The Highwire with Del Bigtree - ON THE RUN

Episode Date: December 2, 2022

The Covid Cabal is On The Run!; Apple / Elon Feud?; Fauci Deposed; Upheaval In China; Del Fact-checks Dr. Jha; UK Cardiologist Loses Father to Covid Shot; Win for Unvaxxed Airmen/WomenGuest: Dr. Aseem Malhotra#DrAseem #HWFactCheckBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Did you notice 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 corporate sponsors telling us what to investigate and what to say. Instead, you're our sponsors. This is a production by our nonprofit, the Informed Consent Action Network. If you want more investigations, more hard-hitting news. If you want the truth, go to Ican Decide.org and donate now. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you,

You are out there in the world. It's time to step out onto the high wire. Well, for all of you watching here in the United States of America, I hope you had a wonderful Thanksgiving. And for the rest of you around the world, I just hope you had a great week. But, you know, for those of us celebrating Thanksgiving, I have to say it's always particularly unique experience for me going back to Boulder, Colorado. I mean, if you know anything about Boulder, it's really like the liberal crystal cathedral

of the entire world. And everyone I went to school with that aren't like really close friends think I'm like the worst thing that's ever come out of Boulder. So it's always great to get to go back to my hometown and deliver a talk, which I did at my folks church there, the unity of Boulder. It was packed. It was an incredible experience. But that sort of dichotomy that I think a lot of us had going back home. And I know I gave you marching orders. Go back and have those difficult conversations about what's going on, try to love each other.

But, you know, press these issues. We need to wake up as many people as we can. Well, I did the same thing, and I'll be honest with you. I had some mixed energies around. If it, some of it went well, some of it not so well. An occasional storm out of the room happened, not me. I feel very comfortable where I'm sitting in my chair at the moment. But it's important.

We've got to start talking to each other. We've got to reopen up this idea that everything is available to conversation, that everything is open to a debate. Let's hear all sides of this. And so that's what my week was like. And it was a lot of fun. It was, as I said, there was ups, there was downs. But hey, that's family, right?

I hope you had an incredibly awesome week yourselves with your families. But let's get back to it. Because as this conversation now that we've been centered on now throughout COVID, you know, I saw a meme that said something like, can you imagine living through the last three years and not having any questions. I mean, I know that's what a lot of you were thinking, right, as we watch this show, what type of person could possibly at this point after everything that's gone on, like all the changing of tone around the vaccine, what it can do, what it

can't do, what it never did, or we never knew it was, or all the different things, you know, the people that are dropping like flies and we're watching it, the rise in, you know, sudden adult death syndrome, whatever the heck that is. And there are still people out there that are just like just totally towing the line. And it just makes you think, and I want to ask the question, like, have you never had the ability to reroute or course correct? I mean, how many people will just go no matter where the conversation, you know, demands that they go? And so we're dealing with that. But on the other hand, I feel like we are living in a moment where the genies out of the bottle, folks, the cat's out of the bag.

There's no stuffing it or ramming it back in. That's going to be part of the conversation I'm going to have with my esteemed guest coming up later on in the show, Dr. Massim Mahltra is joining me. Really excited to get to talk to him. Also about the climate in the UK versus just what we're experiencing here and the doctors that we've had on the show here. So that's going to be really cool. But first, I want to talk about, you know, how do you know you're winning, right? How do you know you're actually winning or how do you know where this is going?

Well, I'll tell you one of the things that I know is when you start seeing your opponent running for the hills or backtracking on things that they've said or done when you're still standing your ground. That's a good sign of who's actually in control of the conversation. I think that's what's happening right now. Huge headline over the holidays that came out here in America. The FDA says telling people not to take Ivermectin for COVID-19 was just a recommendation. This article goes on to say the cited statements were not directives. They were not mandatory.

They were recommendations. They said what parties should do. They said, for example, why you should not take Ivermectin to treat COVID-19. did not say you may not do it, you must not do it. They did not say it's prohibited or it's unlawful. They also did not say that doctors may not prescribe ivermectin. Isaac Bellford, one of the lawyers said during a November 1st hearing in federal court in Texas. They use informal language. That is true. It's conversational, but not mandatory. I want to just, hold on a second. Can we all just wrap our heads around this? So the FDA that prior to this moment in court had

basically made us believe that they are the gods of medicine, that you bow down to whatever they have to say. Whatever the FDA, whatever the CDC says, then, you know, our doctors, they literally look at as like sort of like the priests or the high priests of this religion. And now their argument is not we stand by the fact that we don't think Ivermectin is a good treatment. Their defense is, well, you shouldn't have listened to us. I mean, that's what they just said, basically. Well, that's your fault for listening to us. Wait a minute, I thought you were the ones of part of making the mandates across the country.

I thought you were the ones that were telling us that this was like horse paste or horse medicine. Oh, yeah, there we are. There's the tweet. You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all, stop it. Why, you should not use ivermectin to treat

or prevent COVID-19. It goes on to say that. Well, I mean, this is where they're at. And I find it stunning that essentially one of our heads, our leading health agencies now in America is saying, all we're doing is making recommendations, folks. You don't necessarily have to listen to us. Really? I think we should take them on their word right now so that we never make these mistakes again. Let's go ahead and look at some of the things they did say.

This was from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Why you should not use Ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19. Goes on to say, should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? Here's the question. Should I take amyvermectin? There's the question. No. No, you shouldn't. They're not taking it, you know, any clearer than that. It's horse-paced.

And look, they reached out to all their news agencies to make sure that if you were even considering it, you should be told this. This drug does nothing to protect you from getting COVID or to help you get over it if you have it. To have poison control centers in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama. They're inundated with calls from Americans dosing themselves. with these meds that don't treat COVID-19 and that don't prevent it. There is no scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19. Doesn't treat COVID, but could put you in a coma.

To date, there's now literally tens of thousands of people that have been saved, hundreds of, in studies even around the world, the studies keep piling up for ivermectins. One of the main talking points I've had in the speeches I've been given around the country, including the one I just gave in Boulder, over to the Thanksgiving. holiday, but let's just take them for their words, shall we? Because I think this is a learning moment for all of us. Here's what the FDA wants us to know. We make recommendations. You should decide your own treatment. And you and your doctor should have their own relationship. We shouldn't be affecting your doctor. We shouldn't be affecting you. We are only making

recommendations. And many of those recommendations over time could be wrong, which is why you should think for yourself. That's really weird, because that's what I've been telling you on the high wire. Think for yourself. Forget about what the experts are telling you. You need to do your own research because they are not doing it right and they're not making the right statements. And they seem to be have been taken over by the very industries we're supposed to be being protected from. Well, the backtracking doesn't stop just here in America with the FDA. How about one of the leading voices of Canada? Like the leader of Canada. Would it be awesome to see him have to backtrack after being such a hole? Take a look at this. A number of people have testified in this inquiry referencing your widely published comments and calling the unvaccinated racists and misogynists. And we have heard testimony in this inquiry about how some of your officials wanted to label protesters as terrorists. Would you agree with me that one of the most important roles of a Prime Minister is to unite Canadians and not divide them by engaging in name-calling?

I did not call people who were unvaccinated. names. There is a small fringe element in this country that is angry that doesn't believe in science that is lashing out with racist

misogynistic attacks those protesters who can I don't even want to call them protesters those anti-vaxxer mobs but there also there are farrushment

They're not opposed to the vaccination. They're extremists. They're not in the science, who are often misogynes, and they're also, it's a little group, but that's a place. Is we, is we to tolerate?

It has to stop. People of Ottawa don't deserve to be harassed in their own neighborhoods. They don't deserve to be confronted with the inherent violence of a swastika flying on a street corner. The Canadian

at home watching and disgust and disbelief at this behavior, wondering how this could have happened in our nation's capital after everything we've been through together. This is not the story of our pandemic, of our country, of our people. Now look, I'm not, there's a lot we could take away from this conversation here. First of all, you should really wonder if you should be re-electing and voting for people. that you watch literally change their tune as time goes on. But even more so, here's what I find really disturbing is anybody that forgets what this thing is.

Now, you know, we live in a world, this is called a camera, Mr. Trudeau. It's a video camera. This is that thing you're looking into all the time, okay? So when you make statements, especially like multiple times, calling people racist and misogynist and comparing to the Nazi Germany, this thing's been recording you. So you can't give it. on the stage and then say, I never said that. I mean, the fact that these people have forgotten

that this exists, even though it's in their face everywhere they go and then go on to make whatever statements they make, not thinking that somehow this will be recorded in the annals of time, that's what these things are for, by the way. Then they get up on stages and said, I never said that as though we're not going to be able to say that they said that. I mean, let me make it perfectly clear. I am fully aware all the time I'm on this show that I am talking to a camera. Yes, you people out there are an audience and you're who I'm trying to get to, but this camera's being recorded, right? And many of you, even those that hate me right now, and I love that you're tuning in too because we'll take all the audience we can get. Yes, all you haters and trolls out there, welcome to the high wire.

You're recording this as we speak so that in case I ever say something wrong, you can hold it against me. And by the way, I'm still waiting to see one of those videos. Over the over two hours of programming we do every single week. where is the video where I actually state misinformation? I see it written in headlines all over the place. If you have it recorded, why don't you do what we just did? You can't because I still stand by everything I've said throughout COVID. Because we're right.

It's called the scientific method. We actually challenge ourselves. We have a scientific team from around the world making sure we get it right. Not first, but right. That is the priority here on the high wire and we're going to stand by it. It's why today's show is all about the fact that they are running away from us. They're trying to get away. They're running over the hills.

They're backtracking. They're doing everything they can double speak. We are not going to get them, let them get away with it. So to start this process, to get through the rest of this fantastic show, it's time for the Jackson Report. All right, Jeffrey Jackson. Let's hear what you got this week. Would you have a good Thanksgiving, by the way? I did.

It was great. My parents came in to visit myself and my wife, and we spent about four days together. It's great seeing them and just spending some time. and catching up on things and family and talking about the events of the world going on right now. I'm thankful my parents are actually somewhat aligned with me when it comes to how we see the world. It cuts down the arguments.

Indeed, indeed. All right. Well, what should you be arguing about this week if we have an argument to make? Well, one of the big stories here coming out of the U.S. is this Attorney General for Missouri, Eric Schmidt and Jeff Landry, he's the Louisiana Attorney General. they are involved in a legal case about the collusion with big tech to censor American speech during the entire COVID response during the COVID conversation.

And they had a chance to depose Anthony Fauci for seven hours. Now, this deposition remains sealed. There's a lot of people trying to get their hands on it. So we're going to read some of it, actually, instead of listening to it. But early on in the pandemic, just to set this up, Dr. Fauci asked Clifford Lane. He's the deputy director of NIA, Fauci's NIAD. He asked Clifford Lane to go with the WHO to Wuhan, to China to check out their response. How they're handling this new cold virus that's just really sweeping through their country.

Do they have a handle on it? Well, this is the headline. This is an article out of Gateway Pundit, Jim Hoff. Fauci admits he based his unprecedented U.S. economic lockdowns on dr. conian measures used by the Chinese communists. So Dr. Clifford Lane gets back. And he's asked by the attorney that's deposing him, did you talk to Clifford Lane about his experiences in China?

And this is what Fauci had to say. And we're going to read this. So he says, Dr. Fauci, the answer is I did. Dr. Lane was very impressed about how from a clinical public health standpoint, the Chinese were handling the isolation, the contact tracing, the building of facilities to take care of people. And that's what I believe he meant when he said, we're managing this in a very structured way. John Sire, the lawyer says, so he drew the conclusion that there might have to be extreme, in his word, measures to mandate social distancing to bring the outbreak under control, correct? Fouchi says that's what this is implying, yes. And he goes on to talk about how the Chinese were managing things in a very structured and organized way. And obviously, that was early on in the pandemic where he talked to Clifford Lane. But let's just tune in with Fauci just recently. And listen, because obviously he was one of the quarterbacks of, of the lockdown response here in the United States that drug on and on and on and kept changing goalposts.

Let's tune in to see how he's defending this Chinese-style lockdown. Take a listen. Of course, when you make recommendations, if the primary goal, when you're dealing with a situation where the hospitals were being overrun in New York, intensive care units were being put in hallways, you have to do something that's rather draconian. And sometimes when you do draconian things, it has collateral negative consequences. Just like when you shut things down, even temporarily, it does have deleterious consequences on the economy, on the school children. You know that, but you have to make a balance. Whenever you're copying China and how they control their people, you have to accept that there's going to be some negative consequences.

It is outrageous what he said, but now in the context of what he's admitting in this deposition right now, you know, we basically followed a communist dictatorship regime. Absolutely. And, you know, we knew all of those things were going to happen as far as, you know, economic issues, mental health issues. But that, we knew it early on, but that wasn't really in the playbook. It was Chinese style lockdown, essentially. And, you know, this is interesting because across the board, you're seeing people really start to echo this. World Economic Forum, this is a headline here, Klaus Schwab, our friend Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum Chair Klaus Schwab declares on Chinese state TV, China is the model for many nations. This is just recently. And then our friend Justin Trudeau, who he just went over and talked about, he admired China's basic dictatorship.

That's what he said on camera. Justin Trudeau said he admires China's dictatorship. Canadians should have believed him because he came in and he basically implemented similar situation. So that brings us to what's happening in China now over the past couple weeks. Gigantic story protests that are a historical over the past decade or so. You know, understand most of the residents there, they're under a zero COVID policy. They have been for almost three years. Most of the residents have to quarantine in their home.

Sometimes they've been there for now over 100 days. Some have to go to quarantine facilities if they test positive. Again, the COVID zero means you test one person positive. The whole place shuts down, no matter how big the city. And this is exactly what happened just about a week ago at Foxcon. This was Jong-Jo City. This is where the iPhones are made. It's a big tech place in China. And this was one of the headlines out of their. Violent protests erupt at Apple's main iPhone plant in China.

This was a workers' rebellion, Del. And they live in dormitories there. It's about 200,000 people in this company. It's a gigantic company. And they had COVID cases, so they were going to shut them down. People were going to be locked in their dormitories. And the workers said, no more. Protests.

Everyone stormed the gates. storm passes security guards hundreds of people and early early a call said that it was going to hurt production this was one of the headlines here from a source inside this was early on apple to lose six million iPhone pros from tumult at china plant and so the foxcon they really they didn't want their bottom line hurt that badly especially with you know the Christmas season coming up in a lot of countries so they began to offer workers to stay and so this is this is what the headline look like They said, no, sorry, our bad. Foxcon offers $1,800 bonus to workers who stay in iPhone City.

Now, right around the same time, getting a little more serious here, we have people locked in high-rise apartments. We have the quarantines going on, people in their homes. There was a deadly fire in Xinjiang. This is a headline here. Fire starts anger at China's zero COVID policy. Urumqi Mayor apologizes. So we have some B-roll of this.

And from what I understand, this video was sent. in China because it was so alarming. So it was showing parked electric vehicles there, left without power during these long lockdowns that were blocking the fire engines from entering in this narrow road to this burning building. So they had to lob the water over from as far, you know, they pulled the fire engine up as close

as they could get lobbed this water over, but it wasn't hit in the building. This thing burned for almost three hours from what I understand. At least 10 people had died, several injured in this. And this became the rallying cry for really the rest of the country. They were done. And after they saw this, this was shared, all over their social media that the best as possible, you begin seeing protests everywhere.

Protests were breaking out in major cities. And even the United States news covered these protests. This has been an ongoing news story, which is kind of rare for U.S. media. Typically, they don't follow these things as accurately as possible. Sometimes they only shoot it up in the headlines one time and then give it kind of a false narrative and that goes away. We don't have follow-up reporting on this. The United States media has been covering these protests because they have to over the last couple weeks. And this was the headline out of Reuters here. This is when it spread, spread to major cities at this point.

Protests break out in Shanghai and Beijing and other cities over China's rigid zero COVID policy. So this was another headline. After the police began basically fighting with the protesters in a lot of these cities, two Chinese cities ease COVID curves after protests spread. These are giant cities. Guangzhou and Chongqing, 16 million. people, 31 million people, respectively, huge, huge cities. And so the leaders there in the cities are saying that we're going to relax some of these COVID policies, not the zero COVID policy,

but some of the restrictions, they're going to start opening back up the restaurants to, you know, to really appease these protesters because they're starting to take over. And to give me an idea how big those cities are, you know, New York City, we're talking about over 8 million people, L.A. over 3 million people. So these things are dwarfing the size. So if these protests get out control. They got a real problem on their hands. But in the United States, you know, a lot of people, a lot of representatives, a lot of mayors, centers have been pretty quiet about what's going on in China. The White House released a very, very timid response saying, you know, we stand with people that want to peacefully protest,

you know, that's pretty much all we're going to say. But we have Governor Ron DeSantis in Florida. He came out with a little stronger statement for China. Take a listen. Okay. I just want to make a comment about what we've been seeing going on in China. This zero COVID policy is draconian. It violates people's liberties, and it is completely unscientific. And the people of China are right to be able to speak out and protest against what the Chinese Communist Party is doing. This CCP has a maniacal desire to exert total control over its population. Zero COVID is really just the pretext for them to do what they want to do anyways.

And that is not a model that can work over the long term. The people in China are finally speaking out against it. And I just think we need these draconian COVID policies to go to the ash heap of history, they belong. Amen. You know, I feel like I have to take this moment right now because one of the issues that came up, you know, over my Thanksgiving is, you know, why aren't you presenting more liberals that are against, you know, these vaccinations and lockdowns and things like that? And so, the truth is, is we are not a political organization. I don't play Ron DeSantis videos or you don't choose those or whoever's speaking. It's just about the content. We are about, you know, free

medical choice. We believe, you know, our nonprofit is the informed consent action. network, meaning you should be informed just as the Nuremberg Code says, you should be told all the benefits and the possible negative side effects, and then it is still your decision after being given all of that information to decide whether you want to take part in a medical intervention or not. And when we're breaking the Nuremberg Code, we will always be against it. And so here's my call out there. We are really think tanking, trying to figure out how we can make this a not a partisan issue. It should not be. Every American should want control over their own body. I know that we hear liberals say my body, my choice on certain circumstances, but they're giving up that

choice in others. But I want to say this to everybody. If you have a, you know, Democrat senator or, you know, assembly member or whoever it is that you feel like is sharing the message of medical freedom is against following China's orders and following China and looking up to China as the blueprint of example of where we should be, we will play them in a second on this show. Please provide. them to us. We're always looking for that too. I don't want to lose those of you out there that are like me. Maybe once Democrats consider yourself politically marooned, I'm not choosing sides here. We're just bringing anybody that speaks the truth that actually aligns with the Constitution of the United States of America. All right. That being said, let's get on with it, Jeffrey.

Right. It's not our job here to like anybody. Our job is analyze the data to look at what people are doing and what they're saying and to hold them accountable. So that's what we're doing here. And the people in China, one of the things we have to say is we're not that far apart. So people in America watching and going, well, that's in China. I'll never meet these people. I'm never going to China. But unfortunately, we have a lot of the similar issues, struggling economy from these COVID lockdowns, just call them what they are.

Mental health issues, growing censorship, seeing big tech and government collude to basically blur the lines into this one bohemoth apparatus that's censoring our speech. And one of the players directly attaching us to China right now, it's not that. that far of a leap is Apple, the company Apple. They've had no problem doing a plug and play with their tech to suit the Chinese authoritarian needs for what they want over there, for the government deems over there. So this is one of the articles here to really understand where this is at. China, COVID protesters become target of Beijing's surveillance state. So the surveillance state has ballooned under the zero COVID policy. It's been used as an excuse to balloon the surveillance

state and these kids and people and college students that were protesting, they're getting calls when they come back home from the police, local police saying, come down to the police station. You need to explain yourself. You were at an unlawful protest. And so that's how it's going down there in China. But one of the things Apple has done just in China, no other country has done this, is they did an update. They did this by stealth to people in China.

This was the headline here. If anybody wants to read fully how it happened, Apple turned off protest communication. tool right before anti-lockdown uprising in China. So this was theirdrop. So people are realizing they're going to get tracked by their cell phone locator when they're using social media to coordinate these things like the Weibo or whatever they're using over there. So they're using air drop, which is basically you can drop communications to people around your vicinity. And that kind of bypassed a little bit of the censorship and it bypassed some of the tracking. Apple said, nope, you're not going to be able to do that for these protests. Turn it off there through an update.

So people didn't even know that that piece of that technology on their phone was gone. It was just gone. So basically where an update will tell you, here's the great new function, or here's the problem we're solving. They didn't actually tell them what this update it was doing. They're like, oh, just update your phone. And what it did was erase their sort of that air drop feature that they had on their phones so that they couldn't communicate.

Wow. That's twisted. That's really twisted. Yeah. And China was the only, now in Apple's defense, they say, Well, we're planning to roll that out for the rest of the world pretty soon. So China was just the first person. But, you know, these updates can do automatically.

So you wake up one morning and it's not even there anymore. So again, don't take my word for it here. Listen to Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple himself on China. Okay. You have been criticized for not speaking out on human rights issues, for example, in China and other countries as well. This is something I think a lot of companies that have been doing business in China struggle with. A number of companies, as you know, have a bad. in China. How do you think about that? I think that we have a responsibility as a business

to do business in as many places as we can. Because I think business is this huge catalyst. I believe in what Tom Watson said is world peace through world trade. Amazing. You know, world peace through world trade, world control through world domination through a product. I mean, it's scary. I carry, I'll, you know, I'm not selling it, obviously. I can't carry an iPhone because I sort of grew up. You know, in America, you're either like a Mac person or you're that sort of PC side of things, but it's going to make me really question how I move forward because as these systems are being designed, so if you're willing to, in a moment of crisis, take away people's

ability to communicate in China because the government said, so what are you going to do here in America? And that idea that he's sort of when other companies are leaving China, not only like sells his product, but literally works with the government to help them oppress the people. And it's an American company. Really, it's a terrifying development. It seems like despicable behavior from any point of view, but I guess that's just business. That's how it does. You know, it's almost like the Italian. That's just business. This is how we do it. With a different accent, this could be a mob movie with Tim Cook in it. So now Twitter,

let's move on from Apple to Twitter. Twitter in the United States here has found itself at the center of the fight against censorship and really to try to bring open debate back to these platforms, these social media platforms in America that are losing that. This is what it really was about in the news in case anybody missed it. Check this out. Twitter boss Elon Musk announced yesterday that he is granting amnesty for suspended accounts starting next week. Elon Musk says that he will begin restoring previously banned Twitter accounts, tweeting the people have spoken, amnesty is back next week. Some critics believe that Reactivating suspended accounts could lead to a spike in harassment, hate speech, and misinformation.

Do you think this is about free speech or is it about censorship? I think it's about censorship of speech they don't want to be free. A clinical instructor at Harvard Law School says that what Musk is doing is existentially dangerous for various marginalized communities. It's like opening the gates of hell in terms of the havoc it will cause it. The problem is that Elon Musk now is encouraging. encouraging his users to cross the line, essentially, to become more hostile and potentially harass people more so long as it doesn't break the law. I would like to see, and I would hope that Elon Musk would reveal exactly the extent

of the censorship on Twitter. Right. And let's like name names. Let's hear who was actually responsible for this. I think if Twitter actually disappeared completely, that probably would be a good thing for democracy. It would probably be a good thing for public health and public safety. We're all keeping a close eye on this.

We're all monitoring what's happening on Twitter. It is utterly chilling to me to watch, you know, famous news agencies and politicians and the White House expressing absolute sheer terror and panic over the idea that people will once again be able to freely share their opinions. on a platform that exists here in the United States of America. I mean, they are literally terrified of the concept of free speech. Clearly, with no concept of what free speech actually means.

And honestly, like all the way back to like Hustler magazine and the idea that this has gone into court, you may find it repugnant. You may find it repulsive what somebody is saying, but it's still speech, it's still free. And in this country, unlike China that we seem to want to emulate, you were allowed to have those thoughts. And by the way, and this is something I want to bring up.

I know this is, you know, they talk about that somehow allowing misinformation, you know, that misinformation is just going to grow. It won't grow. You mean, here's the thing about that they want to forget about social media. One of the sort of the brilliant pieces about it is if I am following somebody and they end up filling me with a bunch of garbage and I go out and tell other people and then that ends up clearly being proven wrong, am I going to keep going back to that source? No, I'm not.

I mean, they act as though there is no free market to the way that our thoughts work. If I keep following somebody that proves to be wrong and all the science shows that, you know, they're wrong or whatever it is, then I leave it. Whereas if you've been watching the highway, we're the ones being censored, we're being kicked off, and I don't have to change a single word of what I've said. Everybody's coming my way. Rochelle Walensky is now repeating what I've said. They've all gone to, you're going to have to go out and catch this cold, even though I lost YouTube channels over it. So the idea that simply by having an open free market that somehow the bad wrong ideas will take effect, it defies literally the foundational principle of what makes America special, unique, and fantastic.

That's right. And, you know, America has almost like a common sense immune system for this kind of stuff and describe just like what you're talking about. And for the COVID conversation on Twitter has now just open, wide open. So this is what Twitter rules. They just posted this just about two weeks ago. Effective November 23rd, 2022. Twitter is no longer enforcing the COVID-19 misleading information policy.

That started in January. 2020 that started. Check out what that has done to the conversation here. So this is Twitter's own demographics. 11.72 million accounts were challenged. 11,230 accounts were suspended. and over 97,000 pieces of content were removed because of these guidelines. So we are seeing accounts restored at this point.

Not everybody's account, obviously, but the conversation around the COVID and medical and health issues is going to be a lot more open with this out. But back to Twitter, back to what Elon Musk is doing. So this is scaring a lot of people, number one, perhaps the LA Times. This is an op-ed talking about an inversion of reality, how Elon Musk plans for Twitter could threaten free speech. So letting more people speak is going to threaten free speech.

Got it. But who else is really, really scared about this? The entire European Union. So the European Union is threatening. It's warning Musk that Twitter faces ban over content moderation. That's the headline. So again, the EU is threatening an American company. And the reason they're so bold to do this is they have something there called the Digital Services Act

that came into force in mid-November of this year. So they're using that. That's to fight disinformation. That's one of the strongest policies in really any country outside of China at this point for handling disinformation, so to speak. The closest thing we have to adhere in America is in California, where they can possibly censor doctors for COVID misinformation with that new bill. But Elon Musk is doing something is kind of interesting.

It's something that we almost hoped our politicians would do. Keep us updated every step of the way in key junctures for important decisions. decisions. So this is kind of what he's been trying to do on Twitter. So he put this out on Twitter. The Twitter files on free speech suppression soon to be published on Twitter itself. The public deserves to know what really happens. So apparently he has a trove of information showing how Twitter suppressed everything, suppressed the conversation around COVID, around other topics. So he claims he's going to release this for people to see. That would be a welcome transparency for the public. But he also says this, talking about Apple. This was just recently. Apple has also threatened to withhold

Twitter from its app store, but won't tell us why. So understand you, we have Apple here that's working with the Chinese government to suppress their people. And now they're saying, well, you're going to allow more speech on Twitter. We're going to hold you back from the app store. And to counter that, Elon Musk said, okay, well, if you take me off the app store, I'm going to make my own phone. Elon says he'll make his own phone if Apple and Google de-platform Twitter. And he's going to be a competitor in that market. But according to you know, it's amazing. It's amazing. Jeffrey, and I want to say this to our audience right now, because the question comes in,

we're all asking the same question, can we trust Elon Musk or can we not? And I would say, here's how I see this, folks. I mean, if someone is speaking a truth that I hold dear and important, that it's like a primary principle of how I live, and I see everyone against that principle, fighting that person, you know,

sort of that old idea, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. In this topic and in this moment, what Twitter is doing At the very least, whether or not Elon follows all the way through, look at the conversation he is creating right now where news agencies are having to discuss free speech, whatever side of it they're going to come on, whether they're against it or forward.

He's making politicians talk about it. He is literally, this is one of the most important conversations that needs to happen right now in the United States of America. He's driving it, and for that reason, at this moment, I am saying, you know, I don't believe in NeuroLink and all the other crazy things he's got himself involved in, but when it comes to free speech and it comes to free speech and it comes up platform that we can all share with,

I am 100% behind the idea of that being transparent and fair and open. And so for that reason, if you're not on Twitter, this week we should all vote with our dollars. We should show the world how much this matters to me. You can always pull yourself out of Twitter if he moves in a direction you don't want. But let the pundits know, let your politicians know by following us at Highwire Talk, at I Can Decide, at Del Bigtree, at Jeffrey Jackson, at Aaron Siri SG on Twitter. Get on Twitter, folks.

Let's show the world when somebody that's ahead of a tech corporation comes out and says, I believe in free speech, then we're going to show that their numbers go up. This is how we make a difference in this world. And putting a spotlight on that monopolistic behavior of Apple, threatening to, as it has with other, with GAB, with Parlor, has kicked off other social media platforms from their app store. They, it really ruffled some feathers there. So apparently Elon Musk met with Tim Cook. This was the headline here. This was a tweet he put out. Elon Musk says he met with Apple CEO Tim Cook and resolved the misunderstanding after several tweets attacking the company. So apparently they're back and everything's good to go. It's going to stay on the app store. Obviously, a lot of people will be keeping an eye on that. But we have Congressman Kevin McCarthy.

He had some stuff to say about this and to add to this conversation, one of the few representatives here in the United States that is doing so. Take a listen. That is offensive to me. Government's going to go after someone that wants to have free speech. What do they have to look at Twitter about? Do they want to go more after American public about whether they can have an opinion on something? I think the American public have spoken on this. I think our First Amendment stands up, and I think they should stop picking on Elon Musk.

You know, Elon Musk has succeeded in many places. I'd bet on him more than government going after you. And one thing I would say when we talk about accountability will no longer let government go after people simply because of their political views. Well, that's my perspective. No matter what party you're in, you should not be going after people because of their political views. Political views are not hate speech. Right. And so now let's move from speech to, I guess, medical choice, health choice. And we're going to talk about this new bivalent booster. Remember the one that was only tested on a handful of mice before they rolled it out onto the public? So this is how that's going. Check out some of these headlines. Biden wastes billions on COVID boosters. No one wants. Here's another headline. Biden administration announces pushed to improve COVID booster uptake. It says in here so far, just over 11% of eligible people ages 5 and older have received the new booster according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

So what does it look like again when your government has a bunch of new boosters sitting on the shelves that no one wants? Well, you roll out Dr. Ashish Jha. He is the White House's COVID coordinator and he will sound like this. Take a listen. Here's what we know. If folks get their updated vaccines and they get treated, they have a breakthrough infection, we can prevent essentially every COVID death in America. That is a remarkable fact two and a half years after we found this virus first in our country. But it's going to take all of us to make that happen. So please, don't wait, get your COVID shot, get your flu shot. That's why God gave you two arms. You can one in each arm if you want. Oh, boy, ah, okay.

Del, I think it's time we give Dr. Jaugh a high wire fact check. Okay. This week's question, can we expect the booster to prevent every COVID death? Well, you don't have to do much investigating to really get to the bottom of this answer. You just go over to the Washington Post. Here is the headline. Just recently, COVID is no longer mainly a panacea. mainly a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Here's why. It says 58% of coronavirus deaths in August

were people who were vaccinated or boosted according to analysis conducted for the Health 202 by Cynthia Cox, Vice President at the Kaiser Family Foundation. She says, she goes on to say in this article, it's a continuation of a troubling trend that has emerged over the past year. As vaccination rates have increased a new variants appeared, the share of deaths of people who were vaccinated has been steadily rising. So let's go beyond that. headline. And let's look at the New York Times. They have a COVID tracker there. We took that data and we looked at the top 10 most vaccinated states. They had an average uptake of 82% and we looked at the bottom 10 least vaccinated states. And turns out there's a 34% increase in deaths per

100,000 of COVID deaths in the top 10 most vaccinated states. Wow. So there's a data point that is actually really shocking, really should be alarming to a lot of people, really should be investigated. But let's go even further than that. Let's look at data. We have another chart here. This is data from something called OECD. Organization for Economic Cooperation Development is a knowledge hub data and analysis. And they took outside of the United States, they took the U.S., Germany, Italy, France. You can see all the countries there at the bottom. They look at average weekly excess mortality of the entirety of 2022. So you take all of that, all that excess mortality, that will comprise 100% in this graph.

46% of that total excess death comes from the United States. Wow. And you can see following is Germany. And remember Germany, it's actually in the mainstream headlines in Germany. They're actually questioning it. Why are excess deaths so high? They're running at some of the highest excess deaths they've seen there over a decade. You have whistleblower coming out from an insurance company there.

I remember Italy. Number three, Italy was one of the highest vaccination. vaccinated countries as well. They were early to the game with that. Let's move on past the United States, though. We have Australia. Australia has one of the highest vaccination rates in the entire world. And we go to their actual government website. This is Australian government Department of Health's own website. And this is their vaccination rates for people 16 and over. 97.3 there on the left for 16 and over with one dose, 95.9 for two doses, 72.3 for three doses. And then a little over 5.1 million people with that fourth dose, that's about 25% or so of their population. So let's look at a graph here,

but before we look at it, so they, they began vaccinating their citizens on February of 2021. And they were so aggressive at vaccinating that they overtook the U.S. in first dose vaccinations by October of 2021. So just a handful of months later, they overtake the U.S. and they become a leader in the first dose. They did a really good job of getting that out to the population. So let's compare Australia with a control group. One of the poorest, one of the poorest countries in the world, this is the Central African Republic. So check out this chart. This is cumulative confirmed COVID-19 deaths per million. We have Australia and then the Central African Republic. They're running at about a 36% vaccination rate. They didn't do very well with lockdowns or anything like that. Obviously,

We know Australia came in about second to China with their COVID zero policy, hard lockdowns, hard quarantines. And you can see here right around September and October where they overtook the U.S. in that first dose, you see the COVID-19 deaths per million skyrocket. And when you look at this next chart, we compare that to the Central African Republic and Australia. Australia has 9.25 times the death rate of Central African Republic with all those vaccines and all of those lockdowns that we saw, that is the fruits of what they did. So this is some data, just the most recent data. Obviously, we've been reporting on this for over a year on these excess deaths. This has been a beat we've really kept close eye on. But this is just some of the more recent data to look at when we're hearing things like Dr. Jod just mentioned. Well, and to point this out

because, you know, obviously, if you did what I did over Thanksgiving, I'm talking to some fairly, you know, educated friends. At least they listen to CNN all the time. And when I would bring up the rise in the vaccinated death, you know, told with COVID, and say, well, that's just because more people are vaccinated than unvaccinated. All right, let's just go ahead and give you that argument, but it still flies in the face of what the head of the White House task force just told us, which is we will stop all COVID deaths if you get your booster. No, clearly not. Clearly not the case. Not all. No, we're near all. It's such an overstatement. And what I was trying to get through to my family and I pointed out multiple times, all right, you just conceded that that was a misstatement by the government official. You conceded that this is a misstatement. You conceded that they were wrong over here. At a certain point, do you realize you're cherry picking the things you want them to be right about? But how can you assume that anything they're saying is true anymore if they're so uneducated and so dead wrong and possibly even lying to us on all of these other issues? Once a liar, always a liar, I always say.

These people need to be removed from office and we need to get people that are truth tellers that actually stick to the science instead of hyperbole. It's a brilliant take down. I love that fact check. I think, as you said, it wasn't very hard. It starts with the Washington Post. They said it right there. The highest rate of COVID deaths now in America is the vaccinated. There's no way, under those circumstances, you can say that Ja was anywhere near the truth.

It's an out-and-out lie. Jeffrey, I love having you on the team. I'm, you know, I'm pumped. It's the holiday season. But, you know, I'm also excited for all the stuff that we're looking at in the new year, some big things on the horizon. So just great to have you on the team. And thank you for your work.

I'll see you next week. All right. You bet, I'll talk to you soon. All right. Take care. You know, when we're having that conversation, clearly the vaccine's failing. You could blame it on waning immunity, but remember, they told us it wouldn't wane. They told us it was better than not being bad.

Better than natural immunity, all of which has been debunked by the actual science, really from day one, but it just keeps piling up against them and we keep presenting you that pile as it grows and grows and grows. But another topic that we're going to get into in just a moment with Dr. Assim Malhotra is not just the fact that the vaccine isn't working. people are dying of COVID. What about the deaths and injuries from vaccines? What about this sort of rise in this term we'd never really heard of before, which is sudden adult death syndrome? There's a big documentary that came out last week, and a lot of you've been reaching out to us saying, you know, what do you think? And I want to say that everyone, you know, I'm all about, like, everyone on the playing field, do the best that you can do. We stick to our own evidence,

our own science here on the high wire, which is why I want to celebrate. in the middle of this conversation that next week, we have a really big show coming up. I've been working actually for several months, trying to get behind what's actually in these vaccines, what they are doing, what they aren't doing. And I visited the pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole. We did a deep investigation.

He's gonna be on the show next week, and we're really gonna drill down in the highway, in the way that we do it. I believe we're gonna show you some very shocking discoveries now that you may not even heard yet, but we're gonna, stick to what we can back with the evidence. Here's just a taste of what you're about to see next week on the high wire.

You are a pathologist for decades now. How many years? 26 years. Have you seen anything that resembles these types of claws before? No. Never. From around the country, from coroners and embalmers, I have received some samples and specimens from,

unfortunately, the patients that have not made it. And obviously, coroners do this all the time. They do. They're sending this out because something, bothering them. Something's bothering them. But like this entire, you know, this is one of those spaghetti strands and it's just one long line, one long line of protein just congealed together.

I've looked at about 20 of them with this Congo red stain. My next step is spike protein stains on all of these to see is there spike protein deposited in those protein sheets. Have I seen clots? 500,000 patients later, you bet I've seen clots. Clots like this now. And talking to other colleagues, other pathologists, hey, have you seen these?

No. Coroners, no. And this isn't normal folks. There's nothing normal about this. Is there a way that we could test to see that these vaccines can cause blood clotting in some way? Yeah, we can. So let's draw a little bit of your blood. Okay.

Let's put a drop of it on each slide, and we put a little bit of vaccine on each drop of blood and see what happens. Okay, I love that idea. Let's go for it. Okay, cool. That's coming up next week and don't ever say that I don't put it all in the line. I give blood for you out there. All right. So it's going to be really exciting.

I'm psyched that we've finally got our schedules aligned and we'll have Dr. Ryan Cole in studio. Huge development on the legal side. I mean, right, one of the things we're doing here on the High Wire and the informed consent action network, we're doing deep investigations. But as you know, our legal wins, you know, just about half of our budget goes to the battle to not only discuss these issues, but to do. to fight for them and change the course of history in the courts of the United States of America. And we assist in cases around the world.

All of that work is headed by none other than Aaron Siri and his massive now powerful team of expert lawyers that are fighting on our behalf. I think he's going to go down as one of the great constitutional lawyers of all times. But this is the breaking headline. This is a battle that keeps going on. Appeals court says Air Force wrongly relied on broad-prudence. formula to deny religious objections to the VAC's mandate. This is, they're trying to kick these Air Force members out that had a religious exemption.

Aaron Siri has been deep at the front of that fight, fighting hard. As you know, ICANN is also supporting Aaron to fight for the army. So for all of you out there that have come up to me and said, you know, I'm in the military, someone needs to help us in the military, I can is a part of that process too. We sent our cameras out to catch up with Aaron Siri. just outside of the courtrooms while all this was going on with the Air Force. This is a great moment as he got to stand with some of those bold members of the Air Force that are standing not only for their own rights, but our rights too.

Take a look at this. It's a shame that to stand up for a constitutional right would be to engage lawyers, but at the same time, now we're going to have lawyers like you're fighting for us. These members of the Air Force, they swear an oath to the Constitution to uphold it. And the first freedom under the Constitution is the right to religious freedom. They're asked to lay down their lives to defend that right. And so the first people whose rights we treated are we should be protecting are the maple standing behind me who do so, swear an oath to do so, and are sworn duty bound to

pay the ultimate sacrifice to defend those rights. And we're proud to be here today, co-counsel, all of them coming out to stand by that right, to stand firm in that right, Because by standing up for their own right to religious freedom, they stand up for that right for every American, not only in the battlefield, but here at home, every single day in this country. Well, first of all, I just want to give a shout out. Aaron, I know you're busy. You're working on a very important case for us right now. One we can't talk about, but its victory literally will change the course of this discussion in the United States of America. So I didn't want to bother him to bring him in here today. He really is busy. We keep him very busy. But I do want to say this. This is a huge moment. This is multiple attempts now to try and strike down the work that's been done by Aaron and his team

to give these employees of our U.S. government, of our military, the same rights that they're fighting for, which is the right to opt out based on religious beliefs and things like that. We're very excited to announce this and so happy for the team that is behind making this happen. But I want to take this moment because, you know, part of the argument that Aaron's making there with the government is you're saying you have to vaccinate these people in order to have them ready for battle. But Aaron also won, as you know, the V-safe data. Literally the app that was built to track the COVID data, we had to fight for a year to get that data. And what we discovered, this is the dashboard if you want to see it on our websites at Ican Decide.org. When you look at this dashboard, you'll recognize it just that yellow, red, pink, and red there at the top,

that nearly 28% of the 10 million people that received this vaccine reported that at the very least in the yellow, 1.2 million of them were unable to perform normal daily activities. In the middle, 1.3 million missed work or school because of it. And then almost 1 million, 0.8 million required medical care or hospitalization. So 28% were out of commission. We can't afford to take 28% of our military out of commission with a totally untested experimental product. That's one of the arguments being made there, and I'm so psyched that we have the best attorney

making that argument. I want to take this moment, though, to clear something up, because it's something that's being written into us. A lot of times here at the Highwire, I've had out there on the road recently. Several of you came up and asked me questions about this, so I want to clarify something. There's a real question on what nonprofits fund the work that Aaron Siri does, because it's true. You'll see him in a lot of different spaces. So let me be perfectly clear.

The only nonprofit in the United States for America or in the world that funds Aaron Siri and his team to get all of these legal wins and do all of this FOIA and all this work is here at the informed consent action network. When you are donating to do the legal work, that is going to Aaron Siri. There is some confusion because there are times when we will partner with another nonprofit. Perhaps we will send Aaron into their case because he's one of the best at deposing scientists in the world and we say, look, let's send in the guy that understands the science as well as Dr. Stanley Plotkin. You've all seen the Plotkin depositions if you haven't looked it up online or on ICandecide.org or at the highwire.com. But we send Aaron in to do that work with that legal team to assist them. And we fund that. The Thorne Consent Action Network funds to have him go in and make their cases better.

We also get involved in letting Aaron and his team help write some of the cases. If there are cases out that we've said to other nonprofits, please reach out. We will fund Aaron's team to go in and make sure your case is the best that it could possibly be. I say this because there should be no confusion. There's a lot of great nonprofits out there. But when you're thinking about all the wins and you see Aaron Siri doing all this great work and you want to be a part of that, there's only one place that you need to go to in order to make sure that your funds go to make that happen. That's at Icandecide.org or thehighwire.com.

So for all of you, as you're thinking at the end of this year, who do you want to fund to help you win in court next year? Please become a recurring donor at the top of your page at thehighwire.com and Icandecide.org, you'll find donate to I can. Become a recurring member of our. Remember, you got one month left to be a part of $22 for 2022 because we might just decide to go up a dollar next year. If you can do more, obviously, that helps us. If you can only afford to give up one Starbucks cup of coffee a week, do that. Just text, donate to 72022. We'll take the funds you gave up on that cup of coffee because every single bit of it makes a difference.

You can't imagine what it means for those Air Force members and for the Army members. And I want to say this, even when there are cases that we are not funding, There are private cases that some of you have called Aaron to work with, and you are funding that. But Aaron's body of knowledge and his team, what they're using in those courtrooms, comes from all of the cases that have been funded by the informed consent and action network. All of the FOIA requests and all the documents we've got from the CDC, all the legal wins when it comes to the VSAF data and the Pfizer data. All of that is being made possible by you.

Not really by us. We're simply just the conduit by which you get to be a world changer. So please continue to participate those of you that have made all this possible. I know you're patting yourselves on the back every single week we have these reports. If you're sitting there and saying, wow, that must feel good to be able to say you had something to do with that, we are giving you the opportunity to help us change the world. Take use of it and act accordingly. All right, great.

You know, there have been some fantastic and fantastic. special brilliant scientists and doctors that have graced, you know, this stage with me here at the highway over the last few years. Many of them in the United States of America, but we are not presenting in front of you. Someone who has some odd or maybe has a crystal ball or does some voodoo. We have been literally bringing in the best scientists in the world. When they have said the scientific consensus is, no, the scientific censored space is saying what our government and our health agents have been saying, but there's a giant body of literally some of the most powerful

and world-renowned scientists and doctors in the world that have stood behind the facts that we've been bringing you here on the high wire. It is my honor and pleasure to be bringing in just one of these individuals, not from America, but actually one of the leading voices when it comes to heart health in the UK. He's deep inside the government. He's deep inside trying to make a difference in there, and he is really speaking out in a way that is absolutely spectacular.

I'm talking about Dr. Asim Malhotra. If you don't know who he is, here's just a taste of this incredible man. Please give a very warm welcome to Dr. Asim Mahatra. Welcome to the stage, Dr. Asim Mahhotra. It's Dr. Asim Mahhotra. I'm absolutely delighted to have Dr. Asim Malhotra with us, physician, cardiologist, medical researcher and author. Dr. Assene Malhotra, a global expert on health and disease. I was one of the first people to take the jab.

I helped out in a vaccine centre. I was on Good Morning Britain helping tackle vaccine hesitancy. I did not conceive of the possibility that a vaccine could cause any real harm at all. It wasn't even anywhere in my brain. In my journey as a cardiologist, as an activist, as someone who sat on committees involving some of the most eminent doctors in the UK. ignorance occurs even at the very highest levels of academic and clinical leadership. I have a lot of interaction with the cardiology community across the UK.

And anecdotally, I've been getting told by colleagues that they are seeing younger and younger people coming in with heart attacks. We have 14,000 extra unexplained out of hospital cardiac arrests in this country alone. My father, who was a very prominent doctor in the UK, he was the Honore Vice President of the British Medical Association, retired general practitioner. He suffered a very shocking, unexplained sudden cardiac death in July of last year, 2021. And he was very fit guy, healthy diet. I'd actually done some routine heart scans on him a few years earlier. I know that blood flow through his arteries were good. I know his lifestyle inside out. But his post-mortem findings did not make sense to me at all.

He had two critical stenosis in his arteries. In other words, severe blockages in two of his arteries. And I couldn't explain it. Somebody from a very prestigious British institution, the cardiology department researcher, a whistleblower, if you like, contacted me to say that the researchers in this department had found inflammation from imaging studies around the coronary arteries.

Evidence-based medicine has been hijacked by powerful vested interests. I was under the impression that the vaccine would prevent transmission. We obviously now know that's completely false. That isn't true. We don't even know if it was true at the beginning. beginning. Much, if not most published research is not reliable, offers no benefit to patients, and therefore it's not useful to decision makers.

I think now it's high time that policymakers around the world put an end to the mandates. History will not be on their side and the public will not forgive them for it. Well, obviously we've been covering Dr. Assim Mahatra since he gave some of these incredible statements he did on British news channels. And then we had the opportunity to to speak to him sort of via Zoom across the lake, if you will, but now it is my honor and pleasure to be, you know, here in person with Dr. Seymalja. Thank you for joining us. Delights to be here, Del. It's really great. You know, for people that, you know, maybe brand new to this conversation, the high wires growing every single day, just very

quickly to clarify when COVID first started, you have stated that you got the vaccine. and you even really were on the news trying to promote it. Just tell me a little bit about that. Yeah, I was one of the first to have two doses of the Pfizer vaccine because I actually volunteered and helped out in a vaccine center in the north of England. And around a month later, I went on Good Morning Britain because I had convinced a friend of mine who's a well-land film director, Gorinda Chada, that the vaccine was likely to be safe

and that she should probably have it because she was a bit older and a bit higher risk because of a weight. And then, yeah, the situation, of course, the evidence changed and the situation evolved. And once that evidence came in where I was able to look at the benefits and harms and understand that data to a point where what I found was really quite shocking, I then felt it was my duty and responsibility, Dell, to get the information out to the public and policymakers to completely suspend the roll out of this MRNA technology, even what you've been discussing on the show today around the boosters and the bi-valent and all kind of thing.

It's essentially right now all risk and almost no benefit whatsoever. I mean, those are really, I know that you as a doctor, you are careful with your words, especially as a visible doctor, a family, your father, very famous in medicine, obviously puts you in the limelight. So I know that you are not making those statements carelessly. And so I appreciate that you've selected that. And so your father's experience, did that, were you already beginning to question, or was it just such a shock what happened with your father and his untimely death that it triggered that? Yeah, it was an accumulation of evidence that was coming to me to the point where I was then starting to put a jigsaw together.

And the jigsaw looked quite disturbing around the vaccine. Interestingly, Dale, so my dad had a cardiac arrest six months after having the second dose of Pfizer vaccine. to July 2021. And again, his post-mortem findings, as I said before, didn't make sense. He had two severe narrings in his arteries. He was otherwise very fit and well. Coronary imaging stuff that we'd done a few years earlier was fine.

So it didn't make any sense. At that time, I did not even link it to the vaccine. In fact, it was interesting. I remember, you know, I tweeted out when I was going up to Manchester. I live in London when I knew he'd had a cardiac arrest and he'd passed and I went there to be with him. And I tweeted out what was happening. And I remember,

at the time being very upset because somebody who I regarded as a troll on Twitter said it's a vaccine and I thought this person is crazy right I block them okay so I didn't it didn't occur to me at the time yeah at all and then it was only a few months later when evidence started to emerge which now is very clear that the MRI vaccine seemed to accelerate coronary artery disease one of the mechanisms of harm and unfortunately there are many any and everything that can go wrong with the heart is triggered or can be caused by this vaccine, right? So it was only when the evidence emerged later on that I was then able to look back and say,

ah, now that missing piece for me, which was unexplained in my dad's death, almost certainly was triggered or caused by the vaccine. Wow. Well, I'm sorry for your loss. And obviously a great man of science and he's passed it on to you. When we were talking about having you on and we had you on before you had done a study, I said, what would you, what would you say? Because what you're saying, they're very, very strong statements, you know, really only downside now in your mind, no upside to the vaccine, which puts you in opposition to virtually

still shockingly almost every health agency in the world. I know that can't be a comfortable position to be in, and we're going to talk a little about that, but there's obviously something that gives you the courage to do that, and I would have to assume it's scientific evidence. So take us through the evidence. What you think is the smoking gun or the silver bullet on this vaccine program right now? What is the most important thing that you think you can, as a scientist, you know, rest your... Absolutely.

Great question, Del. So I think if we just take a step back for a second, as doctors, and certainly this is something I've been an advocate for for many, many years is promoting ethical, evidence-based medical practice, and crucial and central for that is informed consent. So using that framework, if you like, and the purpose obviously for that of using that framework is to improve patient outcomes, right? So treat illness, manage risk factors, relief suffering. That's our job. That's our primary responsibility as a doctor. So everything I do, everything I write, everything I advocate for, always comes back to that patient in the consultation room. Can I be the best possible doctor I can be to help that

patient? Right. So everything comes down to that. Now, when it comes to this vaccine, for example, what I tried to do and what I did in this paper was break down the data so people could have an understanding about the absolute benefits for them versus the harms. When you look at Omicron, the current circulating strain, based upon real-world data in the UK, which can be used or replicated in other countries, we're able to look at the number of people per 100,000 vaccinated who were dying from COVID versus unvaccinated and give you an absolute value. So, for example, Dell, this is what we found. If you're over 80, which is the highest risk group, you have to best case scenario vaccinate 7,300 people to prevent one COVID

death. In the 80 group. In the 80 group. And that's probably best case scenario because it's not corrected for other factors such as a terminally ill 80-year-old may choose not to have the vaccine, gets COVID and dies because of COVID, right? They are higher risk of death from COVID. That's different to a healthier 80-year-old, right? But we haven't corrected for that. So not correcting for that. This is still likely best-case scenario. Okay. So in other words, if a patient came to me, and I've had these conversations with patients, say they're 82, you come to me in a conversation room, doctor, should I take this drug or the vaccine? What I should be saying to them, based upon the data we have, best of evidence, there's a way.

one in seven thousand three hundred chance. Best case scenario if you take this vaccine. The vaccine will benefit you. It will benefit you in preventing you dying from COVID. Right. That's how we should be practicing. In the highest risk group. In the highest risk group, this is from the Omicron station.

If you go back in time, it was better. Obviously, you know, probably better for people during strains that were more lethal. So the next question then is, well, what's the downside? Now, if we take a step back and if I go back to, you know, February 20, when I was on Good Morning Britain and telling people that I was based upon historical data for traditional vaccines, right? Vaccines are some of the safest pharmacological interventions. If there was no downside Dell at all, you could probably on a public health scale

justified to some degree an approach where we vaccinate as many people as possible to save the few without a downside, right? But unfortunately, that's not true. So you asked me about the highest quality level of evidence. The smoking gun, the highest quality level of evidence, came very recently, published in the journal vaccine, peer reviewed, carried out by very eminent scientists in their fields. When I talk about eminent scientists, I always think about eminence of integrity, right? These are people who are not getting funded by pharma. These people who are independent of vested interests, right?

Robert Kaplan from Stanford, Joseph Freeman, Peter Doshi, associate with the BMJ. What they were able to do, Dell, was to go back to the very original trials done for, by Moderna and Pfizer with those MRNA technologies to look at the raw data to some degree to see what were the absolute harms from the trials that led to the approval by the FDA of the vaccine and then subsequently mandates and coercion and mandates okay what did they find and this for me is just beyond comprehension to some degree that when you think about what actually they found and then what happened subsequently they found that in those trials when everything's corrected for age groups and risk factors, one was more

likely to suffer a serious adverse event from taking the vaccine, disability, life-changing event, hospitalization, than one was to be hospitalized with COVID. And remember, that's during the ancestral Wuhan strain when it was more lethal. It was still going to cause more harm than good. And that rate was at least one in 800, right? And that's over the first couple of months. we know now, certainly in my dad's case, and many other patients, by the way, I've managed many patients now with vaccine injuries. We know now that the events rates are probably much, much higher for two reasons. One is the original trials were designed in people that were generally healthier. If you're healthy, you're less like to get a side effect, okay? That's how the drug

companies conduct their business. Let's be honest. One of the things that I do here, and I've stated before, I have no medical background, right? I am a journalist. I sort of gotten a medicine and through journalism working first on the Dr. Phil show and then ultimately the doctor's television show. So I've done tons of research. But I just have an essential red flag that goes off because I think large corporations tend to cut corners and we all, you know what I mean? Humanity is what humanity is. And I think every product, if the company itself gets to do its own testing, we should be questioning the quality of that testing. And you have to assume that you may not break the law, but you're going to do a few things to pad your outcome. The number one being cherry pick and we looked at this trial. I mean,

they didn't want smokers, no drinkers, nobody with diabetes, nobody overweight. Literally, you know, go ahead and cut out 75% of the population that's going to get this and then just stick with I call like the superheroes all got selected. And look, that's the nature that they're allowed to do that. It's not breaking the law. But it's really scary when you use these super healthy people and they end up having negative outcomes to the point where you're saying where the risk, and we're talking about the population risk, not of the healthy people, of everybody, the risk was greater to be, you know, basically hospitalized as a healthy person getting this vaccine than being a regular person getting COVID anywhere in the world.

Absolutely, absolutely. And it's a really good point you raised, Dale, because you're saying that what they've done is they, they exploit the system, the system that is rigged against what's going to be good for people. patients in public health. And that comes on to another point is that how did we allow this to happen? So when I wrote the paper, I didn't just break down the data on the vaccine and clearly unequivalable evidence it needs to be pulled. Yeah.

There's not, you know, I've not had anyone rebut what I'm saying and people are just ignoring it, you know, regulators are probably just ignoring it. They're burying the heads in the sand. They don't want to talk about it. Partly because also they must also accept some responsibility for allowing this to happen, right? So it's about acknowledging their mistake, but we can't move forward constructively until we acknowledged that we got this wrong, there's been errors, and we say we are going to now implement interventions to stop this happening again. And that's what I tried to do through

my paper and explain to people that, you know, the drug companies can develop drugs, but they shouldn't be allowed to test and then hold onto the raw data. The FDA shouldn't be getting most of their funding from pharma. Right. Right. Drug company sponsored research, it has to be independent, you know, the actual findings of their, well, drug company sponsored the research shouldn't be determining medical decision making at all. No. And we've seen the history of what they've done over the years. And that's at the root of our healthcare crisis.

Over-medicated society, not just with the vaccine, is considered to be one of the leading causes of death after heart disease and cancer globally because of side effects, right? Right. So we have to think about those laws that have allowed this to happen. And when you look at it and you speak to people, they're not scientific, right, in the sense that they're not independent. They're not allowing independent science to influence clinical decision-making.

And therefore they are not also then democratic because most people are horrified when you tell them, did you know the FDA gets most of the funding from pharma? Did you know that nine out of ten of the previous FDA commissioners between 2006-2019 when they left the FDA went on to get lucrative jobs with the drug companies? It's a revolving door. Why in this country, and it's an issue in the UK and Europe as well, not to the same degree, why are political parties taking money from farmer? Why? This is shocking. You're right.

You're right. No good American citizen that I've spoken to finds this acceptable. That means this is not democratic. That means there are laws that are unjust and undemocratic and they need to be changed. A couple things I just reported earlier. The FDA on the terms of Ivermectin, I'm not going to really get into that issue with you, but this idea that they're saying, well, we, you know, what we're saying is just a recommendation. I want to think about that for a second because you just, you know, you're pointing out the FDA.

Obviously the FDA has importance though. You're in the UK. You said not as much that revolving door. What, what, from your perspective, not being in America, how important is the FDA on an international level? I mean, obviously it's sort of the pinnacle of where our health facts come from. What is its effect on international policy from your perspective? I think they have a huge influence. America in general has a huge influence on the Western world.

So I think we often adopt what's happened in the U.S. happens in the U.K. Interestingly, though, what many people, and in fact, I was shocked by this when I was, I looked at, the BMJ did an investigation about regulators around the world and what funding they get from pharma. In our country we have something called the MHRA, which is equivalent of the FDA, the medicine's health and regulatory agency. They get 86% of their funding from pharma. You get out of here.

Right? And the problem, one of the issues why this is not being addressed, Dell, is that many policymakers, senior doctors don't even understand these system failures. So for example, a few months ago, I gave a talk at a meeting during the British medical Association Conference and the British Medical Association Chair, Charne Nagpur was there. And I talked, it was, the title of my talk was the corporate capture of medicine and public health. Yes. Right. And I talk about this regulatory capture and the MHRA. He didn't believe me. I mean, he was shocked. He himself didn't know that the regulator. And you know, and he's

responsible for influencing policy and statements from the BMA, for example. He couldn't believe it, right? So a lot of the people involved in the space who've been influencing health policy, I actually think they don't fully understand the evidence and they don't fully understand that the evidence that they are getting has been distorted by pharma. You know, showed a clip earlier on by Ashish Jarre talking about, I mean, it's unbelievable. How can the White House spokesperson on COVID-19 vaccines at the moment say that if you get boosters, there's almost 100% chance you're not going to die from COVID? It's complete and total nonsense. It's just false. It's false information.

And I saw him reading from a script there. Is that script written by Pfizer? I mean, it's a serious question. Do they have him living in a cave somewhere in Siberia? I mean, I mean, at this point, at this point, you know, maybe you could have been hoodwinked or blindfolded by the media two years ago while this is all coming out. I don't understand. I mean, help me understand how someone like Jha can make that statement now.

I mean, there are proven deaths now. COVID deaths after vaccination. There are all sorts of issues. The myocarditis issue is blowing up. You know, my news feed is filled every day with these adults, you know, sudden adult death syndromes, all of these things. Now, are they all linked? Probably not.

But he just said literally unequivocally zero deaths will happen. I mean, you couldn't be further from a careful statement if you tried, right? And that's sort of his job. Yeah, I think. So to look back at it, not necessarily specifically saying that Ashish Jal has done it for these reasons, but if one understands a system failure that lead to these sorts of statements, very quickly one needs to appreciate the real scandal we've got. As doctors, we have a duty to patients in scientific integrity. But there are other interests that are going to impede with us being able to do the best for our patients with information about improving people's health.

And obviously the big player in this situation is the pharmaceutical industry. Their legal obligation is to produce profit for their shareholders, not to give you the best treatment, right? But the scandals are these. The regulators fail to prevent misconduct by industry and that doctors, institutions, and medical journals, who have a responsibility to patients and science and civic integrity, they collude with industry for financial gain. So if there is that collusion going on and pharma are really calling the shots, one needs to appreciate that the pharmaceutical industries interests are not there for the human interests. They are there just to make profit and to make money and to rig the system and to give you selective

information around benefits, for example, suppressing information on the harms, and they will do anything and everything in their power to make sure that their machine continues to be well-oiled. And that's exactly, I think statements like this from Ashish Jal are a result of this corporate capture, if you like, from these industries that are not human. Dare I say it, Dell. I don't want to be alarmist here. I say this is evidence. Many years ago, Dr. Robert Hare, forensic psychologist,

considered preeminent expert in his field who was behind influencing the original definition of psychopath. Okay, international psychiatric definition of psychopath. In the book of the corporation, the documentary done by Joel Buchan, he says when he talks about big corporations and he talks about farmer, he says if you look at the way that they operate,

they actually fulfill international diagnostic crimes. criteria for psychopathy. And when I try and understand what's going on, and people say things like, this is criminal, this is unbelievable, like I think one explanation is this, is that if you have an entity that has more and more power over our lives, big corporations, who function more often than not, or very often as psychopathic entities, you can then explain all the downstream effects in the culture. turning a blind eye, not speaking out, you know, information being suppressed.

This all, I think, comes from the root cause of the problem, which is the corporate power. Regulatory capture. Absolutely. I mean, and then we have, I don't want to get, I think we've nailed this to the wall, but you also, in terms of America, the NIH, we have doctors or scientists at the NIH holding patents to the Moderna vaccine. So you now have government literally making money off of the sale of every single vaccine that goes out. It's going to the pockets of scientists that are supposed to be a protective regulatory agency. And I think when we look at JA, we've got to recognize now that these agencies really are just doing their job, which is promoting products that they're deeply and completely involved with.

They're advertisers. They're not, you know, regulatory agencies any longer. I want to get into what I think makes you unique. And there's, look, there's a lot you have put a lot in the line. but unlike some of the doctors here that I've had on the show, you know, some really esteemed doctors, you are fairly entwined with the government. You've done a lot of work with the government in the UK. And so I'm wondering if you can give me an inside scoop

because you have the ability to pick up the phone and talk to these parliamentary, you know, leaders. And can you tell me, is there a glimmer of hope there? I mean, because here in America, we've got a few. We've got Senator Ron, John. I mean, I'm not going to try and name them, but it's literally like a handful that are really helping us in trying to get some truth out there and having hearings. But I feel like what I'm seeing in Europe and in England, seeing, you know, real statements being made. And I know you're inside there.

What is the climate inside politics now around this coronavirus vaccine? Are you feeling like you're getting some headway in having these conversations? Yeah, I think so, Dahl. I think the dial is shifted, certainly. I don't say this myself. A lot of people contacted me after my papers were published. People in cardiology departments, you know, in well-known teaching hospitals in London saying all the cardiologists have read your paper, they're like, we're not having any more boosters. You know, they get it. It made sense, you know, for them. So that's good. But for me, just coming back, understanding my approach to this to try and change the system. You know, if you look historically, you know, I've been an activist for many years. I've been behind, you know, we got a soda tax, a sugar drinks tax introduced into the UK. I was considerably campaigned behind that, almost a single voice when I started talking about the harms of excess sugar.

And one thing I learned is that, and it's not easy, but for me, there are anything that harms my patient, right, is an injustice. Yeah. Right. And it's an injustice for the population in general. People when they realize it, they think this is wrong, right, if information they're receiving about their health is going to Cause them to deteriorate mentally physically as opposed to the opposite It's deliberately done. People don't like that, right? People get angry about that kind of thing So what do you do? You make the injustice visible if you want to change the system. The ideal scenario in normal circumstances is the use of mainstream media

Mainstream media still has a huge influence. Yeah, what you're doing with the highway a massive influence in terms of people you can and you know, get this, disseminate this information out to. So the strategy for me is dissemination of truth, of honest, transparent information to as many people as possible, use of mainstream media. But in that process, you hit the, there's something called the triangle that moves a mountain. It's an approach structure that came from Thailand.

We have it right here. It's drawn up. The triangle that moves a mountain. And I think it's a really nice way of thinking about, right? So you need the information to be clear and concrete. As a doctor, I want to disseminate information. that's going to be truthful about people's health. And you can do that through getting out to the,

for the social movement, getting out to the people, which can be through social media, mainstream media, but simultaneously getting the political involvement too, because ultimately politicians have a huge influence over our laws, you know, how we live, and we have to be able to engage with them if we're going to change the system for the better. So in that process, certainly when it came to, you know,

the paper that I wrote, I had already built up a network over years as an activist, with politicians on both sides, the left, the right, with media, with journalists. It's been the hardest thing that I've ever been, you know, in this particular instance. Normally, if I write a research paper, automatically, D. And I've done this over the years in many different, when it's about whether it was cholesterol or statins or reversing heart disease or the obesity epidemic, or low-carb diets, you know, helping to reverse type two diabetes.

Almost every single time I've written something, I put, I throw the kitchen sink it to make sure he gets into the mainstream news. And almost every single paper that I've written in the last 10 years, I've got it either in a British newspaper or on the television, right? This one was the hardest. I worked with the journalist. I won't name who it is. He was a good guy.

It was all set up as his exclusive, right? And literally, last minute, the day before the, you know, when the press release was written for him, with doctor's support, he said, I can't do it, right? And then it was a question of, okay, let me just try and get it on social media. I mean, we spoke on the high wire. It was covered in the Times of India. It was covered in Spanish newspaper. So it was getting some traction.

Fox News, for example. So that's good. But coming back to... But it's unlike every other thing you've ever done as a doctor, right? I mean, here you clearly see the science is clear. You're standing by. The journalist knows it's true. And that journalist is still coming back to you're saying, I'm sorry.

We can't publish. Do you have any idea? I mean, I don't understand that. Because here, I would say, we know there's direct funding going into advertising. My understanding, we have direct consumer advertising for drug companies. Is it true that that doesn't exist in the UK? Not so much in the UK, not at all.

It's interesting when I spoke to journalists. So on that, no, interestingly, and I'll name them. The Times newspaper did a detail interview after my paper was published, okay? And even asked me to respond to and rebut the counter that was coming from organizations like the British Imminological Society and the British Heart Foundation. They had no legs to stand on. And what they were saying was not questioning my science. It was just very bizarre denial, right?

It never got published, extensive interview. BBC Radio Scotland, a journalist there, who's followed my work, did a long interview with me, talked through everything, never went to air. The Daily Mail, same sort of thing. It's really interesting. It's getting stopped at a high level, right? And it's never happened to me before. My understanding speaking to journalists friends of mine is there seems to be some government

pressure on those newspapers. The government is saying you can't go there. Right. Right. And obviously we know governments are colluding with industry or they feel that this is we're almost on a war footing. You know, this is almost like going back to the Vietnam War, right? We look back in retrospect and it was obviously most Americans I think realized that was a huge mistake, right? But at the time, activists speaking out, they got smeared. Right. You know, I watched a documentary not so long ago on Martin Luther King and he was one of the first people to speak out against the Vietnam War. And he was one of the first people to speak out, and was accusing the newspapers of treason, right?

I think we're almost in a similar type of situation to some level with this vaccine. But I think the situation is changing. I think more and more of the public know. We've seen, obviously, data coming in, people aren't going for their boosters. Right, 11% we just said today, which is, I mean, to our audience out there,

I mean, and I think that's why sharing your videos, your talks, the work that we're doing here, there's a groundswell. The media is not helping us at all. Mainstream media is clearly bought, whether it's by industry or by government and those two are so intertwined as we've already discussed. But let's take it full circle. In that mountain you talked about, you know, in order to really move something, we do need this political movement.

And so you've had some, you've gotten into speak to the parliament and discuss. Tell me about that. Yeah, I was invited to speak at an all-parliamentary group that was set up to represent and support people who'd been vaccine injured, led by a conservative party MP, he calls Sir Christopher Chope. He invited me to speak there. Interestingly, there probably would have been a lot more MPs, but 15 minutes before I'm going into the room to give the talk.

And there was members of the public and vaccine injured that were invited as well, and journalists. It was when the then Prime Minister Liz Truss announced her resignation. So Parliament was in chaos, and many MPs weren't able to come, but about half a dozen of them did come. And for me, because the data is so clear, and I walk people through it.

And in fact, in some ways, I think because I had the vaccine, Dell, and I went on TV and said it was safe. I think it allows people similar to me, including doctors, to give them a bit of a safe space, say, look at this guy, he's had it, he promoted it. He's not coming from a bias. No, he's changed his mind because the evidence has changed. I think it allows them to be a bit more comfortable to listening to me and then maybe acting upon it. Are you suggesting that I should get the vaccine so people listen to me more? It's not going to have it. No, listen. Obviously, you made the right decision with hindsight, right?

But when I gave this talk, it was interesting. I could see the look on the faces of those MPs. It was like the penny dropped. Because I didn't just take them through the data. I also explained how they had been duped. Right? And they didn't like it. And one of them is called Danny Kruger, who was a quite prominent MP.

He was David Cameron's former speech writer when David Cameron was prime minister. Very intelligent guy, very well respected, very measured. And then I learned a couple of weeks after my talk, he'd got up in a separate Westminster debate and actually said that he mentioned me and the data that I provided to him, but actually went up and put his hands up and good on him. And he said, listen. I think we have this clip, actually. Let's play this here. This is we're talking about. It is an essential principle of medical ethics that people need to be able to give their informed consent for any treatment.

And I do worry about how we can say that consent was fully informed in all. cases. Throughout there has been not, I wouldn't say deliberate, but there has been some misinformation that turned possibly accidental in favour of the vaccine. We can tell this with hindsight. Perhaps the most egregious, and the doctor that my honourable friend mentioned earlier presented on this to the APBG last week, Dr Malhotra, the claim that the vaccine is 95% effective. But what that means is simply the relative risk, not the actual absolute risk, reduction in risk to an individual, the absolute risk reduction is really less than 1%. There was a widespread claim that the vaccine stops transmission so people should take the jab to protect other people.

We were all told that. We all believed that for many months. Last month we heard from Pfizer that their vaccine was never tested to see whether it would stop transmission. Actually, he went on a little bit further. Obviously the effect had been so deep. He has some sort of personal regret from the talk that Dr. Mahalach had given. This is what that sounded like. We still do have, I'm afraid, much to. I'm afraid much to ask questions to ask ourselves and even much to be ashamed of. I'm particularly ashamed, and I put it on record in hindsight, of my own vote to dismiss the care workers who didn't want to take the vaccine.

And I very much hope that the 40,000 care workers who lost their jobs can be reinstated and, indeed, compensated. You know, I mean, so clearly you had an effect. You know, we're seeing this, probably just saying the others in the room. And that's not lost to me. When I've got to talk, I've been given, you know, all around the country and people come up to me like, how could anyone refute what you just said? I think we're doing the same. I'm showing some of your science, a lot of the science that's out there. It's just, it's really irrefutable at this point.

I mean, you're either just a denier of the facts or you know the facts and you're talking about it. But, you know, how do we explain, or let's, let's tell you. take it out of the politics now let's get to you know the lay person the people watching the show watching shows that are telling them the opposite is the truth there's so much information people say just don't know how to move forward I can't imagine you ever imagine that you would find yourself in position where you are going to decide to take a position that goes against as I said before I think almost every regulatory health agency in the world that can't be comfortable for you but for the layperson what do we say to the the future of how

you handle science and medicine yeah if we can't trust our regulatory agencies yeah a couple of things on that Dell first and foremost interestingly I've cut this the scale of this is probably bigger than anything I've ever done yeah but I have actually been here before okay so 2013 I wrote an editorial in the British Medical Journal was peer reviewed and it was called saturated fat is not the major issue so I'm a cardiologist that comes out and says commits medical heresy at the time. Having looked at this data,

trying to understand why we hadn't combated heart disease, what was driving obesity epidemic, and I said saturated fat, butter, cheese, eggs, all that kind of stuff, does not, eating saturated fat, the evidence suggests does not cause heart disease. We should focus on sugar. I said we have over-exaggerated cholesterol

as a major risk factor for heart disease. Imagine all these government bodies around the world for years have said the primary focus or the primary way of us beating heart disease is to get people's cholesterol as well as possible. I said this was not scientific, one not based upon any good evidence, or it was flawed. And it was over-prescribed statin drugs, which are the most lucrative drugs in the history of medicine, right? A trillion-dollar industry, possibly a billion people around the world prescribed statins.

In 800 words, I wrote this piece in the BMJ. They press released it. It became front page of three British newspapers, butter is back. I was on CNN International, Fox News, Chicago. It became a big news story. But there was a huge backlash, huge backlash. I was having to deal with the news. nutritionists who said that, you know, I've committed blasphemy about saturated fat and diet.

I had the statin industry and all their proponents going after me. So I've kind of been there before. I mean, I looked in this, I covered this when I was on the doctors. And, you know, it was the American Heart Association, screaming bloody murder. Yeah, you know, because they were promoting this idea, which I'm sure you must have discussed, which is we now know that there were false papers written funded by the sugar industry to make, you know, the cholesterol and fats that the culprit instead of looking at them. and huge funding and fraud that's sort of now more visible, but there's still people there,

I mean, there's still obviously, like, I think it's almost like one and two adults in America's on a staten or close to that really, really high numbers. Yeah, no, absolutely. So I think because I'd gone through that process and been essentially proven right and the evidence has changed

and known what it was like to be in that situation at the time, and of course it was stressful, in some ways, because I've gone through it, maybe I'm a bit more thick-skinned, right? As a public health advocate, there's a lesson that as soon as your work threatens an industry or an ideological cabal, you will be attacked, sometimes relentlessly and viciously. So what's the lesson?

Grow a rhinoceros hide. Right. But for me, you see, Dell, I think it goes a bit further than that. It's about obviously speaking the truth, understanding that it's not safe to speak the truth, it's not safe to speak to speak, but I think about it more rationally, it's even less safe to not speak the truth. Because if you don't speak the truth, the problem just gets bigger and bigger and almost unsurmountable. So for me this is about being rational more than being courageous

in trying to talk about this. Did you have a sense jumping in here that because there are careers at risk here in America I just had Dr. Peter McCullough on the show. The boards are trying to pull his certifications or have or he's trying to fight them back. Many doctors under assault here in America. Did you have a sense that this topic was going to be so big that you could be putting your career in jeopardy? Yes, absolutely. And I've had some backlash behind the scenes. Even before this, I was actually played a big role

in getting the mandates overturned for NHS staff. So once I realized there was a problem, you know, with the vaccine and the heart risk about a year ago before I published my paper. I then, you know, I lobbied. I was on mainstream BBC. I was on, you know, Sky News. I was getting messages to Secretary of Health

through the chair of the BMA and managed to get it overturned. But in that process, Dell, oh, behind the scenes, I was getting medical establishment bodies, having complaints sent to me as an anti-vaxxer, spreading disinformation. Even before this, I mean, I have actually lost well before the vaccine issue. I've lost three NHS jobs because of my public advocacy on heart disease, pushing lifestyle, saying that statins are over-prescribed. basically being an advocate for informed consent has resulted me losing three jobs in my career.

They haven't been specific, but things I've said suddenly your service is no longer required. So I've had to go, you know, navigate through the system. But I also still believe, and, you know, in these situations, I think it's still very empowering. When you speak truth, you'd be amazed how many people come out of the woodwork to help you and support you. Or people who didn't feel comfortable or were afraid to speak out, suddenly feel a bit more emboldened. and they realize that there's an injustice going on. So for me, I just keep going with that. You know, that's what keeps me going.

But how do you, I mean, I think that there's a lot of doctors watching right now. We have a lot, they're writing all the time. I'm glad they're out there. But they're like, Del, I can't speak out. I could lose my job. What makes you different there? Like, what, you've gone the other direction. Like, I have to, there's got to be something inside you that says,

I have to speak out. Where does that courage come from for those doctors that are watching? for those doctors that are watching right now. It's interesting. So a couple of things. One is I would say, if we're not allowed to speak out for our patients, for me, the title of doctor loses its meaning. I want doctors to think about that a little bit and look in the mirror and think.

They're damaging their own soul, right? By doing that, they're damaging what medicine should be about. They're damaging the whole ethos behind medical ethics by not speaking out, right? I think they need to understand that. In terms of me personally, Dahl, I think maybe it's, I suspect it's a combination. The fact is as well as brought up. You know, I had two parents who were very just amazing human beings, but my dad always taught me to speak out to, you know, stand up to bullies. He'd done that throughout his life and his career.

He was a junior doctor student, medical student and junior doctor activist in India. He was arrested twice by the Indian government for speaking out against government corruption. So, you know, that was something I observed in him as a person. For both my parents, they instilled into me, your primary duty is always to put the community first, do things for the community. So I think I got that from them. I went to a really amazing school called Manchester Grammar School. You know, we were taught, excelled in academics, but it was always underpinned about doing the right thing about having values. Our motto in Latin was sapera outa.

It means dare to be wise, right? But you also have to be wise enough to dare as well. So I got that also from my schooling, I think, as well. And I think that just makes me the doctor I am. I just, yeah, I think one also, when one looks at all of this, ancient wisdom tells us to lead the good and happy life. We also have to act with virtue. And I think the society, and partly because of these system failures as well,

you know, the opposite, we talked about psychopaths earlier. The opposite of a psychopath is someone who is an altruist or who's compassionate, right? And it's about acting with virtue. And I think if all of us together, even at the grassroots, behaved in a more virtuous way and thought about even our children and what values are they growing up with, we've got this social media addiction, we've got a lot more materialism that's come into our lives,

a lot more individualism. That actually is taking us away from what it really means to be human and to lead a life that's going to be optimal for our mental and physical health. We are social beings. Speaking the truth also is about being able to trust each other. Societies can't function cohesively unless we trust each other. We can't trust each other if people are not speaking the truth. So I look at it from that perspective as well, a bit more of a kind of spiritual side.

On that point of trust, I mean one of the things that I grapple with, you know, and the government, my government is making statements about people like me, those that you're creating distrust in the government. You're creating distrust. You know, in the statements you're making, you know, you were creating essentially distrust in the the MHRA, is that right, FDA, we're all doing it. Because there has to be now, right, at this moment. So what do you think is the pathway for, as again, back to your average person.

It's not in a position of power. They don't get to change the medical system or the doctors. What can they do? I mean, what is your advice as a doctor in the climate today? Where I, you know, people say, you're telling me, me I should be listening to you over the CDC or NIH and Tony Fauci and I would say you know no not me necessarily but all the doctors I'm having on my show all the world-renowned

scientists all of the studies that are being done by some of the greatest scientists in the world you should be listening to them and certainly putting it on the table in front of yourself and start saying there is something I need to weigh out here I'm only getting a propaganda space from one side what is the other side saying and try to come to some conclusion, but how do we move forward? I mean, this is a really scary time for your, for your average person that just wants to get on with their life and people say, I just trust my doctor, my doctor's doing what's right, and they're listening to the FDA and the CDC, and they're giving them good information. What do we, how do we get, how do we handle this world

we live in? Yeah, I think people need to take a step back and think, hold them, first and foremost, and this, we're all, we all have a collective responsibility in this, Dell, but if you look at our health agencies, public health bodies, One of the ways I even try and get my medical profession to take a step back and think What is our role in the fact that we have essentially worsening health for most people in the Western world right now? In England we've had a stalling a life expectancy the last 10 years in the US I understand in fact your life expectancy is going down a bit But what's worse is people living longer in chronic disease in poor health right? So if just take I'm not saying it's all their fault But if our government agencies were doing their job problems

Why is the health of the American population getting worse? So let's just start from that, right? Let's try and get into the roots of it all. And I think beyond finger pointing, I think it's about engaging in a discussion with those people, compassionately if we can, to make them acknowledge that they are, this is a system failure rather than individual,

pointing fingers at individuals. We're all part of the system. We have to all work together to change the system. But coming back to the point you made earlier about how do people how do we engage in dialogue with many people out there, even friends and family members of ours, I suspect? This has divided many people across the world, right?

How do we get into a discussion to get them more enlightened or maybe thinking more about how we are thinking around this? And I think we have to acknowledge two psychological phenomenon in relation to the pandemic, Dell, first and foremost. The first one is fear, right? Fear clouds critical things. thinking. Many of us from the beginning of the pandemic and still now have been gripped by fear that we've never experienced our lives, right, around COVID. At the beginning, it was clearly

devastating, especially for vulnerable and elderly people as a virus, right? It was awful. And many older people are still probably gripped with that PTSD, right? So I think acknowledging that means that we've got to communicate better and it's going to be a little bit harder to get through to people. But you start from a place of compassion and you say, listen, I get it. I understand. I was fearful as well, right? how's that been for you? So I think that's one way to get through to people. The second bit is, which is a bit more challenging, is this concept called willful blindness, right? It's when human beings, and we're all capable of this in different circumstances, Del. When human beings turn a blind eye to the truth in order to feel safe, avoid conflict, reduce anxiety, and protect prestige.

And I think what's going on right now, why public health authorities are other, whether the CDC or the FDA or even the American government, are not acknowledging this. They're bearing the head in the sand because for them it's a huge, it's something that they cannot fathom that ultimately they will feel that, hold on, we coerced, we pushed people, we mandated this, and now you're telling us it was a huge mistake

and we've probably, probably caused more harm than good. And the vaccine probably should never have been approved in the first place. But the only way to address it is with the cold hard facts. And bearing our heads in the sand means the problem is only going to get worse. And the system isn't going to get better unless we address it head on. And it may be the vaccine now. But let's say, for example, if we allow this to continue, who knows what's next?

It may be that you can't travel unless if you're over 40 and you're not taking a statin drug, for example, right? That's where we're heading. Or as I've said to the New York Times and Washington Post when they're questioning me, do you really want to live in a world where the pharmaceutical industry gets to, you know, be a crony of someone, maybe a president, a prime minister, say, hey, declare an emergency, no, and I will put out a brand new product and we won't do any safety testing. Some new technology that's never been injected into human beings before will rush it out saying it's an emergency. Everyone will be mandated by the government to take it. And if there's any problems, we'll check in with you later.

I mean, and I've said to them, do you really want to live in a world where, I mean, pharmaceutical products aren't tested? Or let me ask you this question. Did you, do you think every safety test ever done on all the drugs we've taken our lives was just a waste of time? Because if not, we should be aligned right now. We should be aligned as journalists. We should be aligned as doctors that even if, out of sheer dumb luck, this vaccine ended up not being dangerous or, you know, more negative than positive, if we continue this approach

towards medicine and allowing an industry that loses court cases for billions of dollars every year for having lied about safety and efficacy over and over again, whether there's drugs, you know, biocs, you name it. But if we continue this as the pattern that we are going to push out products without proper safety testing and let the government do that upon us, we're not going to, I don't think we're going to live very long on this planet. I don't think we have a long time as a species, especially products like vaccines, which gives you this right to inject every human on the planet. Well, in order to protect the tiny group of people that are really at risk. The rest of you all need to get this. I mean, this concept is, is terrifying, especially when

you put rushing science behind it. Absolutely. I think you've hit the nail in the head dead dell. People need to understand that the current trajectory we were going down with all this misinformation is one towards oblivion. I mean, ultimately, truth is what's going to redeem the world from hell. Yeah. We're heading towards hell. Yeah. Let's not be on any illusion here. I agree. And I think that we have the power to change that trajectory, but by giving people the confidence to be able to speak the truth, but to even speak the truth if they know it's going to, in a short term, going to give them a backlash. But if we work together collectively, then we have, you know, democracy is true meaning of democracy's people power. The real power is with the people. It is.

And if we, you know, look after each other and work as a group for the sake of humanity, without point. pointing fingers, right, and saying, listen, we're all to some degree responsible for the system problem, right? The system failure. Let's work together to fix it. Then we can at least go through this situation of chaos, pathological chaos, to try and get to a point of order with the least amount of damage possible, right? Because I remember, Del, and I'm going to say this out loud. I, a year ago, I was over in the States, after I started looking at the vaccine data, realized what the problem was. I was speaking to my cousin in Indiana, and he's a physiotherapist, and we had a conversation

about it at depth. Joe Rogan at the time was putting out, you know, Robert Malone's podcast, Gina McCuller. And he just looked at me and said, if what you say is true that this was deliberate, you know, in terms of the original data was showing that it was going to do harm than good, and people died necessarily my biggest fear in the United States is it's going to get violent. I said we have to do everything we can to stop that happening because it can generate so much anger. I've lost my you know my best friend, the last surviving member of my immediate family, my poor father almost certainly was killed by this vaccine and I've had moments

of course of really profound deep anger inside me but I know that those emotions are not good for me and they're not going to have do anything constructive moving forward, right? So I can speak and say, listen, people are going to realize what the truth is. They're going to find out that Uncle Bob or whatever else had a cardiac arrest that he didn't need to have the vaccine. They're going to realize that. But we have to think, how do we actually change the system to reduce or minimize further harm? And that means not acting in a fashion that's going to cause people to get hurt. I agree. I mean, look, I believe in peace, everything. Like they're trying to put words upon the work that we're doing.

There's, you know, the governments are trying to scare people. But I want to say this. That I believe, as I said earlier on in the show, the cat's out of the bag, Jeannie's out of the bottle. There are too many brilliant scientists like yourself in very strong positions. Even Dr. Peter McCullough, I have to believe on the other side of all of this, you are the ones that when it becomes totally clear and obvious what has happened here, And I think that we're on the verge.

That is really starting to open up. All the anecdotal stories out there are adding to some sense of a body of information now. And then we have what we know from the trials more of that information. We've sued. We've won more Pfizer data's coming. We know what it's clear what this whole mess is going to turn out like. So I think we're going to see a position where even if you've been sidelined for a moment, the world is going to have to say to the Mahontras and the McCullovs and the Maloney

and the Ryan Coles of the world, hey, look, our bad, we need someone to lead us out of this. We need the ones that had this right all the way from the beginning. So the more that you speak out, the more others like you, I think, should be defining their positions standing on that team for the world that I think leads us out of this. So, you know, we could go on, you know, I would love to pick your brain on all the anecdotal things that are happening on. But I think I want to leave it with this because it is clear there's so much to be excited about hearing your voice.

But one of the things that you're really, is really important to you right now is that even on the high wire, I know we have people that have gotten the vaccine. And when I speak now, it is clear that many people, you know, have been misled in one way or another. We're all a part of the same world family here.

We want to help everybody. And one of the messages you're trying to get out is whether vaccinated or not, there are real things we've learned about health, both before, but through this, risks to COVID. So tell me a little bit about that. Like what does a person do now?

There are threats that there's going to be a resurgence of some new variant of COVID. It could be possible for all sorts of different scientific reasons. RSVs out of their flus are coming. And look, we live in a petri dish. The world is got, there are millions of viruses and bacteria all over the planet, and monkeys, animals. At some point we're going to always be coming in contact with something. what do we do instead of fear cannot be the space we live in we you know in some ways all of

this knowledge has has the world changed since we were a caveman or like what has really changed I mean we used to be carefree and we're becoming less and less carefree are the things we can do with our own health so that we can free up our mind to worry about other things yeah I know it's a really good point we should look at this what can we learn and move forward positively, both in terms of risk of infection and poor outcomes from any kind of, you know, respiratory infection, for example, or other infections. And my work has been trying to get to the roots of how do we optimize our mental and physical health. So the real big issue in America, in the UK, in many parts of the world right now, is people are living with poor metabolic health.

In layman's terms, they have excess body fat that is going to be a risk to them. whether it's about increasing the risk of heart disease, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, even cancer and dementia and dementia. And the root of this problem is poor metabolic health. The good news, Dell, is that very quickly, just from dietary changes alone, you can optimize those risk factors. I manage many patients in my clinic in this way, get them off their pills, and they are shocked that even just within four weeks of changing diet,

and I'll give you some specifics on that in a minute, their risk factors get better. But more importantly, a lot of what we do as doctors, how we want to live is to improve the quality of our lives and patients' lives. And they feel their quality of life gets better quite quickly and they can't believe it because they break the addictions to these so-called foods that are damaging them. So the big issue in lifestyle right now is the consumption of ultra-processed foods, right? So more than half of the calories in the British diet, probably 60% of all the calories consumed

in the American diet come from ultra-processed foods. What are these? Industrial formulations, usually packed. packaged foods and the definition, so they're normally a combination of ingredients, sugar, refined carbohydrates, unhealthy, yours. Simple rule of thumb, if it has, if you can count five or more ingredients on a packaged food, and this includes even bread, package bread, it's ultra-processed, don't eat it. Food industry have designed these foods to become hyper-palatable, encourage overconsumption, interfere with appetite, and to some degree addictive. Once you break that addiction

and you're going back to eating whole foods, very quickly people notice their health getting mentally and physically. So that's one of the things people can do. So simple. I mean, it's so simple. Absolutely. Absolutely. If you are seeing that like, and especially the words you can't pronounce in a paragraph, needs to go into garbage. Yeah, if your grandmother wouldn't recognize the ingredients, don't eat it. Right. That's what it is. Right. Let's go back to the basics. Right, right. Soldier processed food. Other simple things, I mean, just, you know, taking moderate exercise, you don't have to be pounding it in the gym, right? You know, I studied a lot of these areas around the world with high longevity, these communities where people live to 100. They're not on

pills are really healthy. Brisk walk, 30 minute brisk walk a day. That's it. These people weren't pounding it in the gym. You can go to the gym. Listen, I'm very active, but keep it simple. It doesn't cost you any money to do that. And then other simple things like, are you getting at least seven hours sleep and if you're not, why not good quality sleep? How are you controlling your stress? Are you meditating? Are you engaging in more social interaction? I know with lockdown that's been difficult. One of the things I tell my cardiac patients, and partly because the only evidence we have or the best evidence we have the reversing heart disease comes from meditation, right? But one of the things I ask them is, are you with your friends and family, like simple things like,

are you hugging enough, right? Honestly, I prescribe hugging to some of my cardiac patients and couples and say, listen, I want you to do a 20 second hug at least 10 times a day. You know, these are simple things that we seem to have forgotten, but we're social creatures. And when you look at what is the most important factor behind happiness, according to psychological research, in human beings, it's meaningful relationships, it's social connection. Let's go back to those basics, right? Quality of life improves, reduces stress levels, reduces your risk of disease as well. And that's what we need to be talking about.

It's such brilliant advice and so simple. It's something I've been working on myself, my own health. And it was doctors I was talking to that were treating COVID right up front. They're saying, look, obesity is really the major issue here. Diabetes, these things are really contributing to that high risk. group was a very you know in the end a fairly low death rate I would say across the world when we look at the work done by John E.Needys but I think that is such an important takeaway and it sort of comes back to what all this is doing which is it's driving us back to community like who do we

who's in our community that we trust who do we interact with who are we hugging you know back to our local farmers back to simpler eating you know you know whole foods natural food all of these things I think are going to make us a stronger people in the end. I really do believe in some ways, and I guess just to sort of finish it up, I think we're going through the birth pangs, really of sort of all the corruption, the industrial takeover of governments, of regulatory agencies, all of that, this is going to blow that all wide. It's going to be so clear to so many people over the next couple of years, hopefully sooner than later, that we really got off track. And I believe we can use this momentum, this energy, some of it negative, to really sort of, you know, birth a better

world, a better world of science. Because as you're talking about right now, when I hear it, and something that when I was working the doctors, I used to complain about, like, we would do stories, we'd hear like Harvard Medical School out of eight years, you'd get like 10 minutes of credit time dedicated to nutrition, right? Like, what's causing the disease, right? So much more work going there. I would say where medicine fails us, it's brilliant in the ER, it's brilliant in surgeries and things that are needed to sort of put us back together. It really sucks at making us healthy. And it sure would be great to see, you know, doctors and medicine and hospitals starting to discuss food as medicine. Absolutely. You can't fix lifestyle and social problems with

pills. And that's where we need to go back to the root cause of it. Absolutely. You know, one of the things I tell my patients as well. In general, good health does not come out of a medicine bowl. We've got some great stuff that we do for emergencies, but most of the problems now, chronic disease management are driven by lifestyle. Therefore, the solution has to be a lifestyle intervention. Awesome. Well, you do a lot of speaking on this. You've written articles and books and all that. So how do we follow the work that you're doing? It's the best way to track. Sure. Yeah. So I'm on social media, on Twitter as Dr. Asim Alhotra. I'm on Instagram and Facebook, Lifestyle Medicine Doctor. I have a website, Dr.osim.com.

So that's, yeah, people can look at my work there and see what I'm up to. And yeah, I've written a few books. My latest book is called A Statin Free Life. Oh great. A revolutionary plan to prevent heart disease without the use of statin pills. Really important. I think for a lot of Americans. So don't tell me you didn't need to read that book.

And then if we want to support the work that you're doing, is Patreon? Yeah. So, I mean, I'm as an activist, and this is part and parcel of it, you know, 80% of the things I do, even my writings, I don't get financially paid for. And that's fine. I accept that, but if people can support whatever else, I have a Patreon site, and then people can, you know, I put blogs on there and that kind of thing that's just stuff, so people can voluntarily contribute to that as how that helps. Well, I love the fact that you made the trip here to America that and just anybody that speaks to truth the way that you are, you really give me a sense of hope. When people ask, like Del, how are you so hopeful? I get to meet people like you.

And there's just, I just don't believe. The light and the radiance, the truth that's shining from you, it's infectious. it truly is, I think, shifting the world as we know it. So keep up the good work. You have our complete support and please keep us abreast of any shifts in this conversation, anything we can do to help your work as you move forward. Thank you, Delo. It's been an honor and pleasure to speak to today. Thank you. You take care. All right, well, look, you know, one of the ways to figure out, like, who is your community, you know? Who are people that you could sit down and talk about nutrition with? One of the best ways to do that is to maybe wear like a little bit of a like, hey, I'm on your team.

You know how you do that? It's all about how you high wire. Hey, Highwire insiders. Do you walk down the street and get recognized for your high wire here? Oh my gosh. You watch the Highwire? Love it.

Do you sport your High Wire t-shirt in public to start a meaningful conversation? Get vaccinated. Don't you mean get vaccinated? No, I mean vaccinated. Let me tell you why. If you like to wear your Be Brave ball cap around town or sip your organic iced machil latte from the new High Wire Cork Tumblr, send us a quick video rocking your favorite

highwire look and explain what it means to you to support the work we do by stepping out on the highwire of life in our merch. Be brave! Hey Del, we love wearing a highwire here because every time we do, we know where to find our tribe. Email us your video at How I Highwire at the Highwire. and join the thousands of Highwire Insiders who find their tribe simply by being brave. Hashtag how I highwire. Well, I think we've got some new merch to be going up over the next few days to deal with the holidays. It's a great gift to give people so that we can all find each other in this community.

Folks, you know, they're on the run. And we have done our job every day. You've been sharing the Highwire. You've been getting the information out. You've been standing your ground in your workplaces. You've been standing your ground in the hospitals and in the government agencies that you work for. It is, you know, as we sort of draw into the final month of this year, I'm so excited in coming out of Thanksgiving, celebrating all of the victories that we've experienced here.

Sure. I mean, this has been horrible. And I know there are more horrors to come as we are going through what I keep describing as the birth pangs. But we certainly have got to celebrate our wins. and we've got to celebrate our winners. Those people that stay in their ground that don't have to change their tune and slide around and say,

oh, we never meant that. Why were you ever listening to us? How about those that stood their ground? One of those heroes, I think we've talked about him in sports, is Jochovic. And we just, Novak Djokovic, who was not able to compete.

He is literally at the top of his game. I don't think there's any argument. He's the best tennis player in the world. Novak Djokovic wins record, tying sixth ATP finals title earns record 4.7 million. So whenever they finally allow this guy to play, he kicks everyone's butt. For him, he's a great representation of what it means to be healthy. I'm sure his diet's amazing. And he has stated to the world that he's not going anywhere near this vaccine so much so that he put his legacy on the line. This guy could be sure.

shattering every record there is, and yet he is standing his ground, as he said, there's nothing more important than me being allowed to control what goes into my body, and that is a victory that we should all be celebrating. And when you ask yourself, what should I do in this moment? I want you to remember the Dr. Massim Mahaltras of the world, the Novak Djokovic that have put it all on the line, saying things like, what am I as a representation? What am I as a doctor, if I am not doing what's best for my patient, but towing some political line or some pharmaceutical line, I am no longer a doctor. So therefore, if you took that license, it didn't mean anything anyway. It doesn't matter to be the greatest athlete in the world if you destroy

the body of that athlete or certainly don't allow me to treat my body the way that I want to and have in the success that I'm having. This is a free country in America. We're supposed to be the Beacon of Light and Hope in the World. We have some amazing people right now we're working with. Next week, Senator Ron Johnson, by the way, is having some more hearings that are going to be taking place. I think there's a private hearing on Tuesday and then on Wednesday a public hearing. That will be available right here at the highwire.com. And by the way, you don't have to write this all on your calendar. If you are simply a part of our newsletter, then you will be told highwire is going live. All you have to do right now is scroll down on the page at the highwire.com. It costs.

You lost you nothing at all. We don't even care about all you freeloaders out there. This is free to you. Just type in your email and subscribe so that you will get all the evidence, all the science. You'll get Dr. Malhotra study on Monday. It will be in your hand so you can see exactly what he means by the evidence that has him saying. There is only a downside of this vaccine. No upside.

You'll have the science you can hand to your friends. That is part of the transparency that we have here at the high wire. So we love the fact that Senator Ron Johnson's, you know, on our side in the political system. We love to celebrate. As I said, if there's Democrats out there, please send your videos our way. We'll celebrate you too. And to Ron DeSantis out there, man, just keep up the great work. We love how outspoken you've been on this topic.

So different than those that are backtracking and sliding and slipping around. You know, take it to heart. Think about your health right now. You go into the new year, this is a really good time to say, look, there are always going to be viruses and bacteria. How am I going to be the warrior for my family? How am I going to be the warrior for humanity and this species if I'm not taking care of myself? So take care of yourself. Get healthy.

It's something that we're focused on a lot on our team here. We've all been very busy. There's lots of excuses. It's time to personalize this and make a difference in your own life. And I think really it's time to start hugging one of just. other a little bit more. I mean, if it's 20 seconds, you know, five times a day, how many of us are falling short of that? I can tell you there's one guy living up in Canada, I am sure, is falling short of that. He's the guy that keeps having to backtrack because he is lying to the world in Trudeau,

I'm talking about, obviously. Need more hugs, buddy. Need more hugs. How about get in with the truth? Stop towing the line for the W.E.F. Do what's right for the people. If you don't, we're just going to sing songs about you. This is the high wire. I am so excited about all we've achieved. I love all the help and support we're getting from out there. More of you can help. We can do more. Greater good is ahead of us. Stay positive, stay vigilant, stay loud, stay informed, and we'll see you next week. pulpit ready to abuse this just in another coward in control scared by the sound so he hides in a hole he'll call on the guards to trample the crowd because the louder they get they silence his power shame blame no matter what they say don't let the bastard get to you he's gonna try to shut us down but we'll stay

our ground a this just in he'll lose this just in another villain on the screen acting like a hero for all the drama queens this just in another black painted face lathered in his virtue enslaving every race he'll send out the troops and freeze the account says the freedom you get is what he makes allowed. Shame, blame, no matter what they say, don't let the bastard get to you. He's going to try to shut us down, but we'll stand our ground. A, this just in Hill Lou. Look in his eyes, you can see he's afraid, so fragile inside while the town's on parade. Shame, blame, no matter what they say, don't let the bastard get to you He's gonna try to shut us down, but we'll stand this Justin, he'll lose No, he'll never shut us down, cause we'll stand our ground, hey, this just in you lose