The Megyn Kelly Show - Mace's Quest to Protect Women's Spaces, and RFK vs. Corporate Media and the Swamp, with Casey Means and Vinay Prasad | Ep. 949

Episode Date: November 20, 2024

Megyn Kelly begins the show by discussing Rep. Nancy Mace's proposal to make sure women's restrooms at the Capitol stay exclusively for biological women, the importance of maintaining privacy and safety for women in public spaces, the solution of gender neutral bathrooms, why now is the time to speak out about protecting women-only spaces from biological men, how Speaker Johnson found the right way to describe the issue and the nuance of it, and more. Then Dr. Vinay Prasad, creator of DrVinayPrasad.com on Substack, joins to talk about what we now know about the COVID vaccines harming young men through myocarditis, the need for a nuanced look at vaccines generally, RFK Jr.'s claims about the potential dangers of fluoride in drinking water, the way other European countries don't put fluoride in their water, RFK's actual views on vaccines and where he's in line with other countries there, the truth about raw milk, and more. Then Dr. Casey Means, author of "Good Energy," joins to discuss RFK's bold plans for reforming the Department of Health and Human Services, his three clear areas of focus, the establishment in DC and in the corporate media terrified of what he'll do, the challenges he'll face from the swamp, the troubling conflicts of interest between the FDA and CDC and Big Ag and Pharma, how the revolving door hurts Americans while lining the pockets of those in power, the truth about the chronic disease epidemic in America, the growing trend of legacy media attempting to rehabilitate the ultra-processed food industry, the real motivations behind this narrative shift, the truth about seed oils and toxins in our food, and more.Prasad- https://www.drvinayprasad.com/Means-https://www.amazon.com/Good-Energy-Surprising-Connection-Metabolism/dp/0593712641Kettle & Fire: For a limited time, get 15% off at http://kettleandfire.com/MKJust Thrive: Save 20% Sitewide at https://JustThriveHealth.com/Discount/Megyn  or use code MEGYN at checkoutFollow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow

Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at noon east. Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. As President-elect Donald Trump's cabinet takes shape, we are expecting a brutal confirmation process for a few of the nominees. What else would you expect, right? And while we spent a lot of time discussing the controversies around Pete Hegseth and Matt Gaetz, we wanted to take a deep dive into the man listeners of this show know well as RFKJ. He's been tasked with leading the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA movement, right on as the Secretary of Health and Human Services. And the DC establishment is having a full on meltdown over it. But I'll tell you right now, he's going to get through. I'm going to win.

He's going to get through. I was persuaded by what Dan was saying yesterday, Dan and Mark, about how there are too many Democrats. They're like hippie type Democrats in California and Vermont who are really behind the Maha movement and like RFKJ, who, let's face it, is a Democrat. And good luck stopping him, even if a couple of Republicans peel off because he's pro-choice. I think he's going to get through, but not without a fight. So today we're going to separate fact from fiction when it comes to him with Casey Means. Dr. Casey Means is back with us. And she and her brother, Callie Means, we understand are two of RFKJ's favorites and could potentially become advisors, I'll ask her. And also Dr. Vinay Prasad, who was one of the only people speaking sense during the COVID pandemic. So that's a good team to get into this

with. What's the cause of many health problems in America today? It's simple, shitty food. Food that is engineered to keep us addicted, offering zero real nutrition, crafted by mega corporations that prioritize profit over our well-being. Our food system is broken and we just cannot rely on big food to put our health first, as you know. If you are skeptical of the ingredients in the food you buy, and you should be, or if you're looking for something new you can trust, I want to introduce you to Kettle and Fire Bone Broth. Kettle and Fire is not just any broth. It's made using 100% grass-fed and free-range bones, slow simmered for over 14 hours to extract critical nutrients your

body needs to thrive. It's high in protein and better yet, each recipe is crafted by world-class chefs to ensure the best taste possible. This is the bone broth I use and I've been using this for a couple of years now. So with Thanksgiving right around the corner, consider using Kettle and Fire's broths to add rich, delicious flavor. No artificial Thanksgiving right around the corner, consider using Kettle and Fire's broths to add rich, delicious flavor. No artificial flavors, no harmful pesticides. It's just simple ingredients to support your health. Find Kettle and Fire in the broth aisle at grocery stores nationwide. And for a limited time, my viewers and listeners get 15% off by going to kettleandfire.com slash MK. That's kettleandfire.com slash MK. That's where I get it

online. Or pick it up at your next grocery store trip. Kettle and Fire, play with your food, not your health. First, we want to dive into a major controversy now swirling in our nation's capital. Welcome to our party, people. They're finally starting to realize that men are trying to invade women's spaces because they put dresses on and pose as women. And we finally starting to realize that men are trying to invade women's spaces because they put dresses on and pose as women. And we're supposed to feel really sorry for them when the answer is no. Well, I don't. And you shouldn't either. Earlier this week, Congresswoman Nancy Mace introduced a bill that would keep biological men out of women's restrooms on Capitol Hill. This comes as the first transgender. Now, I'm not

calling this person a congresswoman. It's a man posing as a woman who just got elected to Congress. It's a man wearing a woman's dress and trying to look like a woman. And he wants us to call him she and her. It's a no, sir. This person is about to be sworn in and wants access to the bathroom Nancy Mace uses and that I would use if I were there visiting the people I know in Congress. And I'm sorry, but there's a place for you, sir. It's the men's bathroom. Get out. Get out of the women's bathroom and the women's spaces. You want to do your thing and put on a costume that makes you look like me. I don't love it. I'm going to be honest. I don't, I'm not a hundred percent with the live and let live crowd. I'm really kind

of not, I'm kind of offended by it to be perfectly honest, but I can't do anything about it. And that's life. A lot of people do things that I find kind of irritating. And I realized that this is in some large measure, a sickness that, you know, they don't have full control over. So, okay, I'm not going to bully them and I'm not going to be, you know, harass them when I see them, but I don't buy in. It's their delusion. It's not mine. I don't share it. I don't have to pretend I share it. My children will not be pretending they share it. They will not be forced to say she, her when it's a man and God help any teacher who tries to make them. So that's number one, but number two, now this person is on Capitol Hill and apparently would like to

use the women's bathroom. And I'm sorry, the answer there is a no, because the women's bathroom is for women and you're not one. And declaring yourself a trans woman, which means fake, fake woman, trans means fake. If you substitute fake in, you'll understand what everybody is saying. It doesn't change that. Now, Nancy Mace introduces this resolution. I want to get the wording right because she submitted this and then she's changed it since to say, okay, it doesn't have to be legislation, but I want at least a rule. It was a two-page resolution to amend the 119th Congress. That's going to get sworn in, in January, that makes more sense that that doesn't force everybody in Congress to vote on this thing.

And it just says to speaker Johnson, could you please take care of this by making it a rule, which makes perfect sense and protects women, um, protects women that we don't have to fight over. Just make it a rule. This person, if he doesn't want to use the men's room, should use a gender neutral bathroom. And if there isn't a gender neutral bathroom, well, they should get one built before this person arrives. It's only November 20th. We've got plenty of time. You have plenty of taxpayer dollars to build a bathroom. It can't cost more than 30 grand. I mean, I could find you a contractor who will go and build you a bathroom, a stall that you can call gender neutral before January 6th. And this person can use it. Don't tell me you don't

have it or you can't find the money for it. I'll donate it to you. You want 30 grand to build a fucking gender neutral bathroom. I'll give it to you to keep this man out of the women's space. It is ridiculous that people like Nancy Mace and others have to fight for this. This should have been handled long ago before this person even got to Congress. It just should have been in the rules package. I realized we weren't thinking about it, but you should have been. Now's your chance. Now it looks more provocative because you're doing it in response to one person who declares themselves a trans woman arriving. So it looks targeted. I don't, I don't care. I don't care. That's your problem.

You can deal with the upset that's caused some loons on the left on your own time. But what needs to happen now is this man needs to be kept out of the women's space. Period. Here's what I'm realizing and following this controversy online has exploded on X. Most of the people out there do not know all the facts that the people who listen to this show know. I feel like you guys know this the facts that the people who listen to this show know. I feel like you guys know this at like the back of your hands at this point, because you've been listening to the show, most of you for a long time, forgive me to the audience members who are relatively new to the show, but like most people do not have any idea what we've been talking about here for the past four years. Uh, and so I've been tweeting some of these things out. You, it's amazing to see people's response. Like oh, wow. Okay. Yeah. That's a, that's a really interesting argument. Like, yeah, right.

For example, that a very high percentage, um, Dr. Blanchard, who was a preeminent researcher on the trans community puts it at over 90%. Irrespective of that finding, it is indisputably an alarmingly high percentage of so-called trans people. And here I am speaking of those who are men posing as females that are in fact autogynephiles. An autogynephile is a man who gets sexually aroused by dressing as a woman, picturing himself as a woman, looking at himself in the mirror and seeing someone who appears female. He gets off on it. He gets an erection thinking about it and doing it. I don't want that next to me at work, in the airport, in a schoolroom or anywhere. And I certainly don't want it next to my daughter. Nancy Mace, controversial though she is, has every right to say, I do not wish to

share the bathroom with a man in a dress. I don't want to share one with a man not in a dress, and I don't want to share one with a man in one. And I certainly don't want to share one with a man, not an address. And I don't want to share one with a man in one. And I certainly don't want to participate in any man's, I don't know what this particular person's story is, any man's sexual fetish or delusion. I am there doing the people's business. I have important work to do, and I wish not to be distracted by someone getting off on the fact that he's in my kind of clothing in the stall next to me. You look at Leah Thomas's social media. Go ahead and look at this. an in-depth report on Leah Thomas, the swimmer at UPenn, who stole Riley Gaines' fifth-place medal and other first-place medals at the NCAA championships a couple of years ago. They reported that this belonged to Leah Thomas, formerly Will. Leah slash Will has never come out

to dispute it or challenge it. We've reported their reporting on the show. Same, never gotten any pushback, very open-minded to your denial, Leah Thomas, if this is in fact wrong, but they did an in-depth report on his social media and it is deeply disturbing. It shows all sorts of autogynephile porn. And I'm not going to give you the details, but it's a lot of little figures, you know, cartoon-esque figures in dresses appearing like women with erect penises and somebody doing something to them sexually or them doing something to somebody else sexually. Like this is the thing. It is not this innocent, like, oh, I'm so sorry. It's not like being gay where you're, you're born with it. You're not going to hurt anybody. You just have a different preference sexually than somebody else. This is something that is

a fetish that is, that can be, that can be arousing in the most normal of circumstances in terms of your surroundings. And that you work out by dressing up in a costume that looks female while you're around other females who have no idea that you're in the middle of some fetish. Like if that's a high percentage, not all trans people, but a high percentage of them. And what Blanchard said was the remainder are homosexuals. They're gay, feminine boys who grow up to believe that, in fact, they're girls. And then when they start dressing like a woman, they'll stay gay. Look, there's a lot of research on this that people haven't seen because no one wants to talk about it. But there's no doubt in my mind that Leah Thomas is an autogynephile

and was parading around that locker room around Riley Gaines and her other teammates who were in, you know, masking tape like bathing suits because they were fierce competitors. And the less bathing suit, the better to swim fast in his masking tape type bathing, masking tape type bathing suit, and was undoubtedly aroused by it. Why do we have to subject girls to that? Why? I don't care whether you like Nancy Mace or not. Why does she have to go through that just to use the bathroom on Capitol Hill? Where are the men to support her and defend her and the other women, because it's not just Nancy Mace. It's everyone. It's all the women on Capitol Hill and all the staffers. And I believe it goes beyond that because her resolution was to prohibit house employees from using single sex facilities other than those that correspond to their biological sex, saying that biological males should not be allowed into women's single sex facilities. Then it says that it would ban transgender so-called women from women's restrooms at the

U.S. Capitol, which suggests to me it goes beyond just the facilities used by members and their staff. Either way, it must be done. Build a gender neutral bathroom. I am not trying to bully Sarah McBride, who was elected in shock, Vermont, uh, from what? Oh, Delaware, equally shocking. Um, I'm not trying to bully this particular person. I have no wish to upset this particular person, but I have no wish to be upset by him either. Sarah, who was Tim 10 years ago, 12, whatever, your delusion is not my problem. I don't have to participate in it. I don't have to pretend that you are in fact a woman. I'm sorry you're going through this. I don't have to pretend that you are in fact a woman. I don't, you know, I'm sorry you're

going through this. I don't think this should be celebrated. When he declared that he was female, he got congratulatory calls from people like Beau Biden in Delaware. Like congratulations, congratulations on what? On suffering from something that's in the DSM-5 as a disorder, a mental disorder, congratulations on saying I'm going to lean into that. I just, I have empathy for these folks. It must be very, very difficult. And as I've told you, I have trans people in my extended family. It must be very, very difficult. And that's what I've been told that it is. I get it. It's just not my problem. And I refuse to make it my problem. And women across America are going to

have to stand up, whether they like the Nancy Macy's of the world or not, and say, I stand with you. And the men are going to have to stand up and say, I will stand up for you, even though this isn't exactly my issue. I mean, I like Speaker Mike Johnson. Speaker Johnson, your bathroom is secure. You don't have to worry about someone who is much larger than the average woman parading or than the average man parading in there, posing as a man. But really, it turns out to be someone who could crush you with one blow of his fist just because he wants to. Somebody who doesn't belong in there. Like women are in a unique spot. And here's what happens. We had this happen on our show. Who was on? It was Katie Katie Herzog, who is saying, oh, would you want to make a male to female trans person who looks,

let me reverse that, a female to male trans person who looks male. So it's a woman pretending to be a man, but the woman's pulling it off. And she raised a particular woman who does look very manly, who's bald, who's got big muscles, who's got lots of black tats all over her. Would you make her use the women's bathroom? And I said the truth, which is, look, on principle, yes, I would make her use the bathroom that corresponds with her biological sex. But if this woman wants to go into the male bathroom and people are fooled into thinking that she is a he, there's nothing I can do about that, and I'm not going to waste my time thinking about that. But the other thing is, the problem doesn't go the other way. That women are not exploiting these permissive laws, rules, and new mores to go into men's rooms and get off on the fact that

they're in a men's room or to go into a men's room and actually hurt a woman or a man who is in the men's. I get so confusing. You get my point. It all goes the other way. It's the women who are endangered, who are getting hurt. I tweeted this out. Go check my X feed. The number of women who have been hurt, attacked, or sexually assaulted by men who are either taking advantage of these rules or who are actually just exploiting them. Look at this graphic. This is a graphic of just some of those who have been accused and gotten in trouble for doing this, for going, for example, into the women's restroom and getting caught taking a mirror and sliding it underneath the bathroom stall divider so he could get a glimpse of the next woman with her pants down or her

skirt up doing her business. I don't want to have to worry about that. Now, there's every chance that a regular man could just sneak into an airport bathroom. You never know. This is one of the freaky things about being a woman. Guys, you may not know that we worry about this stuff sometimes, but you never know. As someone's in there looking at you, I mean, some guys get off on this, but it is a very different story if we're allowing them in. And all they have to say is, it's my gender identity. I identify as a woman. And while Sarah, formerly Tim, is doing his best to look the part of a woman, how does it stop those guys? Put that graphic back up there. If the rule is you can come into the bathroom based on your gender identity, how do we stop these guys from coming in? In fact, let me show you some of the trans, so-called trans people online right now who are threatening Nancy Mays,

all of whom would be allowed into one of these women's restrooms at the U.S. Capitol if Speaker Johnson doesn't change the rule. Take a look at this guy in SOT3. This video goes out to Congresswoman Nancy Mace. Congresswoman Nancy Mace, I hope that one day I do find you in that woman's bathroom and I grab your ratty looking fucking hair and drag your face down to the floor while I repeatedly bash it in until the blood's everywhere and you're dead. Thank you. I hope that Nancy Mace receives this message well. Kisses. Make no mistake, Speaker Johnson and every other member on Capitol Hill, you allow, quote, Sarah McBride in,

you allow him in. That's just the fact. What will you say then? What will you say when that guy, maybe it won't be Nancy Mace, maybe it'll be a civilian, maybe it'll be somebody like me, who's just there to take my kids on a tour. We have to go into the women's bathroom, and that guy comes in. You can't have it. I'm sorry, but it must be stopped. Sarah is not allowed in and neither is that guy. And it's a very simple rule. Women deserve to have their own private, safe, and secure spaces. We deserve not to be, to have our risk of attack elevated as a result of a different rule that allows men in. And we deserve to have our peace of attack elevated as a result of a different rule that allows men in. And we deserve to have our peace of mind just knowing that we're in female-only spaces.

We don't have to approve attacks or a pattern of violence, though there is one. We don't have to prove that. It is enough for us to say we don't want it. We want female-only spaces to remain female, period. And if you get bullied into allowing men in, including this newly elected man from Delaware, you are siding with men who suffer from a mental disorder over women who are simply asking for the privacy and security we've had for decades. Understand what you're deciding. And you, people who are in charge on Capitol Hill, males, congressmen and so on, are not going to have to deal with it. I'll have to deal with it. My kid will have to deal with it. I mean, my daughter's in seventh grade. They're going to Capitol Hill this year on a field trip. They're girls. They're 13-year-old girls.

Do you want that guy I just showed to be able to go into the girls' room when my daughter's in there, when a group of 13-year-old girls is in there. If my daughter shouldn't have to deal with it and I shouldn't have to deal with it, Nancy Mace should not have to deal with it either. You've got people like AOC saying this is bullying. It's not bullying to say, I don't wish to participate in your delusion or your sexual fetish. I don't wish to participate in it. It's fine for you to have it, but I don't have to pretend I believe in it or change my security, comfort, and safety situation for it. That is just standing up for your own rights as a woman. Nancy Mace is out there talking about this because she's gotten so much blowback from these loons on the Democrat left. I'll give you a feel for what she's saying. I think sat one.

Radical left is calling me an extremist for being a feminist, fighting to protect the rights of women and girls. If being a feminist makes me an extremist or a bigot or a monster, I am totally here for it because I'm going to fight like hell for every woman and every little girl across this country to protect you and keep you safe. Good. Good. I support you fully in that endeavor. Speaker Johnson was asked a bit about it. Here's what he said. Is this the first one? I think he gave the original. Yeah. And then he tried to clean it up. Six first. Is freshman elect Sarah McBride a man or a woman? Look, I'm not going to get into this. We welcome all new members with open arms who are duly

elected representatives of the people. I believe it's a command that we treat all persons with dignity and respect. We will. And I'm not going to engage in silly debates about this. There's a concern about uses of restroom facilities and locker rooms and all that. This is an issue that Congress has never had to address before. And we're going to do that in a deliberate fashion with member consensus on it. And we will accommodate the needs of every single person. Okay. You should treat everyone with respect and you should accommodate their needs. And that includes us. That includes the women. And that means men cannot come in, get your gender neutral bathroom.

He realized that the Republican party is not going to have that kind of equivocation anymore and came out and said this later. I asked a question this morning at the leadership gaggle and I rejected the premise because the answer is, is so obvious for anybody who doesn't know my well-established record on, on this issue. Let me be unequivocally clear. A man is a man and a woman is a woman and a man cannot become a woman. That said, I also believe that's what Schroepfer teaches, what I just said. But I also believe that we treat everybody with dignity. Right on. That's great. Perfect. Handle it very well. And that's what you should do. You should treat this person with dignity and make sure that there's a gender neutral bathroom. Make sure there are other Congress

men. Well, women mostly online trying to virtue signal right now. I'm so sick of these losers. Here's representative Suzanne S U Z A N Del Bene representing Washington's first congressional district. Wife, mom, grandma, dog mom. She comes out and says Nancy Mace was the first woman to graduate from the Citadel. She knows full well the pain of gender discrimination and the impact of bigoted policies. This is bullying and she should be ashamed. The impact, the pain of gender discrimination, gender discrimination. Segregated by sex bathrooms are not discriminatory, madam, which you should know as a member of Congress. They are entirely constitutional and have been upheld. There is absolutely nothing unconstitutional, illegal or inappropriate about keeping women's bathrooms for women only. Biological women. There are no other kinds. And the virtue signaling on the left,

look, it already cost you a presidential election, cost you the Senate, led to you not getting the House. Go ahead, take on this issue at your peril. You may think you're on steady ground because now we're not talking about kids. Now we're talking about grownups, but you know what grownups were talking about? Women. And we are sick of your shit. I am not alone. I know this is not just a women's issue. I know my male viewers are with me on this too. Now's the time to speak up. Now's the time. If you were silent about it before, we just had a whole presidential election in which the trans issue was the number one motivating issue for swing state voters. Speak up. Use your voice. Drop a line into Speaker Mike Johnson, into your representative to say, no men in women's spaces.

Not in their bathrooms, not in their locker rooms, not in their prisons, not in their sports, period. There's nothing kind about forcing women to endanger themselves and make themselves uncomfortable for the sake of somebody else. This is what McBride himself tried to use to shame us. Sarah, formerly Tim. Oh, I dead named him. He was Tim McBride for 20 years. Then as a senior at American University, suddenly declared himself a woman. He never became a woman. He became a man dressing as one. He changed his name to Sarah, which I would call him if he were here. But in order to make clear to you what we're dealing with here, what we're talking about, I point out to you, he used to be Tim.

Now he's Sarah. Sarah's posting on X was, Every day Americans go to work with people who have life journeys different than their own and engage with them respectfully. I hope members of Congress can muster that same kindness. This is what they do. They use words like that to shame us into silence and away from a position that would protect ourselves and our comfort. There is nothing wrong with saying, I am uncomfortable with you, Mr. McBride, coming into my bathroom. And here again, one more point. This is yet another situation that underscores the danger of using preferred pronouns.

How can you say she cannot come into the women's room? How can you say that? That doesn't work. Sarah McBride is a he. He may not go into Nancy Mace's bathroom because he is a man. And Nancy Mace's bathroom is for women. That's it. Anybody on Capitol Hill have any questions, you can email me. You got the number.

We're going to take a break and we're back with Dr. Vinay Prasad. There is an epidemic affecting two out of every three Americans, poor gut health, processed foods, stress at work, fluoride in the water, even toxins in the air you breathe, can overwhelm your digestive system. You might expect to feel the bloating and the heartburn, but sleepless nights, afternoon crashes, mood swings, these are all signs your gut may need some help. While most probiotics get torn apart in your stomach acid, the spore-based strains in Just Thrive probiotic are clinically proven to arrive in your gut 100% alive, creating a fortress of good bacteria that can support digestion, immune system, and mental clarity. Just Thrive probiotic is non-GMO and gluten-free, and you can choose between

berry-flavored gummies or easy-to-swallow capsules. You can even open the capsule and mix the contents in your morning coffee or sprinkle it on your food. For over a decade, Just Thrive has been fighting to make Americans healthy again with science-backed solutions you can trust. To join the gut health revolution, visit JustThriveHealth.com. JustThriveHealth.com. And save 20% site-wide with promo code Megan. That's JustThriveHealth.com, promo code MEGAN. We're getting into the freakout over Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s nomination as the secretary of HHS,

and we begin with a guest we enjoyed back during the height of the COVID pandemic. He has a piece this week in the free press that gets to the truth about RFK's supposedly controversial views. And you can find Dr. Vinay Prasad on YouTube, podcast platforms, and on Substack at Vinay Prasad's Observations and Thoughts. Doc, welcome back. Great to see you. It's great to be back, Megan. Can I just start with something? This is not about RFKJ, but it's something I watched you do a YouTube show on with a pediatric cardiologist one time, and it's on the myocarditis that young men suffered in the wake of getting, in particular, people talk about doctors who said maybe we don't need mandates for kids as like something reckless. And maybe we should be careful, especially with, you know, being out there pushing the Pfizer vax because his fan group is like that group without any asterisks, right? Like, yeah, sure. It's cool to get the vaccine. Like nobody

talks about this. And as a mother of two young boys, not to mention a girl, I, this is a real thing that kids did get this. And it's a real concern for a lot of parents. Yeah, I can comment about that. I guess I would say that mandates, particularly for young men between the ages of 16 and 26, were a net harm. I mean, I'm not just saying that they shouldn't have done it. Of course, they should have had no mandates, I think, at any ages. I think that was a mistake. But in that subgroup of young men from 16 to 26, we harmed those men from dose two and dose three. We've shown that in a number of publications. That was bad and reckless policy. I think there's a simple mind, which is people

want to say all vaccines are safe and effective. All are good. That's like saying all drugs are good. The right vaccine for the right person at the right time can be of tremendous benefit, but the wrong vaccine for the wrong person at the wrong time can be of tremendous benefit, but the wrong vaccine for the wrong person at the wrong time can be really harmful. So young women in this country were harmed by J&J, particularly women between the ages of 18 and 25, and young men were harmed by Moderna and Pfizer. And one of the things Robert F. Kennedy wants to do is remove a 1986 law that prevents parents from suing the company that makes the product only for vaccines. And I actually support that policy.

I think vaccine makers should be able to be litigated for harms like myocarditis, which were suppressed. And, you know, the response was, well, they're not going to make the drugs unless we immunize them in some way from these lawsuits. But now with the benefit of hindsight, you look at the huge money they made at Pfizer and Moderna from these vaccines and they want to tell us they don't have the money to pay those who are vaccine injured. I mean, do you buy it? You're absolutely right. The 1986 law occurred at a time where vaccines were very cheap and they weren't making a lot of money from those vaccines.

Now they've made $100 billion from the Pfizer vaccine. The new maternal RSV vaccine costs $300. Modern vaccines are not like old-fashioned vaccines. They're incredibly lucrative, multi-billion dollar products, and they should, and they have plenty of the money to tolerate litigation. They should face litigation just like they face litigation for drug products

like allergy medications or anticoagulants. That old argument no longer holds true. Okay. So you go through in the free press piece a lot of the things. And can we talk about fluoride? Because I have been into Maha before it had its name and spoke with Casey Maines, who's here later and many others. And I've known that there is an issue, a potential issue, or at least a debate about fluoride in the drinking water. And that it's considered toxic, a neurotoxin. I've heard RFKJ say that as well. And people I really

like laugh at that out loud. Like that's an insane position. And they, this is one of the things that leads them to say he's a kook. So what of fluoride in the drinking water? Yeah. So the purpose of my piece is really to argue, and I'll come to fluoride, is really to argue that you can't be a kook if there are many European nations already doing the policy that you suggest. So I treat RFK like I treat anybody. Let's not look at him as a person. Let's look at his ideas and go idea by idea. RFK Jr., like a lot of people, might have a bunch of ideas that are really good and promising and maybe a few ideas that are debatable and a few ideas that are bad, but we should be able to take the good from what he's saying and question him on the other things. So let's take fluoride in the water. The first litmus test,

do other nations take the fluoride out of the water? There are many nations, including Germany and other European nations that do not put fluoride in the water. So there is no global consensus that you should put fluoride in the water. There's some other pieces about fluoride that are interesting to me.

One, when we originally put fluoride in the water, there were lots of cavities and caries among children. And the idea of put fluoride in the water, there were lots of cavities and caries among children. And the idea of putting fluoride in the water is that pregnant women drink water, they'll take up fluoride, their babies will be born with stronger enamel, and they'll be less likely to get cavities. What we have seen over the course of the last 40, 50, 60, 70 years is there is a reduction in childhood cavities in nations that have added fluoride to the water and in nations

that haven't added fluoride to the water and in nations that haven't added fluoride to the water. The most recent Cochrane Review, which is a prestigious evidence-based association guidance on this topic, says we don't know for sure what the absolute benefit is of fluoride in drinking water on children's cavities. We also know that by putting fluoride in the water, there are lots and lots of people who are exposed to it who may not be the beneficiaries of the reduction in cavities. The other difference, we use a lot more fluoride containing toothpaste now than we used to. And so that's a way in which cavities are getting better and fluoride is getting to teeth anyway. Now, in terms of the questions about does it affect cognition and IQ, that's a very tough, obviously a tough question to tackle. I think Robert F. Kennedy is correct that at very high doses, fluoride is a neurotoxin.

At the doses people get exposed to, does it have an impact on cognition? I've looked through a bunch of studies. My team is going to do a review of this. I'm not sure yet. But I think the point is, if Robert F. Kennedy comes in and he says municipal water plants should be discouraged from putting in fluoride. We all know what's going to happen, Megan. The same thing that happened when Trump said we should reopen schools.

All of the red districts will take the fluoride out of the water, and all of the liberal districts will probably put more fluoride in the water. You know, they might even add a little fluoride to the water. Yeah, don't do that. And so I think that you'll get a very split view. But people who want to fearmonger and say, RFK Jr. is going to come in and take the fluoride out of your water, I think that's not what's going to happen. And I also think there's a legitimate debate here.

There's a reason why some countries are not putting it in. And we should have that debate and not call him a kook for bringing up the topic. Totally agree. You point out in your piece that while, yes, at high levels, it's disturbing, it's potentially disturbing, you're right, other researchers found that even fluoride levels within the legal range were associated with that risk of it being a neurotoxin.

And one study of American mothers found that pregnant women who drank fluoridated water were more likely to give birth to children with lower IQs. This is probably why they banned it or they don't use it in Germany, Norway, and Sweden. I think this is a very good caution. It's for people to look into. And I'm sure RFKJ is not going to go in there with a magic wand and start doing this stuff. He's going to have doctors who he trusts, unlike those who he thinks are captured, actually take a look at it honestly for the first time. So yes, we like it.

The biggest thing with RFKJ is the thing I spent two hours talking to him about, and that is his skepticism about the MMR vaccines that we give our kids when they're born. And he fought to get thimerosal out of the vaccines, which has mercury. He did not accept the protestations that it was not a problematic form of mercury. And indeed, they did wind up removing it. And he's had some questions about vaccines, but he told me personally he had all of his kids vaxxed with all the MMR stuff. So what about his stance on MMR vaccines? So I think it's quite interesting, and I have a sort of a middle-of-the-road nuanced position on him. I don't dismiss him out of hand.

I think on the particular question, is the MMR vaccine linked to autism? On that question, I think there's a number of studies that in my mind show pretty convincingly that it is not linked to autism. But on the broader vaccine questions, why does the United States have vaccines that we don't give in Sweden? We don't give in Switzerland. We don't give in Germany. Our vaccine schedule is more aggressive. There are differences across countries. Are there side effects of vaccines that we might be missing or underappreciating? Is there more work that needs to be done to optimize vaccine safety and efficacy

on this sort of global question? I think RFK Jr. has an important point. As you know, Megan, in this country, there were two safety signals from COVID-19 vaccines that we talked a lot about. One was the one you mentioned, myocarditis. The other was something called thrombocytopenic thrombosis that occurred with the Johnson and Johnson and AstraZeneca vaccines. Those safety signals were not first discovered in the United States. Our CDC was not the first one to tell us about it. The myocarditis signal came from the Israelis. They told us about it. And then Rochelle

Walensky denied seeing the signal. You can check the Reuters news story. I believe it is April 27. The United States' vaccine surveillance safety system is old. It's antiquated. It's not very good. There could be many other safety signals for vaccines. We are missing. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has a unique opportunity to revive this system, to rehabilitate it, to make a new modern system where we actually take seriously vaccine safety and we actually try to study it. And you're not going to find safety signals if you're not looking for safety signals. I think that's an important problem. The other thing I'd say is that there's a pushback to Robert F. Kennedy that anytime you

look for safety concerns for vaccine, you're anti-vaccine. That's not true. Anybody who prescribes any drug product of which a vaccine is one knows that a good doctor always considers side effects, always considers that other side. And the last thing I'd say is I've listened to him. I think that people are fear-mongering. If he comes into power, the MMR vaccine is not going to disappear from the hospital shelves. He's a big believer in vaccine autonomy. So he will likely try to reduce coercive pressure to have the current vaccination schedule. But I don't think he's going to take away any vaccines. I don't think changing that 1986 litigation law is going to make them manufacturers not make them. I think these kind of fear mongering stories, the vaccines will disappear. I think that's incorrect. So I think

that while he's wrong on MMR and autism, I think he might have a broader point about we should take safety more seriously. Yeah. And when I talked to him, he said on the autism front, it he felt like the vaccines and the mercury and all that that may have been a factor in the explosion of autism that we were seeing at that time. That the whole environment that our kids were growing up in, especially in that time period, was just a toxic stew all around them. I mean, as a kid who grew up swimming in the Hudson River, which was loaded with GE toxic waste dumps, I can appreciate that. He spent his whole life trying to clean up the Hudson River and other places like it. And that's one of the things they say about him. Well, he's not a doctor. Well, neither is Xavier Becerra, our current HHS secretary. He's a lawyer. He's a politician.

And neither was Kathleen Sebelius. She's a politician. It's not unusual to not have a doctor heading HHS. In fact, I think a doctor heading HHS is the unusual thing. Most of the people headed HHS are not doctors. And on the flip side of the question is just because you're a doctor doesn't mean you know anything about medicine or get everything right. Fauci famously said, don't wear masks, wear masks. Ashish Jha says, make sure your toddler gets their annual booster. He has no evidence to say that. Make sure that a person who's already had COVID twice and taken PaxLivid twice takes it a third time. So doctors are making things up all the time. I'm not concerned that Robert F. Kennedy is not a doctor. That doesn't enter my calculus at all. How about the Hep B vaccine that we're giving newborns?

Newborns who are obviously participating in the high-risk behavior that warrants the Hep B vaccine that we're giving newborns. Newborns who are obviously participating in the high risk behavior that warrants the Hep B vaccine. No, I'm kidding, of course, because newborns aren't. Right, sexual behavior. Right, sexual behavior. So I think, you know, Robert F. Kennedy has an interesting point and European nations appreciate the point. And that point is that many European nations do not recommend Hep B vaccination at birth. In the United States, as rule, almost all pregnant women have hep B vaccination, have hep B virus testing. We know which women have hep B when they're giving birth. That's something that we're routinely screening all

women for. I think it is an interesting and reasonable thing to ask whether or not every baby born in America should get hep B vaccines at birth or if it should be delayed, as it's done in many European nations. Now, one of the reasons people say we got to do it at birth is that people aren't going to follow up. That, to me, is not a terrific reason. It feels very paternalistic. I'm not sure there's actually evidence for that claim, that there are missed people in European countries, that Americans are less likely to follow up and see doctors and participate in vaccine programs. But European countries, that Americans are less likely to follow up and see doctors and participate in vaccine programs.

But to me, that's clearly an issue worthy of debate. And on my own sub stack at drviniprasad.com, I had an infectious disease doctor, Megan, and he's writing anonymously. He's an East Coast professor. He has to be anonymous because unfortunately, the leftists have captured the field of infectious disease and they don't wanna have any dialogue on this topic.

But in his anonymous post, he tells the story of a doctor couple who asked, why do I have to get this at birth and how the system was not giving them a good answer? And he himself is skeptical and he's an ID expert that this should be given at birth to all babies, perhaps the babies that have high risk, you know, who are born in high risk situations like, you know, a parent has it, et cetera. So I think it's a very good point and a place where Robert F. Kennedy has a point. There's a debate over raw milk. This is getting more and more popular, especially with some young men. And RFKJ has said he's fine with it. And now some of his critics are saying that's crazy talk. You know, you can get E. coli.

Pasteurized milk came around decades ago for a reason. What do you make of that one? So one thing is, you know, I have to admit, I'm not a big milk drinker in any way. I'm an adult who doesn't drink a lot of milk. My mother grew up in India, and she used to tell me that there's nothing that she liked better than the taste of fresh,

unpasteurized, or so-called raw milk. And I think there's nothing that she liked better than the taste of fresh, unpasteurized or so-called raw milk. And I think there's some people who genuinely prefer the taste. So that's part of the motivation is they think it tastes better, it's better for cooking, etc. Let's apply the European litmus test. There are many European nations where it is legal to sell raw milk. There is a risk, probably Emily Oster, the economist, calculates the risk in the New York Times as seven in 100,000. So there's some risk that you will get some sickness from raw milk, but it's not 80%. It's 7 in 100,000.

It's a very low risk. Now, that risk is probably on par with all sorts of risks we allow people to take every single day. And to be honest, if I had to choose between a glass of raw milk and a Twinkie, I'd probably drink the glass of raw milk. It's probably healthier than the Twinkie, the things that we do sell that cause chronic disease. So I think to Robert F. Kennedy's point is he's a believer in body autonomy. And the other thing, Megan, is I'll point out, he's both a skeptic of vaccine mandates and he believes in a woman's right to choose. So he's rather consistent on body autonomy in a way many others are not. He thinks that the same body autonomy extends to raw milk, that if you want, you can buy it. But no one's going to come and force you to drink raw milk if you don't want it. I'm not going to drink raw milk because

I don't drink milk. But he's saying, if you want to do it, why not do it? And the governor of Colorado, Jared Polis, a Democrat, agrees with him. And he has a large constituency of Colorado hippies, liberal hippies, who want to have raw milk. So I think on the issue of raw milk, that's not a hill to die on. If I was in charge of it, I would remove the restriction on selling raw milk. If people can bungee jump, they should be able to drink raw milk if they want. There, this one's not in your piece, but he, there's also some out there statements like the brain worm that he said he got. And there's one quote where he suggested that HIV does not cause AIDS, that, that AIDS is

not caused by HIV or may not be in an interview in 2023 with New York magazine. I mean, does that, is that crazy talk or what do you make of statements like that? Well, I mean, it's very possible and some people are infected with pork parasites that do go to the brain and they become calcified like sister sarcosis. So it is possible he does in fact have a brain worm. I don't think that's actually driving his thinking. So I don't think it affects your cognition. In terms of HIV being the cause of AIDS, I, as a doctor and somebody who has studied this a lot, will say that HIV is in fact the necessary cause of AIDS. You don't develop AIDS without HIV. You need HIV plus time for your CD4 count to drop. I would, anytime I read what the

media says he said, I would love to see the full transcript of what exactly he said and think about it, you know, because I don't trust the media anymore. I've come to be distrustful of them. But having said that, I would say HIV is the cause of AIDS. And I would say that it's possible he did have a brain worm. I don't think that explains his beliefs, many of which I think are very interesting. The last thing I'd say, Megan, is when was the last time we had an HHS secretary who had beliefs at all? Usually we have HHS secretaries who go from the pharmaceutical

companies to HHS. They just play the political game where they do a little bit for the public, not much at all. And then they go back to self-aggrandize and consult for pharmaceutical firms and consult for insurance companies. This is the first time, in my knowledge, you have an HHS secretary who has any ideas at all that are worthy of discussion. The first time that he has an opinion on anything. And I think Americans, by voting for Trump, they voted to shake up the snow globe. They want somebody to go do something different. And this guy, he might not do everything perfect, and he will get pushback from the media and from me and from others when he makes a mistake. But there's some things he wants to do that are really laudable.

He wants kids to have better food. He wants, you know, better nutrition for all of us. He wants us to curb the obesity epidemic. He's a guy coming in with some ideas. And I think that's worthy of taking seriously. All right. And the six seconds left. So thumbs up on RFKJ from you?

Well, I say I don't want to give a final verdict. I think some of his ideas are really good and some of his ideas need to be pushed back, Don. But I think it's interesting times and he is forcing an interesting discussion. Great, great. We're going to get into some of those things you just mentioned when Dr. Casey Means joins us next. Always great to see you, Doc. Thanks for being here. Thank you. Dr. Vinay Prasad, take a listen. Check out his YouTube because you will find a lot of really interesting, accessible discussions at the top of the medical field.

RFKJ brought Maha to MAGA during the campaign and then Trump won. So what will Maha look like in practice? Let's face it, RFKJ looks good. He's on his way toward being confirmed. He's not even one of the top names that people are objecting to now. It's all the attentions on Hegseth and on Matt Gaetz. It doesn't mean he'll sail through, but if you wanted to place a bet, I think it'd be a pretty good bet to say he's going to make it, especially given the groundswell of support behind him and how important his endorsement was. Think about it. Like Matt Gaetz is a loyalist to Trump. And so is Pete Hegseth. He loves Trump. But who delivered votes? Who actually inspired people to turn out of the polls who might otherwise not have for Trump or might not have turned out at all?

Who inspired Nicole Shanahan to get off the couch and start using her enormous good fortune to make those very powerful ads for Trump that, you know, she's been on the program a couple of times. He was her, she was his running mate. All of that was Bobby Kennedy. And so good luck to you if you're going to try to stop him because America has said they might not want him in the top job, though they didn't, weren't really given the option thanks to the Democrats. And they are very democratic process. Uh, they, they want him in the top job, though they weren't really given the option, thanks to the Democrats and their very democratic process. They want him to make America healthy again. And one of the people who may help him do this, and certainly who had input into his thinking about it, is my next guest, Dr. Casey Means. She and her brother, Callie Means, have been driving

the Maha movement. Casey's the author of the must read, must, must read. Promise me you'll read this book. Please. I beg of you. Give it to everyone you know for Christmas. It was great, great gift, their wellness, easy to understand actual tools in there for you to get started. So you don't have to like try to remember it in your head. It's called good energy, the surprising connection between metabolism and limitless health, Good energy. We covered it in great length with her on episode 887. Welcome back, Casey. Great to see you. Hi, Megan. So good to see you. Trump won and now Bobby Kennedy's nominated for head of the N.I. I mean, can you believe this? I can. I think Americans are ready to be healthy again. And I think they came out in full force on November 5th saying that we want to bend the curve of the industries you're not supposed to challenge and worked with RFKJ. He mentioned you at his Trump endorsement. I just would love to life to trying to probe the real root causes of

why Americans are sick right now and why health is getting absolutely destroyed in this country for children and adults. And that journey, of course, as we talked about on our last episode, pulled me away from the conventional health care system. I left my career as a surgeon, and I devoted my life to figuring out why are Americans getting destroyed at such higher rates in other countries? And the reality is it's metabolic dysfunction. It's a mismatch between the environment we're living in and what our cells actually need to thrive. And unfortunately, that's been almost completely absent from the conversation about health for many, many years. And so the fact that RFK is

talking about this and he's really created vision and clarity for what we can do with the incredible health resources we have in this country. And, you know, unfortunately, the media has been picking apart just fringe aspects of what he talks about. But I think the vision is so clear and so bold. It's let's get Americans healthy. Let's focus on the modifiable root causes that are destroying our health. And let's do three things. I mean, he's really broken it down into three dictates that we should all really be hopeful about. The first is we need to get the conflicts of interest out of the health agencies. This is step one. You've talked about this so much on your show,

but there is just unbelievable conflicts of interest in the FDA, the CDC, the NIH. We got to get those conflicts of interest out so that it's clean. The second thing we need to do is then produce uncompromised evidence-based research, key word, uncompromised, that actually sets the health standards and guidelines for our health in America. And the third is to, in the next two years, reverse the trends of the chronic disease epidemic, destroying health in children and adults so that we can actually show up for the 250th birthday of America stronger than ever. This is something we can all get behind. And so that vision that has actually been absent from the conversation in the past four years is just making me feel incredibly hopeful. This is that's huge. I mean, those three things are huge. And who

would be against them with RFKJ at the top of HHS. And then potentially Dr. Jay Bhattacharya is talking about as possible head of NIH, which would be amazing. I mean, where could a doctor, Stanford trained, wind up woman, young? I don't know. Like what would surgeon general, CDC, is anything attractive to you just to hypothetically? You are so kind. You know, I'm here to push this mission forward however I can. I think there's a moment right now. I feel something.

I think you feel something, too. I think a lot of people feel something. There's a crack that has opened in the zeitgeist, in the consciousness, in the culture where people have realized that things are not going well. We're facing, I would say, non-hyperbolically extinction level trends in our health right now. And so from my perspective, it's all hands on deck. Every single person, every parent, every teen, every, you know, person who has the ability to help us move health in the right direction we need to with our voices, with our actions. And so, you know, that's how I feel. I'm like, I'm here to serve and to help however I can.

She's going, people. She's going. We don't know where she's going. I'm just going to say it. We don't know what role, but God bless you if you agree to serve. I realize you have a great life in California right now, and you've set things up perfectly for you to be practicing medicine the way you want. But man, we need you. And you know, you could be helping millions on that scale, you and your brother. Okay. Let's go through some of these. I do think the conflict of interest thing is

something that must be done. And I would love to get your thoughts so far on whether it can, like how, because sometimes when I hear his agenda discussed, people are like, sounds great. He's never going to do it. There's zero chance he's going to be able to undo these conflicts of interest and the, the power of big ag and these Republican, even lawmakers who are, you know, take, have a lot of big donors in these industries. Right. And then I start to get kind of depressed, but we'll go through them one at a time. Conflicts of interest. Um, the, the big one that I think people can understand is the FDA and how, you know, Scott Gottlieb was running it under Trump and then left to go work for Pfizer. What are the odds that, you know, he's going to be cracking down on Pfizer when he realizes he's

going to get a huge paycheck from them when he leaves? The odds are in his favor that he's going to get he's going to make bank as soon as he leaves this government job. Can we really trust him when he's running the FDA? Go back further. Dope Sick. We made a big deal out of that movie when it first came out. We had on Danny Strong, who's the writer and executive producer of it and actually also starred in Gilmore Girls, which he was amazing in. Anyway, he was on the program talking about the conflict of interest there and the opioid crisis between the FDA and the approvals that were given to big pharma, um, and this, the Sackler family, uh, business when it came to Oxycontin. I'm just going to show a couple of soundbites that bring that home. Here's

Danny strong on our show. Um, in episode9. It goes beyond a criminal company, and it goes beyond the dishonesty of a few people. It ends up tying into the very broken nature of our government's relationship with private industry. And that if someone could have a job at the FDA in which they are directly overseeing pharma companies, and then they can immediately go work for those pharma companies, the revolving door, you end up with situations like what happened here, where people are working at the FDA thinking

either A, there's a job for me at Purdue Pharma when I get out or B, a job at a consulting company that can be hired by Purdue Pharma. Or in one case, a person was put on a board at Tufts University that Purdue Pharma was in charge of that board. So there's all sorts of goodies to be had for your career, your future, your pocketbook by playing ball with Purdue Pharma. And I think that I think looking at the revolving door, coming up with new rules that can not enable someone to oversee their warning label and then go work for them. She could have got work for them the next day. OK, so Danny Strong is a Trump voter. I'm just going to say it now unconfirmed. Just my suspicious, my suspicion, but therein

lies the problem. So take that on. Yeah. I mean, I mean, Vinay did, you know, so I was just listening into your guys' conversation. It's so great. And he wrote this amazing, amazing article in the free press that everyone should read. Um, but he highlights actually some of the most recent ones, you know, Mark McClellan, FDA commissioner, George Bush, now on the board of Johnson and Johnson, Scott Gottlieb, head of the FDA during the Trump administration, on the board of Pfizer now. Stephen Hahn, who succeeded Gottlieb, now the CEO of Flagship Pioneering, a VC firm behind Moderna. So we're talking three massive pharmaceutical companies, all vaccine manufacturers, revolving door between FDA and these companies, huge, huge money in this,

obviously. And actually, Vinay's research team published that 60% of FDA cancer drug reviewers go to work in biopharma when they leave the agency. So as someone who is a future, hopefully soon to be mother, who's going to be making decisions about vaccines for my own children, the idea that the FDA that's regulating the vaccines is a revolving door with the companies who make them. And that 75% of the FDA's drug budget comes from pharmaceutical companies. And then there's this weird, you know, crosstalk between the CDC and the FDA where the CDC is then jamming a vaccine schedule down our throat that's bigger than most other countries in the world. And then

we can't question it or else we're called, you know, we're shamed for being terrible anti-vax people. It's like, this is a really weird situation that we're in. And like Vinay said earlier, it's like the fact that someone's talking about this and questioning it, then add on the fact that these companies have legal immunity for wrongdoing and harm. We're living in a bizarre world, you know, and I think I think Americans just said enough of this. Like there's almost this assumption that we're dumb, you know, and that we can't understand what's going on. Well, well, it's true that we're too busy to pay close attention to it, right? I mean, like the average person is not,

they know nothing about the FDA because they don't care to know. They have so many other things to worry about. And there's been, prior to COVID at least, a trust in government that's just like, they got it, I'm not gonna worry about this stuff. Only now I think are people like, holy shit, I do need to worry. Well, thank God for independent media, you know, because I think a lot of this is getting out,

I think, on shows like yours and other amazing independent media platforms where even the sheer facts of what's happening with American health trends, I feel like are almost even the facts that non-controversial facts are not being talked about enough. Like, why is it not front page news that infertility is going up 1% per year? Why is it not front page news that sperm counts are going down 1% per year? Why is it not front page news that 75% of Americans have overweight or obesity, that 52% of American adults have type 2 diabetes, that 30 percent of teens have prediabetes, that autoimmune diseases are going up 12 percent per year, that 77 percent of young adults can't serve in the military because of obesity or drug abuse, that, you know, one in 22 kids in California have autism. And this is skyrocketing, that one

in two adults are going to get cancer in their lifetime, skyrocketing. Young adult cancer is up 79%. It goes on and on and on. You would think this would be a just absolute public health state of emergency like we did for COVID, but it's not. It's not. It's being downplayed. And so this is now, there is an avenue because of the beauty of independent media for this to actually be surfaced. And when people hear it, they know, they see it, that this is truth. And so I think, yeah, I just think it's a very, very exciting time where there's almost like an awakening happening. And, you know, there are such a focus on some of the more minutiae of things that RFK has said, but I think we all need to orient towards the big picture vision.

American health is being destroyed by chronic illness, which is rooted in diet, lifestyle, environmental toxins, and overuse of medications. And we've got to talk about that at the highest level. And he has Trump's buy-in. Trump is here. And whether people like him or not, Trump's, I think, purpose on this planet is to go up against, he wants to fight against corporate interests. And this populist movement has been about that. And he can't run again and he's already a billionaire.

So I think there's and he has seen the light, I think, from RFK that this chronic health issue is a massive issue. You saw him hold up that chart on Joe Rogan. He was clearly touched by this issue that life expectancy in the U.S. is the lowest of all developed high income nations nations, and we're spending 2x on health care than any other country. He is seeing this light, I think, in part because of what RFK has brought to the forefront and what independent media has helped put forward. Americans are seeing it. Everyone wants the trends to turn. But of course, there's so much

pushback to this because the bills of legacy media are paid by pharma. So there's a chokehold on actually talking about this. But things are shifting, I think, the cats out of the bag. And I think we're going to see monumental progress in the next four years. I believe that. You know, I haven't I have not been watching Fox News. I don't watch cable news anymore at all. But I guarantee you, Fox News has got not not positive on on RFKJ. I guarantee you because Pfizer's a big advertiser over there. And I just wonder, like I haven't checked the Wall Street Journal or the New York Post on RFKJ, but I'm just going to predict they're not going to be in his corner because they're all owned by the same company. Jesse Waters has been, I think, going hard on support for this. I mean, he's been doing

episode after episode about health and how many people are coming out on both sides to support RFK. So there's been some, I think, some positive trends. Yeah. Good. And I don't think Jesse's as controlled as some other people over there. So that's good. Good on him. He's a friend and I like him a lot and I like his show, though I don't watch cable news, so I just see his snippets. Anywho, keeping going on the list. By the way, do we have that Gottlieb clip? Did we find that? I had Scott Gottlieb on the show during the COVID pandemic and he had already started working for Pfizer and he was just spewing such nonsense in defense of the vaccines and in defense of the masks on children in schools. And it was just obvious that he was bought into like

the regime as opposed to just independent thought and facts. So we had this exchange. He did not expect this to be a contentious interview at all. And it didn't have to be, but he got unreasonable. Here's just a walk down memory lane. The masks are not effective and there aren't studies proving that they are. The CDC's own study deal with that. 90,000 students in the Atlanta school district prove that they do not have any effect. Why isn't that valid? Why isn't the CDC relying on its own study to allow us to unmask our children? My policy prescription would be that in a setting of a very contagious variant that we don't know how hard or easy it's going to be to control in a school setting where

the imperative is to keep kids in the classroom and also keep them safe. We should go into the school year adopting all the reasonable measures that we can take and peel them away as we see how successful we are. Masking has negative effects. Masking has negative effects on children. That's been proven as well. This is not a harmless measure and it's not helping. So why wouldn't we be honest about the CDC's own information? Well, that's what we're going to agree to disagree. Why wouldn't we be Casey? That's unbelievable. First of all, you're amazing. I mean, pushing back so hard so early when it was also not

acceptable to have these conversations. So thank you. It's astonishing, you know, and I think it's so interesting. Like I think as I've been digging even more, because I think something's so funny that's happening right now with the whole pushback to RFK. And you talked about this a little with Vinay, but like there's this whole thing about RFK is a lawyer. He should not be the head of the HHS. But of course, as we know, the current head of HHS is a lawyer, Xavier Becerra. And he's a career politician. And it's it's really fascinating when you start to ding it. I mean, my first question for anyone who's saying, oh, RFK is not qualified, is can you name the head of the HHS right now?

And I guarantee you most people could not. But, you know, he's probably a great he's probably a fine person. You know, no shade on him. I don't know him. But you actually just go to his ex profile and you're talking about kind of like the regime and this sort of like group thing. Every single post is about it's partisan. It's about Kamala. It's about Biden, Harris, what they've done. And it's all about

increased access to health care services, expanding access to medication and expanding the health care workforce. Nothing wrong with those things. But what it's doing is continuing the gaslighting of not talking about the root causes, not talking about the elephant in the room, which is the chronic disease epidemic. It's absent on his page. Then you go to the hhs.gov website, which everyone should do right now on a browser. The entire banner, the entire top of fold of the page is risk less, do more. OK, it is a litter and they say it flat out. It is a campaign for vaccine awareness and uptake. So it's like the entire personality of the HHS right now is get vaccines.

It's literally like and this does not matter what you're feeling, like people's feelings around vaccines. It's weird and myopic that the actual things that's torturing and shortening American lives right now is not mentioned. Then I invite everyone to go to the HHS.gov priority document of priorities for America. This PDF mentions vaccines 27 times. it does not mention the words chronic disease, diabetes, or obesity, the things that are costing trillions of dollars to the American healthcare system. I mean, 70% of our GDP goes to healthcare, $4.5 trillion a year. And they're trying to essentially jam down our throat that health is found in a syringe. And it's just, again, this has nothing to do with how people feel about vaccines. It is myopic.

It's distracted. And when you follow the money, you realize that it is intentional. We can't talk about that. Yeah, because I think the money piece relates to all of these points. Yes. The one conflict of interest that people at the CDC and the FDA have to your second point, uncompromised key research that sets the standard for health. Well, we learned from our last conversation. I've listened to Callie to the research that's being done to justify things like, you know, no more fat in your diet is paid for by interest groups like the sugar industry. And we're being misled and our government has got a hand in it. And then three, to reverse the trends of chronic disease problems.

Well, that involves big ag and some of the chemicals they use on our food and so on. And like it will require somewhat of a crackdown, which is where we worry that even the Republicans have rich donors attached to these industries. So let's take on the money piece of all of this. where we worry that even the Republicans have rich donors attached to these industries. So let's take on the money piece of all of this. Yeah. So just to kind of paint the picture here, let's look at NIH, FDA, and USDA. So NIH reported recently that since 2012, there's been 8,000 major conflicts of interest with NIH research with industry interests, so food and pharma. So most of us would think, oh, the NIH works for the American people. The NIH is going to focus on the top-tier priorities to keep Americans healthy.

That is not the case. They're working for two customers, industry who's paying the bills and, to some extent, the taxpayers, which are also paying the bills through our taxpayer dollars, but 8,000 conflicts of interest. Then you go to the FDA. 75% of the drug budget for the FDA is coming from the pharmaceutical industry. So the people who are regulating the drugs that go into our bodies are being paid for by the drug companies who want those pills and shots to go into our bodies. Make it make sense. Then we go to USDA, USDA food guidelines for America, which determine school lunch programs, which determine, you know, what's eligible on SNAP. 19 of the 20 people on the 2020 to 2025 USDA food guidelines for America had a conflict of

interest with the food industry. And the 2025 to 2030 guidelines that are coming up soon. It is astonishing the level of conflicts of interest with food and pharma. You can actually look on online, just look up conflicts of interest, but every, every player that you'd imagine ultra processed food companies is, has their hands in paying the people who are on this panel. So that, So as an American, I do not like that at all. I want uncompromised researchers making these guidelines. Then you look at medical education. When I was at Stanford Medical School, Stanford just took a $3 million grant from Pfizer for curriculum redevelopment. That, of course, all the articles around that time, you can say, this is going to have absolutely no impact. This is a no strings attached grant for Stanford. But we all know how

relationships work. And I don't even think of it as like, oh, this is bribery. We live in a relationship-based world where when you're in a partnership with a company or someone, there is a more favorable opinion of them. There is more lines of communication. I don't think it's necessarily nefarious. I think we live in a capitalistic society and this is the way business works. So we need to have a more open conversation about this because, and not even necessarily because industry having its hand in politics and agencies and supporting politicians is a problem in its own right. We need to have a conversation about it because the outcomes are disastrous.

We are sick as hell. And the trends, like I said, if these graphs continue, if the opioid deaths continue, if the obesity rates continue, if the diabetes rates, if the prediabetes rates in teens, if the depression, emotional neurodevelopmental issues continue, very bad. Cancer, Alzheimer's, they're all going up. So if this were clean and we were all getting healthier, maybe we wouldn't be having this conversation. But that's not what's happening.

It's a disaster. And so that's why we got to talk about some of these root cause issues of why potentially the guidelines we're getting and the way we're practicing isn't as good as it could be because it's muddied with corporate interests. So that's really what this is about, is just cleaning it up, making the research clean

so that we can hopefully create guidelines and a way of practicing true health care in America, not sick care, not reactive whack-a-mole siloed medicine, but really align all these taxpayer dollars and all these agencies towards the thing that matters, which is American thriving in health, which of course then will trickle around to the rest of the world as well. If we can crush it here, which we're not, but we can, it could have a huge positive impact on the whole world. So, you know, that's why the money matters. What's going to happen? What's going to happen when and if, um, the seed oil producers turn out to be big Trump donors, you know, I mean, that's where that's where I get worried. This is what I do know. I don't know the answer to that question.

What I do know is that we all have parents and many of us have children and we have siblings and we have friends no matter who we are, whether we're the head of the FDA, a politician, or a mom. We all have people we love, and people are getting hurt right now. People are sick. Every one of us knows someone who's had an early surprise cancer. We know someone who's dropped dead from a heart attack. This is becoming so common. And I do believe in my heart that unfortunately,

often when chronic illness and preventable illness touches us, it cracks something open. And so my hope would be that we bring some heart to this issue. I mean, we live in a complex capitalistic world. I think people are fundamentally good. And I think that we're confused and distracted. We've lost touch I think people are fundamentally good. And I think that we're confused and distracted. We've lost touch with our spirituality in this country. And, but fundamentally, I think we have to bring some heart to it. And, and the reason I say that is because I've seen so many people have awakenings this year about what's really going on. Let me tell you something from my, where I'm sitting, forgive me for interrupting you, but I've watched your story, which is very moving. And I, I believe you were deeply affected by the

loss of your mother, which was totally understandable. And you write so beautifully about that, what it meant for you when you were losing her and the experiences you and she had. And I think, and I know that you use the psychedelics too, which can also give you like a renewed belief in humanity and our shared connection and our connection to mother earth and all those things. And I, I haven't tried psychedelics, but I'm a big believer because I've seen them help a lot of people who are near and dear to me. But I, my, this is my long windup of saying you're too optimistic. You're too hopeful. I am a cynical news woman who covers Capitol Hill and these politicians for a living. And I do not believe people are

fundamentally good over there. I think they want to get paid. I'm very worried about, I haven't looked at it, but I'm sure that there are some big players in, you know, big ag or big pharma who are big Trump donors who are going to pick up the bat phone to say, RFKJ is fucking annoying. And I don't want him cracking down on seed oils or pesticide use or, you know, processed foods, whatever, take your pick. So that's where I am. But I mean, I think we have to take at face value the words coming out of Donald Trump's mouth recently. Donald Trump is eloquently talking about how he wants his legacy to be turning the tide on American health. I believe the energy behind that is real. And I also, like I said, he's already a billionaire. He has a bunch of grandchildren and a bunch of children

who care about health and he can't run again. So there is, I think, a really cool nexus of opportunity where he might say, I don't care about those donors. He doesn't need donors anymore, actually, right? Because he's not running again. So maybe there's a window here where like real change, uncompromised change could happen. I've also seen it firsthand with politicians that, you know, when Callie and I have been in D.C. to speak with Congress, it's beautiful. Like you've got Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican who, you know, has been touched by the chronic disease epidemic, heard our interview with Tucker Carlson and literally picked up the phone and called us

and was like, help me learn more about this. Just just picked up the phone. I think that what's that? I watched the whole thing. It was great. Yeah. And and so there's I think there is something that can happen when people awaken a little bit. And fundamentally, I think there's going to be executive leadership from the top. Trump has bought in from what he is saying. He's literally said out of Donald Trump's mouth, we're going to get the toxins out of the water. We're going to clean up the food system. We're going to get Americans healthy.

He's at the top. So, you know, let's hope that that inspiration stays strong. I believe it can, especially when you see, you know, people when he's taught when his acceptance speech, which I hope everyone has listened to. It's really quite uplifting. Whether you like Trump or not, it was very sincere. And when he talks about RFK, he's I'm going to let him run wild. And everyone starts cheering Bobby, Bobby, Bobby. I think Trump hears that like this is a legacy issue. There's a moment to do it. And I hope he I think he will stand strong and say, screw the bat phone calls like we're going to move forward and we're going to have an amazing legacy of this presidency of really turning the tide on the chronic epidemic. So I am optimistic and hopeful. That is my personality. But I hear what you're saying, too. Yeah.. Oh no, I pray you're right. I pray I'm wrong on this one. Now what, it could go the other way. Instead of RFKJ having a positive influence on Trump, Trump, in the same way I really thought that my older dog Thunder would be a good influence on

my next dog, Strudwick, the puppy, it wound up being the reverse. And now Thunder just got more and more, you know, problematic in her behavior. She, you know, she, I always say she was perfect until she started hanging out with the wrong crowd. And then she went downhill and started lying on my kitchen table. Anywho, you saw the picture of Trump and RFKJ on the plane eating McDonald's. Oh, my God. RFKJ's holding it. He looks like a hostage, Casey. Have you ever seen someone look so uncomfortable? No, no.

It's the funniest picture of all. Don Jr. tweeted out saying, Maha begins tomorrow. I actually think it's funny because the jerk critics were like, oh, he's a fraud. It's like everyone has a day here or there or a meal here or there where they're not entirely proud of what they ate. And certainly if the next president of the United States is sitting there and saying, would you like some? You're not going to be like, ew, you're gross. I mean, I also like none of us really know if he ate it. You know, I my my money would be on.

I already ate a few bites. That's what I heard. Right. And, you know, if they're like, yeah. So I am guessing he did not house that burger or drink that Coke. But it's just it's so in my mind, it's so irrelevant. Like we, we know what RFK believes in. He's been talking about this for 40 years. RFA RFK is jacked at 70. He is such an avid outdoorsman. He speaks fluently about regenerative agriculture and soil, and he is spiritually connected to nature. Like he's always hiking. He's teaching on Instagram about snakes and lizards and ravens. It's so deeply authentic. And he has a vision. He believes he has said this, that he is spiritually put on

this planet to find a way to serve. And this is the moment to do it. So I look at that photo and based on the hundreds of hours of my life I've spent engaging with what RFK is actually about through long form, not clips and headlines like most people are getting about that. I just don't care. And I think when you look at his track record, actions speak louder than words. Well, for 40 years, RFK has been an environmental lawyer. This is what I would say to anyone. Like this guy has sued Monsanto. This guy has sued GE for PCBs in the water. This guy started the Water Keepers Alliance to protect our waters. He's clean. He's tried to clean up the Hudson River. And so these are he has gone to battle. I mean, I just feel for him because it's like, it all just gets forgotten, you know, that he has done this work against big, big players. Um,

you know, he's, he's worked with the NRDC, the national resource defense council to fight, uh, water and air pollution from corporate activities. So all of that is to say that that photo is absolutely meaningless to me because I've chosen to deeply engage with what RFK is actually talking about. And I think the vast majority of people are getting their information from headlines and soundbites that are coming out of organizations for which 60% of their bills are paid by the pharmaceutical industry. So of course, they want to do... There are trillions of dollars of interest aligned with discrediting RFK and his message about chronic disease reversal. So of course, of course, this photo is being plastered everywhere.

You have to be skeptical about everything you're told about him, unless it's from a source that you know isn't biased against him. Well, I chose to read it a different way. I chose to read it as he was being polite. He wasn't saying no to the president who was offering him something. Maybe he had a couple of bites just to make it, you know, the same way somebody gives me fish. I'll have a couple of bites or I'll try, even though I cannot stand fish. It's a psychological thing. Back to my Hudson river traumas. Yeah, I know. I know. I read your book. I'm trying. I had salmon the other day just for you. Yeah, I know. I tried it. I tried to make myself do it, but then, then, then they, I know it has to be wild caught salmon, but that's really red. That's tough for people like me, Casey. I don't, it scares me. I'm working on it though. And by the way, I did get the carbon filter. I got the reverse osmosis. We've got all sorts of plans in progress over here. Thanks to you. Oh my gosh. I love it. I love it. And everybody else can do it too. All right, wait, we're going to take a

quick break and we're going to come back because there's more to discuss, including the New York Times trying to attack RFK on his push to get the artificial ingredients like food dyes out of our kids' cereal. Why are they on the wrong side? And also trying to challenge the notions about seed oils that we've been talking about for a couple of years here. We'll get into it with Dr. Casey Means right after this. I'm Megyn Kelly, host of The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM. It's your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations with the most interesting and important political, legal, and cultural figures today. You can catch The Megyn Kelly Show on Triumph,

a SiriusXM channel featuring lots of hosts you may know and probably love. Great people like Dr. Laura, I'm back, Nancy Grace, Dave Ramsey, and yours truly, Megyn Kelly. You can stream The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM at home or anywhere you are. No car required. I do it all the time. I love the SiriusXM app. It has ad-free music coverage of every major sport, comedy, talk, podcast, and more.

Subscribe now. Get your first three months for free. Go to SiriusXM.com slash MK show to subscribe and get three months free. That's SiriusXM.com slash MK show and get three months free. Offer details apply. Dr. Casey Means, co-author of Good Energy, is back with me now. And the audience may remember our discussion with Mark Sisson and Dr. Kate Shanahan and many others. Dr. Casey Means in that last episode about seed oils and what a real problem they are in the American diet.

Not so, says the New York Times in a piece just dated a couple of weeks ago, 11-9-2024, writing, are seed oils actually bad for you? To their many vocal detractors, they are referred to as the hateful eight. That's Kate Shanahan that she used that term. Canola oil, corn oil, sunflower oil, and other refined oils made from the seeds of certain plants have become lightning rods of the wellness influencers and some politicians, including RFKJ, saying that they unknowingly poison Americans. The claim that seed oils are ruining our health is especially rankling to nutrition scientists who see them as a big step forward from butter and lard.

Decades of research, decades, Casey, have shown that consuming seed oils is associated with better health, said, wait for it, you're a Stanford-trained doctor, Christopher Gardner, a professor of medicine at Stanford University. What do you make of the attempt to rehabilitate the seed oils? Well, first of all, there is kind of this all-out campaign from legacy and print media to create confusion in the nutrition industry. We had that Time article a few weeks ago. What if ultra-processed foods aren't as bad as we think? This is ludicrous. We know that ultra-processed foods aren't as bad as we think. This is ludicrous. We know that ultra-processed foods are one of the leading modifiable causes of premature death globally. And so it's strange. But when I think about seed oils, there's basically five things I think about of why I don't eat them, why I don't touch them. And the first one isn't even about human health. It's actually about

environmental health. When you look at these seed oils, which have now become really one of the predominant sources of calories in America over the past 50 years, these are grown with monocrop industrial agriculture on these huge monocrop farms covered in pesticides and takes a lot of these plants to just make small bottles of oil. And over 90% of the canola crops in the United States are genetically engineered. So we're talking about crops that are turned into an oil that are leading to environmental devastation of the soil. So that's number one. The second is just how they're produced. So if you've watched a video of how canola oil is produced, it's absolutely- Yeah, we looked at it the last time you were on.

It's nauseating. It's nauseating. And these processes, it's involved like eight to 10 steps, including heating, flaking, soaking, pressing, solvent extraction, bleaching, and deodorizing, heated to really high temperatures using solvents like hexane, and then put in a plastic bottle to sit on a shelf where they can be oxidized by the light that's being exposed to them. This is in contrast to more natural forms of traditional fats like butter, which involves literally one step churning it or olive oil, which involves basically one step, squishing it. So this is just common sense, right? This is ultra-processed, chemically refined food that humans have never eaten before.

Why would we start to look at this like it's some panacea for heart health? The third thing, which a lot of people talk about, they're very high in omega-6 fats, and our diets now have way too many omega-6 fats, which are pro-inflammatory. We need some omega-6 fats, but we're now eating like 20 to one, which creates a pro-inflammatory state in the body. They're easily oxidizable and oxidative stress. As I talked about, let me, let me, let me just jump in. Cause this is what they say in the, in the times piece. Okay. This is what they say. A large body of research has shown that people who consume more omega-6 fatty acids or who have higher levels of those fats in their blood have lower risks for cardiovascular disease,

type 2 diabetes, cancer, and earlier death. That's a completely controversial statement. That is actually, like even in medical school, I learned something different than that. That the huge disproportionate amount of omega-6 fats that we have. And, and mechanistically, we also understand this, like these, these fats, like arachnonic acid and the omega-6 chain lead to pro-inflammatory cytokines in our blood, in our bloodstream. So, you know, they can, they've, they've written a lot of stuff about nutrition. That's blatantly false, like processed foods being okay. But that one actually goes against what I've learned both mechanistically and even in medical school. So that's very, very strange.

They're desperate to rehabilitate seed oils and make us feel like what they say is, look, these foods, he says, we're eating more of these oils because they're used in ultra-processed and fast foods, which make up a larger share of our diets today than they did in the past, said this Dr. Gardner of Stanford. Those foods aren't good for us, he's saying about ultra-processed foods and fast foods, but there's no evidence to suggest that seed oils are what makes them unhealthy. Yeah, so there's a good point there, which is that even,

let's say that the chugging some canola oil was totally innocuous to our there, which is that like, even let's say that the chug in some canola oil was totally innocuous to our health, which it's not. These are the backbone of ultra processed food in the United States. They're cheap, they're subsidized by the farm bill. So they're artificially cheap. And they, you know, a huge place that the farm bill dollars go towards taxpayer dollars is soybeans, which are turned into soybean oil. So they're artificially cheap. So the ultra-processed food companies love them. They put them into their ultra-processed food, which are now 67% of human calories that we're eating in the United States, that we know are destroying our cellular health. And so there's a fair point there by Dr. Gardner that

it's really, it's, it's the context in which they're eating, being eaten a problem is a problem. Um, but also the reality is that 67% of our calories are coming from ultra processed food now. So we need to examine this as like in context of what's happening. Um, but no, I mean, I, for all the reasons, it's not just ultra processed foods. I mean, good luck finding a salad dressing that doesn't have this vegetable oil in it. This canola oil. That's it's very hard. Actually the olive oil is not the default. Oh, not even close. Cause it's more expensive. It doesn't get the federal subsidies. You, you could buy a chicken breast at whole foods. That chicken breast is at the, at the hot bar or in the deli. It's being cooked with canola oil. Almost certainly. Um, thank goodness for

apps like seed oil scout and other things that are helping us be aware. But you know, yeah, I think, um, the fact that a huge percentage of American calories are now are coming from these chemically refined foods. Like this is one of those moments where we need to use not only there's the research that that shows mechanistically that high omega-6 fats cause inflammation in our bodies and our pro-oxidant, but also just use our common sense. Like we don't want these things that are bleached and chemically refined with hexanes being a majority of the calories that we're eating, obviously. Here's the other thing. Let me say this. It's not easy to get seed oils out of your

diet. It's not, but it's possible. The first thing you do is go into your pantry and throw away almost everything. But try it for two weeks and see what happens to your body. Just try it for two weeks and see what happens. That's what I did did after Kate Shanahan came out. I was like, oh my God, I'm fit again. You know, it's like, there I am. I shrunk off that extra layer of inflammation that was all over me. It really makes a difference. So what the bottom line is that RFKJ and hopefully the means twins, they're not twins, but your brother and sister are going to be helping us not have to do this crap. Like we're not going to ideally have to be so discerning in every single thing we choose because there will be plenty of ready-to-grab ingredients on the store shelves that have not been, you know, modified in this way that aren't like cancer in a jar or a package.

And it just won't be so hard for people like me and people who have less means than I have. Okay. But wait, I want to, I want to ask you about this too. Two other things quickly. So we only have a couple of words, a couple of minutes left. First of all, how, what pasta are we supposed to be getting? Cause it's been very hard. Well, I know it's hard. You shouldn't be eating the pasta, but the Italian pasta is good for you. And they spray all of our wheat with the terrible stuff. So what kind of pasta can we get? That's not terrible. I mean, first of all, no non-organic pasta, whether it's wheat or non-wheat they've showed that bonds of the chickpea pasta, which is non-organic has huge glyphosate residue. So don't do non-organic pasta. Um, and then I would probably do a,

like an organic black bean pasta or a lentil pasta, which often the boxes have one ingredient. It's, uh, there's also amazing lupini bean pasta. Um, there's a brand Kaizen that does that. So, you know, something made of a bean or a lentil is a good option if it's organic. Okay. Secondly, the New York times has this piece, um, talking about how they're trying to fact check RFKJ for saying that the, um, that Fruit Loops as an example has too many artificial ingredients questioning why the Canadian version has fewer than the U S version. And the New York times in an aha moment, trying to, like, I got him, writes, but he was wrong, claiming authoritatively that, in fact,

the ingredient list is roughly the same. Although, Canada's has natural colorings made from blueberries and carrots, while the U.S. product contains red dye 40, yellow 5, and blue 1, as well as butylated hydroxy two lane or bhd lab made chemical that is used for freshness that's their fact it's priceless it's like this is the thing they think we're stupid and americans i mean you saw how this blew up on social media charlie kirk posted about it it went viral we're not you know we can actually americans can handle nuance so you know it's like yeah similar, you know, we can actually, Americans can handle nuance. So, you know, it's like, yeah, similar ingredients, you know, this one just happens to have poison

in it, but it's just, it's, but it's the same number. It's also not the same number of ingredients you just showed it, but you know, let's just, let's just talk about the facts. Red 40, which is banned in many other countries has been linked to attention disorders in children with strong evidence in conventional journals. It's also been linked to cancer. BHT, mutilated hydroxy toluene, it's a preservative. It's banned in Europe in food, and it's been found to be toxic in animals. It may cause liver, thyroid, kidney, lung problems, and act as a tumor promoter. I don't want these in my food. They are banned in other countries. And it's wonderful that RFK is talking about the food system. This is one small part of it. There are actually 4,000 chemicals allowed in our food by the FDA right now,

many of which have never been tested for safety. So the broader point is we have to start talking about these toxins in our food system on a really big stage. God bless you for doing it. Your interview on Tucker Carlson, I really think it helped change the world. Yeah, like more and more people saw it. RFKJ was attracted to it. He's been fighting similar fight his whole life,

but it aligned him with you and your brother. And bam, we're off to the races. Can't wait to see what's next for you, Casey. Thanks for being here. Thanks, Megan. Thanks. Oh, it's exciting. Okay, we are back tomorrow.

Don't forget her book is called Good Energy with Andrew Klavan. Interestingly, Doug Brunt is interviewing Spencer Klavan over on his podcast today. All the Klavins with us, Kellys and Brunts. We'll see you then. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.