregnancy was linked to roughly 11% higher risk of preterm birth before 37 weeks and 5% higher risk of high blood pressure disorders such as preclampsia, the leading causes of illness and death for mothers and newborns in the United States. Again, a massive study, 11% extra, 11% higher. percent higher risk from just 10 percentage point increase of ultra-processed food for pregnant

women. And the old food guide, the old food pyramid was directing people to eat ultra-process food. These are massive findings. And I don't think people are really aware of how crazy this gets environmental toxins and the food we eat. But again, this should be front and center during the conversation. Every single administration, at least in my lifetime, didn't even care to look at this. Yeah. Yeah. No, you're absolutely right. And finally, again, we're seeing real changes there, which is something to be excited about in the future of our school lunch programs and things like that.

Yeah, yeah. And so we'll finally end with trying to debunk a sky's falling narrative again from the corporate media. It looks like this. Take a look. All right. Some people may think of measles as a disease of the past, but an alarming horizon, the number of cases in the United States shows that's not the case. There's a health alert this morning about measles. An outbreak that we have been following for you is now growing. In southeast Michigan, a measles outbreak has expanded to seven cases. In Ohio, the CDC confirms 11 confirmed measles cases. In South Carolina, amid the largest measles outbreak the U.S. has seen in more than 35 years. Utah is now the epicenter of the U.S. measles outbreak.

And doctors worry that this virus, one of the most contagious known to humanity, could eventually rip through the U.S. like it did a century ago. State officials are urging everyone to make sure you and your children have had two doses of the MMR vaccine. It is 97% effective at preventing measles infections. Outbreaks and high numbers of measles cases, is this a pretty new phenomenon in the last couple of years? And it is really directly related to decreasing vaccination rates across our country. I am concerned about high risk communities where we have low rates of vaccination and that it can't spread quickly. Unfortunately, it only takes a small percent to, um, to, um,

not vaccinate for things to really spread like wildfire. That last comment I find interesting. It only takes a small percent to not vaccinate to cause a wildfire. Why would that be? Why would a small percent throw it out of whack to like wildfire proportions? Obviously, you know, one of the things I really want to point out, Jeffrey, is when we look at this story, people need to understand that the entire purpose of a measles vaccine program was not to protect.

from measles, their goal was to eradicate measles from the planet. This was the dream they had back in the 1960s. There was a lot of virologists and immunologists that thought it would be dangerous. Don't pressure this very contagious virus that is so mild. You know, why risk it? But let's be clear, Jeffrey, they have failed. But when you watch that news, it is clear what we say over and over again. That is a pharmaceutical ad. That is not news. To be, oh my God, seven cases of a rash in our state. It's all coming crashing down. 11 cases. We have an epidemic on our hands. Oh, and by the way, Pfizer says take two doses of the vaccine to make sure that you're covered 97%. The thing is an entire ad that is funded by the 70% of advertising that's going into these

news stations. And when I watch it, I think, how does any baby boomer sit and watch that and think this is ridiculous? I mean, we used to have, well, of course, a Brady Bunch episode about this. Remind everybody, this is how panicked they used to be when they got the measles. Boy, this is the life, isn't it? Yeah, if you have to get sick, you sure can't beat the measles. That's right. No medicine. Inside or out.

Like shots, I mean. Don't even mention shots. Yes. Yeah, a laugh track because nobody was panicked about it, but they're funded to be panicked now on the news. And the story has been this way. I mean, every year, it's, oh, it's Del Big Street, Robert Kennedy Jr., the reason we're having measles. No, it's because your vaccine actually did not eradicate this disease. It's coming through in the same cycles it always has.

And one bigger issue is the really immune people, which is the baby boomers, they are slowly now leaving this planet. So the last foundational pillar of herd immunities disappearing. Now all we have is this weak, pathetic immunity that's given by vaccines that doesn't last long enough. And slowly but surely we're seeing more and more of this. But hey, let's go ahead and blame the two unvaccinated kids in the building when really this is an issue, I think, that has always been there. Your vaccine program didn't work. You've failed. And now your failure you can blame on this group because you own the television.

That's what I think is going on anyway. And we can see politicians are trying to seize on these cases, on these fear narratives to ram through legislation. We barely got out of the way of a one in South Carolina. They tried to push this through, but protesters' parents swarm the statehouse. South Carolina lawmakers kill Bill that would have ended religious exemptions for measles vaccine. So highly unpopular going after the religious exemption, civil rights, First Amendment. But they're racing to do that because of some measles cases or an outbreak in some. Carolina. They're hoping to get this legislation. Once that passes, that's there forever,

unless ICAN attorneys can come in and try to reverse that. But like you said, we're talking about what about the level of asymptomatic spread? Because this vaccine is not a sterilizing vaccine. These people that get vaccinated are carriers. We know this from the science. It's not just a sterile world we're living in where you get the vaccine, the MMR vaccine, and everyone's sterile except for them vaccinated. They're dirty. And that's not how that works. So let's look at some studies here just to confirm this. So it's not just us talking about this. Here's one titled, Persistence of Measles Antibodies After Two Doses of Measles Vaccine in a post-elimination environment. So these researchers looked at children who received a second measles vaccine dose at kindergarten

age four to six years or middle school age 10 to 12 years. Then he took serum samples. So taking blood samples. Serum samples were collected periodically during a 10-year period for the kindergarten. group and a five-year period for the middle school group. So this is a pretty scientific study. We're not talking about theories or AI models. And let's look at the actual images. This is some basically bar graphs you're looking at here from the study. And you can see the legend, giving you an idea of how to read this and how to interpret the chart. Those big black lines, the tallest black bar graph lines, are the high antibody titers. So when these kids, on the far left side, you can see the age. When these kids first get the vaccine, they're about 75% have the

antibody titers for preventing infection. But as you can see, like with every other vaccine, it wanes. It wanes. It wanes until they need a booster or another booster. And then they get a little jolt there, but they also are susceptible to an injury event profile from the vaccine. But you can see it goes down. It wanes. But that second bar, if you're going from right to left, the second bar, which is a lot smaller, the black bar, that is a medium to low level, meaning susceptible to subclinical infection. So you have about 25%, depending on what bar graph you're looking at, some of them up to 50%, have low to medium antibody levels that makes them susceptible, makes these kids susceptible to subclinical infection, meaning they're carrying their transmitters,

they're carrying the measles virus, they're transmitters, they're giving it. And what's happening is they're not, it isn't stopping, it's spreading. And when you see an unvaccinated child with measles, that's just one person lighting up as an example of what's going on in the community. And so the researchers say this, if ongoing viral transmission requires that a substantial portion of the population be antibody negative, our data suggests that such a situation may be several decades away. Well, that research was in 2007, so we're almost a couple decades away right now. So there they were saying it's not going to be the unvaccinated. I want to bring it up because I think this is something that you and I have been thinking about a lot,

and I'm glad you found this study, but bring up the bars again, because I want to make sure we understand what they're saying here. What they're saying is they tested the blood in these children over a period of time, and when they first get the vaccine, they have a high, you know, rate of antibodies. So this number 900, if it's 900 or above, they believe that means you are not getting infected. You are totally blocking this thing. But if it drops below 900 in this 121 to 900 range, that medium space, now you may not be getting symptoms, but you are a carrier.

You're an asymptomatic carrier. You're infected. You just don't know it. And so it's a huge group right there on that when you're looking at that number, oftentimes, and it drops down to this within a year or two, these kids, 25, 30 percent of them, and most of them are only tracked for five years, some of them 10 years. But what happens once you're in college or you're an adult? This is what we're talking about.

And by the way, when they scream 97 percent effective, yeah, the day after you get the vaccine, but that waning is what we learned in COVID. They said the same thing, 95 percent effective, but it was only effective immediately. And then all of a sudden within 15 weeks, it became negative efficacy when it came. came to COVID, you were more likely to catch the disease and spread the disease. And this is what I think more signs. So I want Bobby Kennedy, maybe we should write a letter to him about this. I want him the next time there's a measles outbreak. Will we go ahead and do antibody tests of everybody in the community, everybody in a school system, not just find out who the unvaccinated. Of course,

the unvaccinator catching it. It's a highly communicable disease. But they're the canaries and the coal mine showing you that this is, you know, the environment is carrying this. They're lighting up. And by the way, we're not complaining. We should be if your unvaccinated kids are getting our kids sick. Maybe there's something to complain about there, although most of us want this immunity. And let me make this clear. What this study is showing us is something I'm trying to get through to reporters when I'm

talking to them. Your unvaccinated kids are going to catch measles every time it circulates through once they drop below that 900. So year after year, if there's measles around, they're going to be spreading it to each other. They're going to be putting that immune suppressed child that can't vaccinate at risk. Meanwhile, the unvaccinated kid isn't a carrier. That's until the moment he or she has it or, you know, contracts it. And what's going to happen?

I'm keeping them home. They got a rash. They clearly have the measles. They're not in school. We know they're sick. So they're staying home. Unlike the vaccinated children that don't know they're carrying and sick and are spreading it all over each other. My kid's home. So maybe. Maybe there was two or three days they were contagious

where we didn't catch it, didn't know as the measles, all right. So they were there. But your kids are spreading it for weeks at a time every single year. And guess what? Those three or four days, now my child that was unvaccinated is now got an immunity that is going to last a lifetime. They're the only ones replacing the baby boomers. They're the only ones creating true herd immunity to protect, you know, the population. And this is something no one in media wants to talk about. They want to make the unvaccinated kids the bad guys. The truth is they are healthy until the moment.

And by the way, we see this as an expression of health. Now they're just developing powerful immunity to go on and pass it on to their kids and to protect those around them. So this whole story, we need more science to look at exactly what you're talking about. But very interesting. 900's your antibodies, okay, probably stopping in. But then when it wanes below that, look at that. So if they've got 25% of them, you know, are in that medium zone, you don't have

herd immunity. You're at 70%. If you start out 95 and then they save like up to 10% don't even react to the vaccine. So you're dropping down to 70, 60%. They never had herd immunity. They can never get there. This product sucks. Can we all just admit it?

All right, Jeffrey. Thank you. Amazing. reporting. Go ahead. This is the dirty little secret that the experts in this field know, the ones loading the teleprompters typically for those media experts that are making those stories that we're watching. And I want to go over one last study just to confirm what you're saying. These are by some of the experts in the field of immunology.

The re-emergence of measles in developed countries. Well, I thought we got rid of it. It's not the anti-vaxxers. It's this. Multiple studies demonstrate that 2 to 10% of those immunized with two doses of measles of measles vaccine failed to develop, fail to develop protective antibody levels and that immunity can wane over time and result in infection, so-called secondary vaccine failure when the individual exposed to measles. Here's some more examples. For example, during the 1989-1991 US measles

outbreak, 20 to 40 percent of the individuals affected had been previously immunized with one to two doses of the vaccine. What hurt immunity? What are we talking about? Exactly. And finally in October 2011 outbreak in Canada, 55% of the 98 visuals had received two doses of measles vaccine. So again, calling on Kennedy and the public health officials at these federal agencies to get antibody tests on these outbreaks publicly release them so we know what's going on. That's how this can be solved. This is how this true story can be told. They don't want it solved.

They don't want the world to know that this whole, you know, scheme has failed. this is obvious science. If they were really fascinated or interested, they would do it. If they were real scientists, they would just say, hey, let's not, you know, have a bias here. Let's figure out what's really going on with this vaccine. What's happening with the vaccinated? They don't want to know, just like they don't want to know if it's safe. They don't do safety studies. This entire thing is a group of ostriches with their heads stuck in the sand trying to govern the rest of us and how we should live our lives. Jeffrey, amazing reporting this week. Really great stuff. Some positives, some negatives, some negatives. true transparency and really good stuff.

Keep it up. All right. Thank you. Next week, Jeffrey. All right. Well, look, we have shown you. We have been sending letters, right? One of the letters we sent to Kennedy was to add 300 injuries to the table of vaccine injuries.

We'll see if that happens. We said, hey, you should redesign the charter for ASIP. Well, that happened. We're excited about that. Look at what that change means. By the way, you make that possible. This isn't free. We have our legal team.

Doesn't just write a letter because we want them to. They go and do research. We said, what could they do with ASIP? What kind of changes can be made? What is the historical facts? When it gets sent to Robert Kennedy Jr., it's cited with legal citations so that he can turn around the next day and say, it's right here. I can do it.

I know I can. We'd win in a courtroom. Let's do this. Well, we just submitted another legal. This is our legal update this week. ICANN urges CDC to classify vaccines that do not stop transmission as shared clinical decision making. I mean, why mandate a product that doesn't actually, this is so several vaccines that are

currently routinely recommended on CDC's vaccine schedules do not stop transmission of the target pathogens like we're just talking about. ICANN's legal team sent a letter to CDC urging it to correct this error and move these vaccines to the shared clinical decision making category. This is really a no-brainer. Now, the measles vaccine may not fit this except for those that it's waning. But there are vaccines like pertussis and others. Here's a list of them.

Hep B, by the way, doesn't stop transmission. D-TAP doesn't. Certainly not the pertussis part of it. Also the T-DAP. Polio. Meninjoccal, HPV, influenza. Some of these, it's because they are, you know, sexually transmitted diseases. So you're not breathing them.

things don't really matter. But what we're saying is, look, the entire reason you're saying you have to mandate this product is so that you can protect your neighbor. But if you're not protecting your neighbor, what if it's worse? What if you're running around infecting them and you don't know it? Like we were with COVID, asymptomatic cares. That's what these vaccines are doing. They're actually making children more risky because they won't stay home. They don't know they're running around. They get everyone infected. So we're saying when it comes to those vaccines, they don't even meet your definition of why a vaccine should be there. So why do we chuck them over to shared decision making? Let's see what Robert Kennedy Jr. does with that. But I just want you

to think about, you know, when you watch the legal cases that we bring in court, when you watch these recommendations, who else you know is making these types of recommendations to the HHS Secretary? Look at all those legal wins. All of this you're making possible. Just think about it. It's been 10 years of activism ICANN has been involved with our nonprofit, that we have been a decade now delivering wins like nobody else has, seeing things a different way, not just going crying boo-hoo when the American Academy Pediatrics wins a lawsuit against HHS. We say, hold on a second, hold on a second. Maybe we can use this to our favor. Let's go ahead and make the adjustment we've been wanting to make for decades, and we do it. don't you love that there's a group that is thinking like that for you so you don't have

you can focus on the rest of your life the things that are going on and know that the best and the brightest are taking care of issues that are literally going to affect your lives? All we're asking from you is why don't you sponsor this work so that we can take on more lawsuits, we can write more letters, we can do more research. You make that possible when you become a recurring donor. Just go to the top of the page. Hit donate to ICANN. We're asking for $26 a month for 2026.

Become a recurring donor. That makes it so that you are a part of our High Wire Plus program. You can watch all of our extra programming. You get newsletters. You name it. But you know what you really get, you get peace of mind. You know that anxiety you have when the world just feels like it's going crazy and you don't know. How can I make any change?

How am I going to do anything? People that are sponsoring our work, they're laying there at night going, hey, at least I know I'm helping Highwire and I can get the work done that they need to get done. And we don't care. It's not just vaccines. You see our involvement with people versus poison. We're going to march for your food supply too. We talk about your water. We're going to look closer. We keep looking at AI. We're reporting on everything we find and doing the same type of research that has been accurate virtually every single show that we've done. So for all of you that sponsor make this possible, thank you so much. If you're listening right now to a podcast,

version of this. Then all you do is pick up your cell phone right now, type the number of 72022. So you're going to text and then write the word donate. And I will respond to you with a text back and give you information on how you can help be a part of the informed consent action network. Look how far we've come and look how far we have to go. It's a lot of work to do. And, you know, in many ways, I think we will awaken a monster. We've got Monsanto. We got Bear. We got Merck.

We got Pfizer. We got the news acting like, you know, pharmaceutical advertising machines. We're taking it all on and we know we can win with your help. So I, you know, have talked about the fact that I was, I grew up, you know, with holistic. I told you my dad thought Monsanto was like Satan itself. But what were the things that we did? Well, a lot of it was homie. And I remember as a little kid, my mom would hand me these little sugar pills, and I'm thinking, what the heck are these?

It tastes like sugar. I don't know what this does. I certainly know that I still do it when I, you know, had my ski accident. I immediately grabbed some homeopathy. The first thing I do is take some arnica. In fact, I think a lot of us are grabbing those little, like whether it's an allergy we have. But what are we actually doing? Does it actually work?

What is the science? Well, if you were to watch the news, they want to tell you the science isn't there at all. This is what it looks like when they talk about it. Homeopathy is an alternative medical practice with roots dating back to the 1700s. A very contentious form of alternative medicine practiced by millions all over the world. It's endorsed by royalty and the stars,

and 500 million people worldwide claim to use it. Homeopathic medicines are based on a few theories of disease distinct from conventional medicine, the most famous being like cures like. In the US, the National Institute of Health, says that there is little evidence. to support homeopathy as an effective treatment for any specific condition. Several key concepts of homeopathy are inconsistent with fundamental concepts of chemistry and physics.

Consumers cannot assume homeopathic health claims are scientifically proven. Currently, there are no FDA-approved homeopathic drugs in the United States. Now the FDA planning to crack down on the safety of many homeopathic products, a $3 billion industry that's never been regulated. They think they're taking an active ingredient that is going to benefit them. And that's where the scam is. That's where the snake oil part of this is. Every time you see Paul Offutt on the news, just know that it is pharmaceutical speaking to you.

And oh, my God, they're under $300 million by an industry that wants to own you, control you, and funded the pandemic that locked us all in our homes. Anyway, you know, homeopathy, you know, I've been on different sides of the map. I've said I've always taken it just because it's, it's seems. like it was there, but you know what really blew my mind? What blew my mind is as I was traveling with Vax and I've done all of this work, how many parents of autistic children have said to me, you know what, the most powerful thing we did was homeopathy. It brought back our child's speech or they started walking again. I mean, I've heard incredible testimonies from parents that have

tried everything else. So is it placebo effect? It didn't work on all the other things they did, but it's something I don't fully understand. And in our, you know, sort of stretching our wings and trying to say, let's not just talk about the problem. There may be some solutions you're not aware of. This is a conversation we want to have, and it happens to be a new documentary out all about it. Take a look at this. I was diagnosed with a mesenteric mass. And thyroid condition, diffuse arthritis, endometriosis, depression, and the autism, strep throat, bladder disease. Dave told me I was dying. Every year, medicine's correctly prescribed, encompasses thousands and thousands of deaths.

The doctor, she said, we can give you opioids, but we're going to have to have you join a support group for the addiction that you're going to develop. I thought he was going to die. They couldn't figure out what was wrong. And they just blew the pain off as like, oh, it's just period pain. That's kind of just what women have to deal with. Homeopathy. Homeopathy.

I have never heard of it. Holistic medicine. Like natural medicine. I came upon homeopathy. I came upon homeopathy and over a year period of time I became symptom-free. Homeopathy has really helped her female reproductive system. She's actually pregnant right now with a baby on the way. It'd save my life.

It gives us hope. Homeopathy was attracting the most well-known, well-respected, literary greats, corporate leaders, and educated people. The important part is, does the stuff work? Many people think it's quack medicine. This widespread idea that homeopathy is just a sugar pill and has to be placebo. It seems to be a general view homeopathy is impossible because it's just water. There is strong research evidence demonstrating it works, and yet nobody will believe it. I wasn't really sure. I was skeptic. I went to the doctor who said to me,

goes, what are you taking? What are you doing? You're way, way better. way better. Homeopathy will effectively restore health rather than simply put a band-aid on their symptoms. It is tremendously successful in treating animals. The homeopathic medicines really improve the quality of the crop in the future. We could see homeopathy instead of toxic pesticides. A clinical effect of homeopathy that is more than just placebo. This is the medicine of the future.

This is the medicine we've all been waiting for. This is 21st century medicine. Well, it's actually World Homeopathy Awareness Week. I'm here with the founder today of World Homeopathy Awareness Week and one of the experts in that film, Gabrielle, thank you joining me. Thank you so much for having me on the show, Del. It's a pleasure to be here. So we haven't done this, I don't think.

We haven't really, in the nearly 10 years we've been at it, we haven't really gotten into homeopathy, even though it's something that comes up a lot of my conversation. So for someone that is like those people in the man on the street interviews in that film that don't know what is it. What is homeopathy? How is it developed? How does it work?

So homeopathy was developed 250 years ago by a doctor Samuel Hunnaman. He was actually become very disillusioned with medicine at the time. At the time, they were giving people high doses of mercury, they were leaching people, and it was barbaric.

And he wanted to find a gentler path. He really believed that there was a way to heal people that was more gentle. And he actually came across, a transcript. Now, Hunnaman was actually versed in many different languages and he was translating some medical journals and he came across an article that had talked about treatment of malaria with Chinchona, which is Peruvian bark. And Dr. Hunnaman found this very interesting because he knew that Chinchona actually caused malaria-like symptoms. So he thought, how could it

be that a substance that causes certain symptoms actually is curative for those very symptoms in when they're sick. And so he started to see this pattern happening in medicine quite often. In fact, Hippocrates was the first way, a person who identified this, that there was the law of opposites and the law of similars. And homeopathy is the law of similus. The word homeopathic means actually homeopathos, which means similar suffering, and comes from the Latin term similia simulibus curante, which means like cures, like. And I want to give you an example because that's how you learn us through examples is,

for example, if somebody is having a lot of excitement and difficulty sleeping and restless and palpitations and they just are struggling to get their brains to turn off, we may choose to give them the homeopathic remedy made from coffee called kaffia cruder, which actually mirrors what the vital force, the immune system is doing, and helps to mitigate it. So, In homeopathy, we have many, many different homeopathic medicines, and it's very important that it is individualized. Treatment is very specific. It has to be individualized for that patient, not just on their physical symptoms, but on their physical,

mental, and emotional, really is the whole body approach. And in homeopathy, we try to, many of our homeopathic medicines are actually made from poisons in their natural form. And so what Hahnemann did through many, many experiments, he found that there's a way to retain the healing properties of the medicine while reducing the toxicity. And we call this method potentization. And so the remedies go through a sequence of serial dilutions. And in each step of dilution, the molecules are succut, they rigorously beaten.

And this helps to not only decrease the toxic effects, they also, each step of dilution. they also increase the potency of the remedies. So homeopathic medicines actually have the best safety record. They're extremely safe. And the research shows this because they are so dilute. Now what's very, very interesting is that we are now starting to do research on the hometic effect. The hometic effect shows that certain substances in different doses, like if you give a high

dose of something versus a dilute dose, we see opposite effects. And this is very well researched. And even if it's for something like exercise, if you do the Goldilocks zone, you want the right amount of exercise, if you do too much, it's actually harmful for you. What homeopathy does is it takes us one step further. It's not just the dilution. It's also the state of the person. You're saying dilution.

We're talking like one 10,000th where they just keep adding gallon. Like I've seen, you know, where they're pounding these giant, you know, jugs of, I guess, water. just like diluting it and then they add that to another like they spread that over 10 bottles in fact and i've seen giant you know programs where they couldn't afford a vaccine program or drugs in different countries but they could ramp this up they've just got all these people pound these drugs because they could get it out quickly cheaply and it's been effective in india and cuba and other places like that exactly referring to the leptospirosis in cuba this was the one of our largest homeopathic studies on 2.3 million people done by the Cuban government and it actually has been

actually shows that in incidences where they gave the homeopathic treatment, it decreased incidence of leptospirosis by 84%. And what's really exciting is it seems like that reduction is lung lasting. Yes, we may need to repeat the program, but erase in the areas that were treated have continued to be decreased with leptospirosis. Wow. So yes, super dilute and so then the royal family. I mean, I know like Prince Charles would talk about it.

Now there's king. I haven't heard much about it. But we always hear the royal family was into homeopathy. So what happened to it? Like, why is it sort of now we see it in the news? When did it start getting attacked? Homeopathy has always been attacked. When, you know, 250 years ago, when Dr. Samuel first discovered homeopathy, there was a renaissance.

You know, he was getting excellent results in cholera epidemics. I mean, his results were amazing, and so were those of his disciples. And there was a renaissance of homeopathy in the United States. And Del, the AMA, the American Medical Association, was actually formed primarily with the interest to abolish homeopathy. In fact, at the time, if you're associated with a homeopath in any way, if you were married to a homeopath, if you consulted with your homeopath, you were at risk of getting your membership revoked. So there's always, homeopathy is under constant threat. But having said that, it is widely used by millions around the world, and all those attempts just make us stronger, I believe.

In fact, the World Health Organization did a survey, and they showed that homeopathy is the second most commonly used form of natural medicine in the world, second only to herbal medicine. Is that true in America, too? I mean, I just feel like we're a little bit more out of it. When you hear the royal families into it, I don't know. I mean, I know it's big. We see it.

I see it, I think even in drug stores, like CV. you could see some homeopathics, certainly Arnica, things like that. Dahl, you're absolutely right. That is not true in the United States. And I actually studied and practiced homeopathy in South Africa, and then I practiced in London where it was widely used and considered as a noble profession. So when I came to the United States, I was astounded in the Pold, and that actually was the impetus that led me to creating world homeopathy awareness because I was so disillusioned

how, you know, most people didn't even know what homeopathy was in the United States. the United States, but that has changed. I've seen a significant increase over the years. You also have an issue. I always think about, you know, I'm not the story of, you know, Tesla and you have Edison and all of a sudden, you know, J.P. Morgan can't make money off of it. You can't make them up. Tesla can charge the ionosphere. We all get free energy, you know. He's like, well, how am I going to make money? That's similar, I think it's a similar problem with the home because you have a real issue with patents and things like that. Is that right?

Correct. So homeopathic medicines are all made from natural substances, Del. And as you know, natural substances cannot be patented. There's not a whole lot of money to be made in homeopathic medicines. The other thing, which is really wonderful, is you only need a very small amount of the starting substance. Right. You get like one millionth and it's like, you know.

In fact, so the old owner of Hunnaman Labs, they had to reprove the homeopaths. epithic remedy apis for the FDA that is made from B. And he, B venom, and he actually, he was so sweet, he went out and caught the bee very gently in alcohol so it wouldn't go through any pain. And that one B has provided enough opia apis, Milivica, it will last us hundreds of years. Wow. Yeah. That's really wild.

So how does it, what is the licensing process, at least in America? How does that work? Yeah. So in many countries, homeopathy is a licensed profession. Here in the United States, it depends state by state. It's very different in every state. In California, we have a regulation that allows this practice of homeopathy, but does not allow for licensing.

So it really, you know, it differs completely state by state. But we are trying to get, we do actually have a national board certification for homeopathy, though. When you think, when people are asking or watching right now, like, what would it be good for? Like if I'm, you know, what type of results have you seen in the work that you've done? So the areas where homeopathy really shines, there's two main areas. First of all is in children's health. Homeopathy is phenomenal in treating children. Children have a very strong, what we call they vital force.

They're very active. They're very receptive. Their immune systems are still developing. And it's wonderful. We've actually found that children raised on homeopathy are more resilient. They are taller. They are bright. are they overcome illnesses better.

And so when we, every time a child gets sick, it's honestly, it's almost like an aperture. It's a gateway into treating the underlying state. So we're helping with the acute illness, but we help to improve them overall. And we see after that infection, develop milestone improved, growth improves, vitality improves, women's health conditions,

homeopathy is amazing. It provides so many solutions to women's health, including things like fertility. And then in mental health, emotional health, homeopathy really shines all types of psychiatric illnesses from depression to anxiety and mentally illness and so forth. There are other areas that there are definitely gaps in our current modern medical system where homeopathy can provide immense value and that is in pain reduction reduction in use of opiates, reduction in

use of antimicrobials including antibiotics antivirals and so there is a huge area where homeopathy can really be beneficial. If someone wants to sort of get into, you know, looking to this for their kids or their family, where do they start? Yeah. So I have a dream, Del. My dream is that every household in America would have a homeopathic remedy kit and parents who are trained and know how to use it. Because that would reduce their, you know, burden on a medical system. That will reduce the use of medications.

using homeopathy as the first line of defense. So if you want to study homeopathy, there's so many online courses. One of them that are very good is Whole Health Now, produces very good homeopathic courses. But the National Center for Homeopathy, that is an excellent resource that provides so many courses, many of them free, especially for parents wanting to learn more about homeopathy. Wow, that's super cool. One of the things that came up in our conversation and, you know, in the film is agriculture and something that we're in the middle of,

obviously, I started this show out. We're going to be marching to try and keep one of the worst toxic poisons from at least having liability protection. I don't know. Getting it off the food is a whole other thing. But, you know, there's people working for homeopathy to replace pesticides and herbicides. Like, what's that about?

So this is very exciting to be done. because I agree we need to decrease our reliance on pesticides and herbicides. This is not sustainable. This is causing our Americans to be sick and causing cancers, causing neurodevelopmental issues. We cannot, we have to find solutions. So there is an emerging body of research showing homeopathy in agriculture, and it's actually called agrohomeopathy. And we find, for example, in cows, if they have mastitis, you can give homeopathic

medicines in their feed, which actually reduces the need for antibiotic in our cows, but also in plants. We find that it increases plant yield, increase in root growth, like the actual length of the roots. It increases resistance to pesticides. It actually helps to use those fungicides. So homeopathy has a huge area of interest in this area and something that we hope to have even more research in the upcoming future.

I always think about that, like, because I know that there's a huge area. veteran veterinarians. In fact, we have one that uses homeopathy. They made, they took some samples from our dog that was having an issue, you know, I think it was like a blood and then just reduced it down and made it a homeopathic just for our dog. It was very effective. But the argument against homeopathy has been that it's just a placebo effect. It's literally just a sugar pill. There's nothing in it because it's so when they test it, so dilute, most the times they can't even find Belladonna or the poison or something that was there. It's been diluted down so much.

But animals sort of, you know, put away the, to me, the placebo effect because an animal doesn't know you're giving them something. Especially if you're just putting it in their feed. It's a pretty good argument. And the attacks. I mean, I know that there was some teething pills that were pulled off the market, things like that. And one of the things I found fascinating is on the one hand, they're telling us it's just a sugar pill. This is all a placebo effect. but it's dangerous.

You know, we got to pull it off the market because it had a toxin that was somewhere deep in the dilution process. And I just find that I always sort of laugh except that has been really catastrophic to some products we were all using. They were, you know, you could buy in almost any store. But I feel like you can't have it both ways.

You can't say this is a sugar pill, does nothing at all is a placebo effect, and then tell us, you know, the elements of it are dangerous. Well, then they do something. So there's real confusions, and you're getting attacked on multiple sides. Is there legislation happening in this country to try and, you know, get a different perspective or have, you know, homeopathy seen a different way?

Thank you for the question. I'm so grateful that you asked. Yes, Americans for Homeopathy Choice is an amazing consumer advocacy organization that has put into place a legislation called HR 719. 50 and we need support. We need support from your audience. We need support it from people in power. So if they can go to homeopathy choice.org and write you congressman and also try to support our bill, we would love the support because homeopathic medicines are different from conventional drugs. First of all, as you mentioned in the patents, we just don't have the billions of dollars

that conventional drugs do. And so they need to be treated as unique drugs. And so all legislation does a few things. First of all, it protects the consumer. It ensures the safe regulation of homeopathic medicines while still providing access. Many of you may have noticed that the homeopathic eye drops are no longer. You can't get them anymore. Dalwin, I travel to Europe, I take an extra suitcase just to load up on all the homeopathic medicines that aren't available here anymore, you know, and all the natural supplements that are no longer available. And I can guarantee you, In Europe, their standards are higher. It has nothing to do with standards or safety.

It really has to do with politics. And so please support our bill because that will make a huge difference for many generations to come. It's really amazing. The more I do these stories, you grow up in America, which you did not, with this sense of American exceptionalism, that we're the best. We have the best, you know, cutting-edge technologies. We're the, you know, we're pushing science in places has never been. But when you really look at it, we are so controlled by lobbies and, you know, industries that are power brokers in our systems. When it's our farming, we're watching this glyphosate.

We're watching our own president being blackmailed to stockpile, you know, a poison that can be sprayed on our food. We watch how hard it is for Robert Kennedy Jr. to make any adjustments to do any studies or science investigating things. And then what you're saying, like we even, with Bonnie Harrod. You know, you have Kellogg's. We're getting a chemical dye in our food that is not even allowed in Europe. And Kellogg's is selling in Europe. They have a different product. They're not poisoning them.

So we're poisoning ourselves more here. Our kids are the sickest in the industrialized world. And now you're telling me that these, you know, highly diluted, you know, sugar pills that really are able to move the needle for some people, you can't even get some of those here. It just feels like America really needs an overhaul. It is so clear to me we have let the power broke, we're really moneyed interests, get too deep into controlling our systems. And they create the AMAs.

They're in your licensing bodies. They're in your, you know, advocacy groups. It's really, it's a tough road. Homeopathy has been in there. Do you feel, I mean, is there a stigma around it or the people that are using homeopathy? They feel weird about it? or is it, you know?

So I grew up on homeopathy and I just, you know, my brother actually died of a drug reaction and my existing brother, he anaphylacted and was luckily resuscitated by paramedics, but he was anaphylactic to self-drugs, penicillin, penicillin, so when that happened to my family, my family felt, well, we have to find another way. And so that's how they discovered homeopathy.

And, you know, being raised on homeopathy, I think it's weird. to give antipyretics to a child with a fever, when the fever is the very best chance you have at fighting the infection. I find it weird to give cortisone to suppress the immune system. I think it's weird to give antidepressants when exercise often works just as well.

So when you talk about what's weird, it depends on which perspective you're coming from. Homeopathic voice consumers, we are not a small voice. There are millions of people using homeopathy. We are a big voice. And, you know, many times, Dell, my patients are scared to tell their doctors that they use homeopathy. They scared that their doctor will say, well, you have to stop using it because it doesn't work or it's going to interfere or some kind of ridiculous thing. But I think we are a big body of users and we need to get louder.

And I encourage, you know, this week is World Homeopathy Awareness Week. What I would love people to do is tell another person that you use homeopathy in your experience. tell your doctor how much it's worked for them, because that's the only way we're going to change that. Absolutely. So once again, let's get the websites up here. If you want to look into homeopathy for your family. Oh, well, this is the film.

Introducing homeopathy.com, you should definitely check out that film. Absolutely worth your time. And it's super inspiring. You're like, oh, my God, if you haven't been doing it, or if you have, you're like, it's verification. And, of course, homeopathy center.org, where you can really get going, get your education happening. And where do we, is that site also am I able to buy homeopathics there?

No. How do you do that? Yeah. So there are some wonderful homeopathic pharmacies. And I really like to support the health food stores because if we support the health food stores, then that will keep homeopathic on the shelves. I don't know if you notice, but Whole Foods no longer. I know.

I know. It's crazy. And then we also have some other really good pharmacies. I don't want to mention any particular, but Hunnaman Labs, excellent homeopathic pharmacies, Desby, we have so many. And so, but the easiest way for consumers to get it is just, you know, go to your healthy store. And the more that people demand homeopathic remedies in the store, the more of a range that they will have. All right, excellent.

Thank you for joining us today. It's super important. And great, you know, to bring some awareness during homeopathy Awareness Week. All right. Look, I've said it. We're clearing out all the old merchandise. Some of it will never be available again. That's why we're having a 60% off sale.

This is the last week. So if you haven't gone there, see what's left, cleared off the shells. We've got some great new merchandise coming. While you're there, you can also grab a People versus Poison shirt or hat too. But go check it out. Good evening. You have the zip on two? We asked and you delivered.

Showing us how you highwire. This is how we highwire. This is how we highwire. Team Highwire is being rep from all. all over the world. Sporting our new high wire gear in the free state of Florida. When I wear this cap, it makes me feel proud. I am a doula and a childbirth educator,

and I love wearing my Get vaccinated t-shirt. Sometimes it's not just what you wear, it's who you meet while wearing it. When I was wearing this shirt yesterday, a tourist came up to me and said, love that shirt. Since 2020, when I woke up from The Matrix, I've been talking to neighbors, connecting with local groups.

There are a lot of people that are a little bit hesitant about approaching the topic of vaccination. And this wearing this shirt allows them to approach me and I know exactly where to send them. Whether you're dropping the kids at school or marching in rallies across the globe, we see your dedication, we feel your support. And now it's easier than ever to join the movement

because we're having our biggest sale yet. We wanna see millions of truth tellers show in the world how they highwire. Head to the highwire.shop to support our mission and stock up on gear for the whole family. Thank you so much. Keep it up. Thank you for spreading truth. We love you guys. Thanks for what you do. Well, like I said, Robert Kennedy Jr. has been in a hearing today talking about all the changes at HHS and most of it, you know, he's got it getting some love from one side and nothing but

hate from another. But this is one of the exchanges. Secretary, you've done an incredibly harmful thing to our community. You eliminated the mandatory hepatitis B vaccine. for newborns, and it disproportionately threatens Asian Americans because while we make up 7% of the population, we account for 60% of all hepatitis B cases. It's clear that this administration has no regard for the health, safety, and well-being of Asian American communities, as well as communities across the United States. That is a terrible disease. but babies are not at risk unless they essentially have zero risk unless their mother is infected

mothers are tested when they go into the hospital to have a baby and for all those people who are infected the vaccine is still a recommended vaccine everybody else it's available parents can assess the risks themselves who informed consent insurance will pay for We did not remove the vaccine from being insured. And we just believe that Americans should have that choice. If the state should not make that choice for them. Epititis B vaccine was not safety tested. It had a four-day test with no placebo.

We don't know what the risk profile is. And parents are allowed to ask that question. Go to our website. We've been streaming it all day. You can see it. It'll be playing there. It'll be on socials. I just want to, you know, just say that there's important work going on here.

But one of the things that the high wire, it really is about awareness, right? Awareness is everything. Bringing awareness to your friends and family is hugely important. It's also why we do rallies, like to get out there, to find your community so that you start feeling empowered with what, you know, you can do. People you can call, friends you can have dinner with and have you. that conversation that, you know, you were struggling. I really want to talk to someone that sees the world the way that I do. But there's going to be moments where we have a C-to-C director we don't like.

There'll be moments where we lose a case like the American Academy of Pediatrics. And then we reconfigure, we jump back on the battlefield and we find a new way forward. This is a part of what's going on. But the most important battle is the battle for the hearts and minds of America and the world. And that we cannot do alone at the high wire. We can't do it alone. And I can. Bobby Kennedy can't do it alone sitting in Washington, D.C.

Children's Health Defense can't do it alone. All these groups, everything, we're all working, all the regulation, all these great medical freedom groups across the country. They're bringing more medical freedom bills to the state than we've ever seen before. I guarantee you if you are not involved with your local group, get involved. Get involved. Get out to the Capitol. make changes, change laws. All of that gets in the news and then people read the news and say,

oh my God, there's people that don't vaccinate it. They even know that. Why? And then they start looking at the research and then they run into someone like you where they see a B Brave hat. What's that about? Slowly but surely we watch these conversations change to where you're seeing headlines by Politico where more Americans want choice when it comes to vaccines. Do not believe that they're all good for them and would like, you know, to see the vaccine program reduced. Folks, we were not here 10 years ago. That is not what you would see in a poll. That would be like 3% of Americans question vaccines.

Everyone else thinks it's amazing. We are now hitting a majority level. But is that a voting block? It doesn't seem like President Trump recognizes that right now, which means we're just not done doing our job. I wish we could all go to sleep. But as Jeffrey Jackson said today, the fight never end. Our founding fathers said, don't go to sleep, you're never going to get to sleep.

Your freedom is going to be something you're going to have to fight for every day because guaranteed, they will try to take it away from you. It is way easier to govern you by control than to allow some light parameters so people can just run amongst each other free and sovereign. That means we have to represent beautifully. We have to speak out. And when you see videos or stories or social media or what we're doing that you like, a show or just one of these segments, please share it with everyone, you know. It's not just about, you know, showing people, you know, what you're looking at. It's about enrolling new members to this community that's growing every single day.

We're going to have good days. We're going to have bad days. But every day you move a heart and mind in the right direction, good on you. We should do that more and more. That's what we're doing, trying to move the needle. And every day I guarantee you, I just was being fact-checked. I won't say by who. And they said, you know, you're making the statement that there's never been placebo trials prior to Lesinger on the childhood vaccine program.

They're like, I mean, you know, are you saying just saline or do you accept that the FDA accepts adjuvented, you know, adjuvented controls? as placebos or carrier solutions. Of course, I wrote a diatribe, maybe I'll put it out on my social media. But you know what that means? It means they know they don't have any placebo-based trials. So now the mainstream media is moving into a very difficult place. Do they want to really discuss the definition of placebo? Because it's pretty simple.

Has no pharmacological effect on the human body. This is what I made clear. But we are moving now. They know that they've lost the argument. There were no salient placebos. Now they want to argue they can inject you with aluminum and that's a placebo. A safety on a placebo study? Injecting someone with toxic chemicals?

I don't think they're going to win that argument either. So behind the scenes you may not be seeing it, this thing is moving. We are taking more and more battlefields every day with your help, with your voice, with you exercising your right to free speech. Let's do it together loudly, proudly. This is the high wire and I'll see you next week.