The Highwire with Del Bigtree - HOW THE WAR ON IVERMECTIN OPENED PIERRE KORY’S EYES

Episode Date: June 5, 2023

Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance President, Dr. Pierre Kory, discusses his new book ‘The War on Ivermectin,’ launched in partnership with ICAN Press. The War on Ivermectin is the personal and professional narrative of Dr. Kory and his crusade to recommend a safe, inexpensive, generic medicine as the key to ending the pandemic. ‘The War on Ivermectin’ marks the launch of ICAN Press, a new division of The Informed Consent Action Network. Order your copy directly from ICAN, at ICANDECIDE.SHOP, today!Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

We're blazing a trail into a whole new venture for the informed consent action network, which is the nonprofit that makes this educational program, the high wire, happen. That new venture is into books. For those of you that actually read, ICAN Press, is going to be launching his first book. We're totally excited on June 6th will be the drop of the war on Ivermectin. A super important story, maybe the most important story in this. entire COVID pandemic, written by Dr. Pierre Corey, who has been at the heart of this issue. I've said it before. I'm not sure that you can put people in jail over a vaccine that failed,

but you can certainly put them in jail when they deny you access to a product that could have saved your life. This is a really important story and a true hero that has been standing in this fight in Dr. Pierre Corey. If somehow you've been under a rock and missed it, this is what he's looked like out there in the world. Dr. Pierre Corey, the godfather of Ivermectin. Dr. Pierre Corey, an infectious disease specialist. Dr. Pierre Corey joins us now. Dr. Corey has traveled across multiple states in the U.S. to care for COVID-19 patients

throughout the pandemic. One of the founders of America's frontline doctors, Dr. Corey, has twice testified in front of the U.S. Senate to promote Ivermectin and other alternative drugs. All we have tried to do from the moment this pandemic was coming to U.S. shores is to figure out how to treat this thing and to come up with the most effective treatment protocol in the world. We are fighting against big pharma. They have controlled and captured our health agencies. Every single policy that they have issued out of those agencies,

the entire pandemic, was written by the pharmaceutical industry. We have a solution to this crisis. There is a drug that is proving to be of miraculous impact. And when I say, miracle I do not use that term lightly. We identified this really powerful data signal around ivermectin and we knew it was one of the most inexpensive and most widely available drugs in the world and it presented itself as a solution to the pandemic. On average, a 62% reduction in death when you used ivermectin from all of these randomized controlled trials. So basically you'd save two out of every three people that you treat. The CDC actually in their memo stated that the FDA has not not approved Ivermectin for COPE? That is a misleading statement, deliberately misleading statement.

Number one, the FDA doesn't have to approve it, Cod and FAAO. We don't need the FDA for anything. It's called off-label prescribing. It's generally champion, and it's a very common practice in the system. It's fully legal, and it's even encouraged when you don't have an effective medicine. In Mexico City last month, they adopted it throughout the city, every testing booth where you get positive, they give Ivermectin. Their hospitals are emptying, and their death rates are My dream is that every household has Ivermectin in the cupwork. And you take it upon development of first symptom of anything approximating a viral syndrome. I launched myself into the middle of that war and I became an enemy.

And the world went sideways. I thought we were doing the right thing, putting forth knowledge of a drug that could help millions. And I started getting personally attacked. And suddenly we saw censorship like we never could believe. We are tired. I can't keep doing this. Any further deaths are going to be needless deaths, and I cannot be traumatized by that. This is corruption.

Plain and simple, it's corruption. Keep fighting. Keep spreading the truth. I feel morally and ethically obligated to show up whatever ass to keep spreading truth. Enough with the medical tyranny. Live, free, or die has never meant more to me than it does now. We must live free or we will die. Live for your die indeed.

It's my honor and pleasure to be joined by Dr. Pierre Corey. First of all, it's an honor to have you here. Just watching that montage, you are clearly all over the world right now trying to get this message out. So thank you for taking the time to join us. Thanks, though. Honour. You know, speaking of around the world, just recently,

you and several other doctors that have all sat on this stage, we're speaking before the European Union. So let's just take a look at this really quickly. Right. I'm going to talk about the global war on Ivermectin, which was a massive global disinformation campaign, whose only objective is to suppress the evidence of efficacy of this life-saving drug.

Any medicine, no matter how many studies, if it costs a dollar or $2, it will not find regulatory approval in any advanced health economy around the world. And what happens as a result, people die. And they die frequently, and in high numbers. It is the most proven medication in history, in history, yet not one advanced health economy

around the world recommends it. Almost all hospitals that's been removed from their formularies. This was a humanitarian catastrophe and a crime against humanity, yet no one will go to jail for it. You know, my question when I watched that, and really, I want people to read the book, so we're not going to get deep into all that we've covered before on Ivermectin. But the European Union, you're traveling around the world, you're speaking everywhere where you'll be heard. Is there a difference here in the United States of America when you have stood before the Senate?

There's like two people in the room. Is the EU any different? Are they more open or porous to this discussion right now? You know, I hate to disappoint you, Del. But I'm going to say I think there's a little bit more support, a little bit more interest at least publicly. But from what I saw at the European Parliament, you know, it was. it was a day put together by about four or five different European Parliament. We're talking about four or five. That's all of Europe.

All of the members were invited to attend that session. From what I understood from those who were there is that they would not show up in public. Because if they showed up and actually attended in that forum, they would be then aligned with or allied with this resistance. Or have to answer questions, what did you think? Exactly. Now, the real question is how many were watching quietly, remotely. And we think those are significant numbers. So as far as how many of people in authority and power

are willing to come out and address this in a direct and public fashion, it's unclear. But I do think the fact that that event happened, everybody was invited and we were all given an audience. I think it's significant. At the European level, I think that was a significant day. But it's hard to tell. I mean, this, you know, I used to think this was or I acted as if it was a sprint.

If you could see, like I go everywhere and like you did in COVID. I mean, we both worked, you know, really hard, but, you know, we have to transition to, this is a marathon, and now I'm going to keep showing up, but you see that, like any grassroots movement, I think it happens slowly and then suddenly, right? And so I think we're still pushing that boulder up the mountain. Yeah, absolutely right. Well, hopefully your book's going to really sort of help, you know, with moving this incredibly ridiculous boulder, you know. And this is, we've discussed it before, you know, drugs. that work just as soon as they don't make the pharmaceutical industry money, they go to the waste bin. That company that made it will come out against it just because they want you on to the new and brightest thing where they can make money again. So it's a really disgusting program there.

But what's interesting is just as you said it, you know, as I said, you know, when you were here in America, you know, speaking about ivermectin the middle of COVID, like there's like no one in the room, right? Just a couple of people. European Union, the same thing. And as you're saying, they don't want to be seen in the room. They don't even, because one, Once they're in the room, now they have to answer to what did you think about what you just saw. And in so many ways, that's really a metaphor for how science is working right now. This is what I don't think people understand. If you want an investigation into any problem in a product, the doctor, like the medical establishment will not do that study.

They will not step into the room because simply by stepping in the room, now they have to address it. And what they really hide behind is, I haven't seen any evidence that says otherwise. Well, you didn't come to the hearing. You won't come to the room. CDC, FDA, NIH, you won't do the study. And that's all of science now around medicine, it seems to me, is we haven't, they'll say that they've debunked it. The news will tell you they've been debunked it. No, what they've said is, we don't have any evidence that shows us that.

But you're not doing the study that would give you that evidence, right? I think that certainly was the case for a long time. But, you know, as I go into my book, Delb, they went further than that. So it's not only the lack of courage and integrity for people to step out, because you need that unique combination for those scientists to really try to direct good behavior of these regulatory agencies. But actually the opposite happened, Del. They did those studies, but they were fraudulent. They were the only studies done on Ivermanton where every single investigator had massive conflicts of interest with the pharmacy, many times with competitors. And then when you look at the trials that they conducted and produced, which were heralded by all of academia, as the largest, most rigorous trials. And all of us researchers from around the world,

and I was not alone, there's a huge network of scientists, I would say, in every country, who have been calling the fraud around Ivermectin, and we tried to voice our objections to the design and conduct of these trials. They manipulated data brazenly. You can see it in the publications. And that's what happened.

So it wasn't even that they, for a while, they were slow walking, they didn't want to do the trials. So you're absolutely right. But then, my gosh, they did them. And they did them with what they've always done in medicine, which is they design studies to fail. How do you do that? I mean, is there a pattern to?

Is there a lot of different ways that can go down? I would say, actually, like everything else, there's a playbook. And it's really the same things they do. And it's very simple. I mean, I don't want to get too sciencey, but you choose the mildest patients you can, right? Because you don't want to take the most severely illness sickest where it's going to have the greatest impact.

So you're going to mute any benefits that you find. You find them mild. You find them young. You treat them late as possible. And when you look at trials, for instance, for a Paxlovod and a molivirate, it's unbelievable the trials they were. They had massive numbers that they treated within two days. And these are drugs they're trying to sell, right?

These drugs are going to make them. And all you have to look is the design of like an Ivermectin trial and a Paxilovid trial. And you can see every single tactic that they do. So Paxlovak. They treat them early. They treat the sickest, right? They treat them longer. They treat them at higher doses.

Ivermectin lowest dose possible. shortest duration possible, start the latest possible, in the most mildest patients possible. We won't see anything. But actually the thing is you'll still see benefits. The problem is when you do all of those things, the size of the trial to show a statistically significant result is much larger than what they have. They know all those calculations. Their whole goal is to find a lack of statistical significance. I will tell you, all the fraudulent trials actually found benefits.

But in modern medicine, if you don't have what's called, that P-value threshold, if you don't exceed that, it doesn't work. And to watch that, Dell, to watch science being conducted at that level, repeatedly seeing the same brazen tactics every time from all over the world with these farmer-conflicted researchers, and I'm trying to call foul, I'm screaming from my office into podcasts and interviews and everything I can and no one's listening. Well, I shouldn't say that.

There is an audience. Like your audience, we have an audience. But it doesn't get out there and to have made. you know policy impact and and I don't know what else to do but just keep polishing forward and they we just keep pushing yeah and we are making headway you know I was on this 2016 or released my documentary Vax the heart of Vax is a fraudulent study yeah where in the middle of a study after setting your protocols and how you're gonna run the whole study they kick half the kids off

the study I mean that to me is just is fraud like you are changing the parameters of the study in the middle of it because you don't like what you're seeing all for what reason to water down the findings so they At the end, they say, well, there was a little bit of a rise, but it wasn't statistically significant. Let me say a comment about that, because there's another piece to this. So it's not only the conduct and design of the trials by former conflicted investigators, the journals play a huge role because, I will tell you, if I tried to publish a study that I had done myself and I had pulled those tricks, the peer reviewers would have said, this is an invalid study, go away.

They would have rejected my trial. These trials where they pull all these shenanigans and they bury people, they take data out, to manipulate the data, they change endpoints in the middle, which is a never event in the conduct of trials. They're doing these things that you would literally be laughed out of any paper if you ever did that. And guess what happens with these trials? They're published in the highest impact medical journals in the world where any peer reviewer worth their salt would have said, I vote to reject. This study is invalid because they did X and Y.

Instead, sail right through publication. Then, after publication, massive headlines across the world, Ivermectin doesn't work. Yeah. Yeah, it's really, really, it feels evil at the very least, because as you said, and you say so plainly, people are dying because of this. You recently spoke in Wisconsin in front of, I guess, the government up there. Is that this?

Yeah, state legislature. State legislature. You went to a place that I was really shocked by. I want to take a look at this. I'm completely estranged from my profession, and in some ways, even society. It's literally a society that's been corrupted by forces, and nobody realizes. We sit in these little bubbles, we read our New York Times, and we think everything's going as according to plan. You know, we even have my colleague over there who says that we saved a million lives with these vaccines.

That is utter and complete nonsense. Nonsense. These vaccines save no one. Across the world, the most highly vaccinated countries had the worst-case fatality rates. your date on vaccine injuries, you always have to multiply it by a huge factor. And yet, even without that under-reporting factor, it was truly concerning. The history of regulatory behavior of agencies is when you launch a new product or a new intervention and a death is reported, the traditional stance is you assume that it's related until proven otherwise. And I heard out of the mouths of

public health leaders saying the opposite. They're not related. They're not related. It's all incredible. I mean, we have baby formula, which kills a couple of babies, and the entire product is ruined from the market. You have a faulty muffler on a car, and they recall 300,000 cars. And here you have all of these deaths being reported, and nobody's doing anything. I've never been more terrified in my life. We have an explosion in autism, which is totally coincident and correlates with the explosion in the schedule. And I'll tell you, my colleagues here, they're going to say there's no evidence to show that there's any link with, autism and the vaccines that is nonsense that is nonsense

all right you know pierre i've known you for a few years now since you got into this we've really been celebrating your work and i will say you know we've gone out and had a glass of wine after shows or being on stages together and i remember early on i was asking you you know have you looked at the rest of the childhood schedule and at that moment you know and you know you said well i mean yeah i'm sure there's some issues there you You just made a statement that is the third rail of all third rails, which is the autism vaccine connection. So clearly, and you're not the only one. You know, Peter McCullough is moving in this direction.

Dr. Robert Malone. I mean, a lot of you guys. So I'm curious, and you get into this some of your book that's really interesting about, you know, a personal story that takes you there. But can you enlighten me on what is it about this journey into COVID vaccine and Ivermectin that, leads a person because this is some of the work that we're doing now with our audience. So many people like, I know the COVID vaccine sucks, but what about the rest of them? Tell me how that journey happens for a doctor that obviously believed in it, vaccinated your family, all those things. Yeah, well, trained as a physician, I mean, there's not even, vaccines aren't even presented

as something to be questioned. I mean, that's settled science. It's established that they're safe and effective and they've eradicated tons of childhood diseases. That is the myth that is taught to every physician and land. So here I am. I have three children that I'm raising, never questioned them. Pediatrician says, you know, this is the schedule and I happily had them all vaccinated because I was told and I'd never had a reason to question the science behind vaccines. I believed what I was told and taught. And then like what you just said, you know, what happened in COVID is I became an expert on a drug and which exposed to me the absolute corruption and control of the system where they can literally get entire global population physicians to believe things that are false. So I saw the capacity

and potential for the corruption of what it can see. Easily. Quickly. I mean, just amazing. And over it. They can get natural immunity as a concept to disappear within 24 hours. With a little posting on an FDA website. Okay. So you see this power and the impacts. So I never questioned vaccines, but then like you said, the COVID vaccines, interestingly, I allowed my parents to get vaccinated in March of 2021, I hadn't done the deep dive yet, even though I was starting to see signals of concern around the COVID vaccines. I did my deep dive in early April of 2021. And since then, everywhere I go, I could tell anyone who ever asked me, please do not get that vaccine. Okay, so that's COVID. Yeah. Let's go back to your question, right? So now I am really skeptical,

because I saw a global propaganda campaign of not only safe and effective, safe and effective, when they were anything but they were not effective and they were not safe. But then you saw the demonization of the unvaccinated, that whole thing. And I saw society literally breaking into half. And lobbying people like you, even Malone, that got, you know, Malone got the vaccine. Yes. And he's an anti-vaxia now. People that have every vaccine in their life, but just in this one, you're an antivaxor.

It's so easy. And that's the thing. They want to label you and they want to pigeonhole you into this fringe element. It's always this fringe element with these. unpopular beliefs that are not credible and that's how they neutralize you, right? Anyone who's speaking truth, they have to demolish your credibility and that's what they do. And it's very effective, right? Although I think what we're about to discuss is how I think it's backfire, but go ahead.

Okay. Yeah. And I think I can probably agree with you. For exactly the reason about what you're about to say. So then, you know, I want to borrow from Jimmy Dorr because I just saw this bit of his, you know, he's obviously, you know, Jimmy Doer, just stand-up comedian. and he's been really very deeply studied on all aspects of COVID. He's talked a lot about it on his kind of news podcast.

And then I saw this stand-up bit where he addresses this issue of this demonization of doing your own research, right? Where like, don't do your own research, you know, don't believe anyone who's doing their own research. And he makes this statement, he says, I think that used to be called reading. Right, right, yeah. And you realize that they label and they describe these. practices as being uncredible. And it's like, no, I'm just being thoughtful, skeptical, questioning, and reading, which is really what we're taught to do with any area of life, right? And so now that I've developed a deep skepticism of now I'm seeing what's coming out of journals,

what's coming out of the mouths of agency officials, which are unmitigated lies, now I have to start questioning, what else have they been lying about? And then I did something called Reading, Del. Right? I read one of the most deeply researched and referenced books. on vaccines, which is turtles all the way down. And the level of expertise and the depth of thought and the presentation of all of the comprehensive evidence around vaccines in regards to safety, efficacy, and the holes in research of what we don't know about these vaccines

put forth to me a really terrifying sight, which is I came to the conclusion, not only that book, it was other things that I had read and understood and actually thinking about some of the epidemiological data around chronic illness, and the explosion in American society and in U.S. children after that expansion of the schedule, I was just overwhelmed with like this is a massive toxic fraud in public health on our pediatric populations, which carries into adulthood that has been perpetrated for a long time.

I learned about myths about the polio epidemic. People don't understand the truth of that the the polio epidemic likely wasn't a polio epidemic, meaning the virus cannot really credibly make an argument that that was the cause of all the paralysis. There are other things that likely did it. And the vaccine did not. And the vaccine had nothing to do that. It shows up, you know, late. They start, you know, recategorizing all the different forms of paralysis,

Gianbarre, transverse myelitis. Had you done that in the beginning, you would have made this, you know, the remaining specific poliomyelitis would have looked like it disappeared anyway. The polio epidemic, as it were, is a fascinating topic. And it also, to this point, is it revealed to me, how this consensus issue, where the scientific consensus is somehow established. Once this established, it's very hard to break it. So you had experts of polio at that time who were writing the definitive papers,

and they came to the conclusion, X, Y, and Z, which happened to be false. Now, there were detractors. There were dissenters at the time who questioned the validity of those conclusions. But if you don't counter it at its source, it propagates. And so now I see a body of evidence. and supporting childhood vaccines, which is literally built on the backs of turtles, that analogy, which is like, you know,

there's really no substantive support for safety efficacy, the mandates of these vaccines, or really even their utility, and on a risk-benefit analysis, which is the core of what we do as physicians, anything, any action I take towards a patient, I have to carefully consider what is the benefit that this intervention is offering

compared to its risks and alternatives. It's called RBA, risk benefits and alternatives and you're constantly especially i'm an ICU doctor in the ICU things move fast you're doing you're making decisions with massive impacts and sometimes with risks and you're constantly having to make that and but with a vaccine you can be much more thoughtful much more studied and i ended up doing my own research into the history of vaccines and the myths that have been propagated starting from smallpox that was not a disease eradicated by a vaccine neither was polio and most of the other child early on the

that are credited, their low incidence, credited to vaccines, is 100% false. Almost all of it was due to improve hygiene and sanitation and water supply. It was like, you know, vaccines are the greatest invention of the 20th century. It was like, no, no, the toilet is. You know, clean running water, not, you know, your feces is not mixing with the water you're drinking from and bathing in. Huge difference in health outcomes. You think?

The moment that happens. But nobody knows that. You know, we're taught that the greatest intervention and discovery in, you know, in medical history is the uptake and use of vaccines. And it's just not true. There's no credible evidence to support that. And so you talked about how some of our early conversations, I hadn't done that deep dive.

And now we're coming full circle. And then another issue, which I've brought up, and I kind of talk about in the book, but this is not my first war in medicine. You know, as you know, you've dressed it with Paul and myself before. Paul and I, we fought a war around Ivy vitamin C, which they also attacked

demolished but I have three daughters and two of them had catastrophic cases of a disease called pandas right which is this neuropsychiatric syndrome that develops after strep throat it's not recognized or taught in medical curriculum right it exists I'm on a board of a nonprofit which advocates for the recognition and treatment of these disorders we fund research at the top academic institutions in land there are neuroscientists working on this disease called pandas yet it's still not taught it's ignored and we're What I came to find out in my journey is that it looks like, and I can't say this definitive,

but the explosion and increased recognition around this disease called pandas, like many other childhood illnesses, appears to correlate with the explosion in the vaccines. And so for me, Del, I find out in the journey that something that happened to me and my family, which almost destroyed me, I've never been the same man as before my children got ill and now, and the battle that I had to fight to get them to care. My kids, one of my children were put into two psychiatric hospitals, and I had to take them out. I was told they had anxiety, which was the most absurd thing.

I mean, I was literally fighting against people who I thought just were on another planet. But ultimately, my children are well. We resurrected them. They're well, and now I come to find out on my journey that likely my life and the life of my family had been destroyed quite possibly due to an effect of the vaccine. question you have to ask yourself is how much what how prevalent was pandas before you know 1989 when everyone's getting 11 vaccines we liability protection now no one has to do a safety explodes 54 vaccines 72 shots what is the overall effect that I'm going to talk later on in the

show about this is the issue and what I think we really need to start focusing on is the vaccine may have protected against the disease it was made for but what we're not testing for is it having an effect on the rest of our immune system that is not, like, you know, simple strep throat, strep throat now turns into this massive psychiatric issue. Is that potentially because the immune system's been altered in how it's going to handle other diseases? And I think that that is the conversation that needs to happen. It's where the science needs to be done because our kids are sick. I mean, they are sick. You know, two out of three of your kids, you know, suffering autoimmune disease. And that's in the space we're talking about. We've gone from 12%

of our children in the 1980s having autoimmune issues to now more than 54%. And that's out of a 2006 number. They haven't even given us. They haven't even given us new data since 2006. I wonder why. I wonder why. I mean, I think we would not be surprised to find that we are, you know, unprecedented levels of autoimmune and neurological disorders.

And, Del, that goes back to, like, if you want to have a discussion in science, you have to be objective, you have to be comprehensive, you have to imagine, You have to amass all the evidence and weigh the evidence. Like, again, the risk and benefits. So let's imagine for a second. I don't want to imagine this, but let's say the vaccines actually were effective eradicating these childhood illnesses.

Great, that's their benefit. You must still now look very closely as to what is the trade-off. What are the acute short-term toxic effects and what are the chronic effects? So if you have some of the lifelong autoimmune, inflammatory disorder, and or autism, which, by the way, I take care of patients

who have autistic children. I have patients who are in their 60s and 7 days, and you know what they are? They're terrified of what's going to happen when their lives end. Who is going to take care of their children? Do children need so much care and attention? And what you don't have, let's be clear,

are 70-80-year-old autistic patients. You know, I mean, this is what's so amazing. Oh, autism's always been here. Really, I had Mark Blacks full of genius in this space, but he says, where are the people in my age with autism? Where are they? Where are the homes filled with elderly, autistic people, they don't exist. This is a new phenomenon. Pandas is a relatively new phenomenon.

These are phenomenons that arrive right where, right where the vaccine program explodes. And I'll say this, because they haven't done the science, they refuse to do the science. We can't say that is the cause, but what I think you're saying, we're all saying is, but it certainly should be on the table. It should be one of the primary things being investigated in this autoimmune disease crisis we're in, and it's the only thing not on the table, literally looking everywhere but vaccines. question. And so, Del, let me bring the book towards the vaccines. So what the book is, it's part my biography, the biography of my organization and my colleague Paul Merrick. And then we, I would say

we delve into the corruption of the science around Ivermectin as a case study. But I want to make the point, although it's using Iverminton as a case study, it's really about the playbook that's always been used. That's what's so important. And when you read about the vaccines and the evidence that's published in the peer-reviewed literature, you see the same playbook that, that they use to demolish a medicine as they use the flip side to support the safety and efficacy. You see the manipulations of studies around vaccines where they literally look only at certain data.

They're cherry picking data. They're not making what are appropriate scientific comparison groups. And then they come to these conclusions that literally are the opposite of what is true. And it's absolutely astonishing that it's been going on so long. There's no area of the medical science which this is spared when you talk about antidepressants and SSRIs and statins and many, many different fields of medicine, the playbooks appear over and over. And that's one of my hopes

with this book, is that if you can learn about the tactics used around Ivermactin, I want the world to be more skeptical and questioning. To do your own reading, do your own research. Don't just accept edicts and conclusions, admitting from the mouths of these officials as the truth, because the experts have come to this conclusion. I think there used to be experts. Now, I have to question every expert because they're all conflicted. Either their jobs are dependent on it, or they're literally getting money directly from those with financial interest

in the topic they're talking about. My advice to the world is listen to no one who has a conflict of interest. And I like your intro to the show, because this show, you guys don't take advertising. You can say and be objective and say the truth. There's no outside influence on what comes out of your mouth, mouth and that's why I'm more likely to hear the truth here than anywhere else. You know, and I have to say your book is the first that we're releasing through ICAN

Press. One of the things that was really important to us, and what I think this book is so important is, you know, these conversations can happen on a science level and need to happen on a high science level, but you wrote this book in the personal story. You made it understandable for all of us because we do have to understand this playbook. It's something that I'm, you know, I try to do on the high wire every week. But this book, truly, represents what we're doing at I can, which is helping people understand you are absolutely intelligent enough to understand this. This, they have like, you know, lulled you into a trance that I'm too stupid to be able

to make these decisions. I just got to trust the experts. It's really quite simple. And I think when you read the book, when you see, you know, the scheme and how it goes down, most people in whatever business they're in, like, oh my God, that happens in my business too, the exact same way. It's no different. It's corruption.

It's moneyed interests. It's biases based on who's funding what and how you move something forward. And, you know, we want to make money off of it. So let's shuffle all the problems under the rug. Still, it's unfortunately in many industries, it's standard operating procedure. It's how those business models are created and structured. The fraud and corruption, corruptive actions are implicit and standard. And so even patients and people in those industries, and I don't think everyone's evil.

I do think there are people in authoritative positions who know the government. game and they're driving the game. Many of the others I just are might be more quietly complicit or just are not asking the questions or just not courageous enough to push back. Because guess what happens when you push back, right? I mean, you've had a lot of people in your show who've come to you and we've shared our experiences of what it's like to tell the truth. And, you know, I don't want to, it's not an ego thing. It's a shame that there's so few of us who are, you know, per se, whistleblowers. But I think there are more and more coming out of certain industries and people are realizing that we need more truth because if if you have industries

whose practices are built on propagating lies in order to support their financial interest they're going to roll over us they have been rolling over us our food supplies our medicines are and i think everyone that wants to be even though they're silent maybe they're afraid what everyone i think if you have any blood coursing through your veins and it's in your heart right now is science about to die every reason i got into this to save people's lives is disappearing money and interest I know I'm a part of poisoning people I you know you even had people breaking from burback at FDA you guys like Paul Offit big shills for vaccine makers saying wait a second this is not we did no safety for eight mice you're going to prove something on a study of eight mice for all

of humanity mean it's gone too far even for some of the biggest shills in this business which tells you how many people below that level were like I was here to do good I can't any longer It's such an important book. We're so excited that you chose to work with us on this, and I Can Press, and it's going to be our first book. I think of a comedian, and I think about this a lot when I think about books, Bill Hicks. I don't know if you know Bill Hicks, but he had a great bit. You know, he says, you know, I was sitting in a truck stop one day, and the waitress comes up, and I was reading a book, and she says, what's you reading for?

It's like, the question was, what are you reading? It was, what are you reading for? I don't know, so that I can understand what's happening the world around me, and maybe, you know, increase my brain size a little bit. You know, and then they said, and the waitress goes, we got ourselves a reader here. That's what I came up. Exactly right.

It's all about. Yes. We actually have readers. I know we have readers in our audience that did do their own science. We came out of this crazy moment in time where the propaganda was saying, if you're stupid, you read the science and you do your own investigation. Smart people don't read anything they trust the experts. And that was the mantra throughout COVID.

that's insane. It goes against everything we believe. All I'll say is, you know, my whole career in academia, my prior career, I have a different one now. But, you know, I was an educator. I love teaching, and I devoted myself to the teaching of medical students and fellows and residents. And I love doing that. And I think this book, in a way, is a labor of love and a teaching exercise. I do want to spread the knowledge that I've gained in order to help people.

And I think more knowledge is, there's never been any of them. to show that the more you know, the more it's going to hurt you. It's actually the opposite. The more ignorant you are, the more you're going to be beholden. And at risk of doing things. Like, for instance, with the vaccines, the ignorance of people and many people in selecting to take that vaccine from being lied to is they became complicit in oftentimes their own demise and or disability.

And they did it because they thought it was the right thing to do because they were told that way. But they didn't ask the right question. They didn't do their own research, reading. Yes. Right? And then the last problem is, what do you read? Yeah.

And that's another lesson of that book, is the trusted sources, those institutions of societies, the high-impact journals and the agencies and their edicts, I have to say that I'm sorry, but those are misplaced faith and trust. There are decades of evidence to show that those agencies and institutions have been captured by industry. You need to go to other sources of information. And I hope that's a lesson people take from that book. I want to thank you for writing the book. We're really psyched.

It's going to be a huge success. Thanks, Del. Looking forward to it. And you are an absolute hero. Always love having you join us. Thanks, Del. Pleasure. Good luck in all of your travels.

And we're going to win this. Thank you. We're going to wake up the world. Thank you. All right. Well, for those of you out there, we're excited, June 6th. Go and get your pre-order copy right now. Because those pre-orders help get it on all the list.

New York Times, if they allow it there. We'll see if they try to censor this book. but ultimately we want to drive sales of this because it's not only about your own education, once you understand what happens here, you're going to have an arsenal of more information on how you talk to your friends, how you can describe simply what's really happening here, and then you can also say, you know what, why don't you read this book? It's a great gift for all of your family members out there that maybe, you know, I don't think it'll work if they already have the cement around their shoes and they've sunk to the bottom

the ocean. But if they're treading water and you're seeing them asking the right questions, we believe that this is a book that is absolutely going to help them understand what happened during COVID. This is the launch of ICANN Press. A couple of great books coming your way. And this is why we created ICANN Press. At the informed consent action network, we are always working hard to inform, educate, and bring you the truth. That's why I'm excited to announce our new book and publishing division, ICAN Press. Leveraging the Pets, leveraging the power of the written word, ICAN Press is partnering with dynamic writers, medical professionals, and experts dedicated to the truth, building a library that will captivate, empower, and inform

you and your family. Ican Press has already launched The Informant, an online monthly magazine, curating news from ICANN and the Highwire offered exclusively to our recurring donors. Sign up for the informant at Icaneside.org slash the informant. Now, ICANN Press is bringing you two must-have books available for pre-order. First, the war on ivermectin from author Dr. Pierre Corey. Details a relentless attack on a decades old Nobel Prize winning medicine that could have ended the pandemic. The war on ivermectin is available now for pre-order and ships June 6th. Also available for pre-order, I'm unvaccinated and that's okay.

A children's book by Dr. Shannon Croner, which empowers parents to talk to the children about the decision to not vaccinate and how to navigate any negativity they may encounter out in the world. Buy these must-have books wherever books are sold, and at ICan Decide. Dot shop. Start building your library from ICan Press today.