The Way I Heard It with Mike Rowe - 462: Del Bigtree—An Inconvenient Study

Episode Date: December 9, 2025

On this eye-opening episode, Mike welcomes filmmaker and television veteran Del Bigtree of The HighWire to discuss his newest documentary, An Inconvenient Study—a film that investigates what happened to the most thorough childhood vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study ever done. They discuss how Del convinced a doctor at one of the most prestigious health institutes in the nation to conduct the study, the shocking findings, and why the study has never seen the light of day… until now.

Hey guys, it's Mike Rowe. This is the way I heard it. My guest today is Dell Big Tree, and the title of this episode is an inconvenient study. Tell them why, Chuck. Well, that's the name of Dell's most recent movie, an inconvenient study, which is about a study that is very inconvenient for a lot of people. Oh, man. This is, if you don't follow me over on socials, let me just tell you real quick what's happened, like over the last month or so or two, I guess. guess. I interviewed Gavin DeBecker about his book called Forbidden Facts. And it sort of went viral, I suppose, lots and lots of conversation about this whole business of autoimmune diseases being linked to various vaccine schedules. And a lot of people were upset with me because they think that all of those theories are conspiracy theories. And they think that all of those concerns, and they think that all of those concerns have been debunked, and I completely respect that point of view. What I don't respect,

and what I wasn't persuaded by, was the type of argument that sort of evolved over there on Facebook, which basically came down to shut up, Mike, the sciences settled, that's been debunked, I can't believe you would hang out, blah, blah, blah, and a lot of ad hominid and stuff. So anyway, this conversation has been ongoing, and for the record, I am not anti-vaccine at all. In fact, I'm fully vaccinated, as far as I know, with every vaccine a person can get, including the COVID vaccine. But I'm troubled more and more here of late, specifically by the exploding instances of childhood diseases that are consistent with the exploding schedule of childhood vaccines. I think what you're trying to say, Mike, is that the more vaccine, you know, as time goes by,

kids are getting more and more vaccines, and at the same time, kids are getting more and more chronic diseases. Now, is it causation? Causation does not equal correlation. I understand that. And I'm also familiar with the Dunning-Krooger effect. And I also realize I'm somewhat out of my lane, as I've been reminded to have these concerns at all. But it's not just me. I mean, millions and millions and millions of people have lost their basic trust in science, in medicine, and in journalism. And we're constantly confronted with experts who disagree. I mean, you can switch from Fox to CNN, and you can see that. But you can

can also see it in virtually every scientific debate that's going on today. So, flashing forward, I invited my friends over on the social channels to watch the movie we're about to discuss. It's called an inconvenient study. I encourage you to watch it too. You don't need to do it right now. You can do it after the conversation, if you'd like. It's very powerful, and it's upset a lot of people already. But For the life of me, I don't know where it's inaccurate. I can't find anything in the movie that is fundamentally false, but it's a movie that shows a study that was never published,

but nevertheless conducted, that offers just a massive signal that something is amiss between a group, a large group, of vaccinated kids and unvaccinated kids. And to be clear, we're talking about the childhood vaccination schedule, not the COVID vaccine. Correct. Although Del Bigtree, my guest, has a lot to say about the COVID vaccine. And you know what?

I do too. Not just the vaccine, but the impact of living through the last four years. I still think a big chunk of the country is suffering a kind of post-refering. a kind of post-traumatic stress. I still think we're trying to come to grips with the fact that trust has been broken. And so a big chunk of my audience, whom I adore, are still very much of a mind

that we should defer to the experts and not read books written by criminologists about... Childhood vaccine schedules, yes. Correct. And so what this really is is a conversation about experts versus people who are deeply concerned

about contradictions in the data. Make of it what you will. I promised that I would watch this movie in the wake of the aforementioned conversations. And many people ask me to invite Dell on who I've had met before and you'll learn very, very, very soon under what circumstances.

But if your mind is open, I believe you're going to enjoy all of this. If it's not, I look forward to hearing from you over on Facebook. An inconvenient study indeed with Del Big Tree right after this. I love stories like this. Seven years ago, a guy named Ben Still was a musician. He had zero interest in running a food company, but he was annoyed that so much imported meat was being deceptively marketed and labeled as domestic

and decided to fix the problem. The result was a company called Good Ranchers. It's a completely honest, totally transparent meat company that deals directly with American farms and ranches and promises to deliver high-quality American-grown meat for a fair price. Today, that promise. And Ben's absolute determination to keep it has not only propelled good ranchers into the top tier of meat, delivery companies, it's fueled enormous awareness among meat eaters like me, that we have all been affirmatively deceived by policies that allow imported me to be marketed as domestic. That's the reason I switched to good ranchers. If I'm being honest, though, I doubt that I would have stayed

this long had the quality not been so exceptional. Every single cut I've devoured from good ranchers has been straight up delicious and every morsel was raised on a small American farm or ranch. Give them a try. Subscriptions are affordable and flexible. In fact, if you start your plan today, you'll get free meat for life and $40 off your first order. Just use code mic at good ranchers.com. Free meat for life, 40 bucks off your first order. Good ranchers.com. American meat delivered. If you could eat a steer, if you could eat a cow, don't take a chance on a foreign ranch. Get good ranchers now. Hey-ha!

Well, first of all, where's your security? I don't have any, you know? Once I left Bobby's side, there was no security to be found. Oh, my God. I figured you'd show up with two or three guys with suspicious bulges around their ankles. Yeah. I don't think, you know, I mean, you can't live in a world living like that. You know, being, and I don't think that's not realistic for the way I want to live my life.

Well, good. Yeah. We've met, I guess this will be the third time. I think it's about the third time. Like we met when I met you at Freedom Fest once in Memphis, a year and a half ago, maybe more. I think it's more, but time flies. I've lost all track of time. I was in a thing called Freedom Fest, and it was Memphis.

I'd heard your name, but I didn't know about the high wire, which I believe that's what I was on. Yeah, we saw you were there, I said, would you mind you try to? shopping in and being a guest on the high wire. And I googled it and I'm like, holy cow, man. What is this jagged little bill all about? I mean, I was intrigued by everything I kind of read. And I showed up early in the morning and you guys had taken over a suite in a hotel. Yeah.

And it was like a mash unit or something. I mean, you have a great team. And they're on it. They get it done. They make miracles out of, you know, square boxes with no windows. and, you know. It's a big team. Yeah.

How many are on it now? And is it still? I'd say, you know, the high wire and I can or nonprofit is probably about 25 people, maybe 30. And then, of course, half of the work we do is legal. And so, you know, Aaron Siri is our lead attorney. But we've sort of built that out. I mean, that his, you know, group probably got 20 or 30 people that work for us pretty full-time, doing the government, trying to, you know, use.

this topic of medical freedom as a way to wake people up to the fact that you're about to lose freedom. You know, if you don't control your body, if you're not the one that's responsible for the bodies of your children, then we're, I don't think we're in, I don't think we're free people. What does ICANN stand for? Informed consent action network. And why are so many people opposed to it? I think we are challenging what is really a dogma. We want to say it's science. I think we're transitioning to the space where people like yourself, I think our people, finally asking the right questions. You know, you can't have an intelligent look at the world,

be open to anything's possible. We've been lied to in so many different ways that at least I have to be open to the possibility. Right? I mean, I think isn't the definition of its insanity, believing you've got it right and everyone else has got it wrong or some form of that. I think we have to have some, you know. That's the definition of narcissism. Oh, maybe narcissism. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Yeah. But they're adjacent. Yeah. So. So we're in a time now, and I think COVID woke a lot of people up to an issue that I've been working on for since really 2016, which is vaccine safety. Your first film was faxed?

Yeah. So we've made a lot of headway. I mean, I think watching Robert Kennedy Jr. get sworn as HHS secretary, you know, I was director of communications. We met there too. That was the second time we met. Yeah. We were sitting. I was one of my favorite meetings of all times was interviewing you as the potential to.

be vice president for Robert Kennedy. The way you handle that meeting was beautiful. The way you speak is phenomenal. And as a director of communications, I can say, I almost shed a tear. When I watched you handling the press coming in on you, you know, why were you asked, what's going on there? And when I watched you handle that, I just thought, oh my God, he would have been such a dream. That would have made my job so easy. Your understanding of press, how to handle it, how to be gracious, but factual and articulate. It's something that you obviously, I mean, you've been at this for so long, but it's also something you can't teach somebody. You can't bring someone in and stick them into VP into a very, you know, into a very controversial presidential campaign that we had with Robert Kennedy Jr.

And, you know, you know, well, look, it would have been awesome to have someone that could handle the press as well as you do. But thanks. But the country deserves, I'm a single issue guy, you know, and I'm not a political animal. And I knew both of those things when Bobby called. And he encouraged me to take the meeting anyway because he said, you'll have a story. And you know what? He's so right. And life is, you know, even when you're pretty sure you're going to do or not do a thing,

It just, no one had, I was flattered. You know, I was flattered. And I don't, I don't see eye to eye on a lot of things that Bobby, at least as I understand. Yeah. But I was just so interested in the idea that he would be that interested in me. It was just so basic, you know. And, you know, I brought Mary, my business partner, and we were driving over. And she's like, you say yes to this.

And there's going to be a hole in the wall shaped like me running. Okay, you understand that. I'm like, yeah, look, I'm not going to say yes. But I just felt like there was a strange triangulation going on in my business and in the country where I was getting a lot of calls. And I think I had been made strangely relevant by the headlines and by events, right? As Harold McMillan famously said, events, dear boy, events. And, you know, I remember talking to you in Memphis about this when we sat down and did.

your show. I just, it was like, that to me felt like the very beginning of the crumbling of our institutions and an almost primal level of trust that was suddenly feeling very wobbly. And really, I just wanted to see what Bobby had to say about that. I didn't know you were going to be in the room. I didn't know Cheryl was going to be in there. I didn't know any of the cats would be there. And it wasn't fun, but boy, it was, I'll never forget it. And what struck me more than anything was the fact that a simple and inevitable no, it took me a month to say. Because you know what he said to me, man, that really stuck. He said, yeah, yeah, you disagree with me on this, you disagree with me on that. We were talking about energy. And I'm like, look, man, I'm friends

with Charles Koch. He supports my foundation. He said, ah, yeah, I sued. him a couple times. I know. But he said, listen, I don't need to be surrounded by people who agree with me on everything. Tell me if you disagree with the idea that the middle class needs a better shake. I said, no, I don't. Tell me if you disagree with the idea that these constant wars are a bad idea. I said, no, I don't. And then tell me if you don't think we're the sickest country on earth right now. I said, I do. He goes, well, you agree with the things that keep me up at night. Yeah.

And that's why I couldn't just say no. And the last thing he said was this micro works thing, I can make it macro works. Yeah. And that has stuck with me to this day. So when you see him again, tell him, thanks for that turn of phrase. Yeah. Because we are now. I mean, much of what he suggested I ought to think about doing is happening.

Yeah. So it does feel like a lot of what we've discussed in the past is just like a leaf in the tide, you know, it's just, everything's being pushed forward. And there's kind of a, just an inevitability about things that's interesting time to be alive. I think it's, I mean, I think that's the gift we've been given if you stop complaining about what's happening and realize, you know, what is it, the ancient proverb, may you live in interesting times, we absolutely do. And I think that that moment, you know, we were a rag tag, you know, a group of people. I'd never run a campaign in my life, hadn't really been around politics. I'm just a media guy.

And, you know, but I love Bobby. I've loved what he stood for. And I think we all, and the reason I think I love that meeting with you is, I think, as you said, we all feel like there's a providence to the life we're in at this moment. There's something really important that whether it's happening, has to happen, for this dream of America to succeed or to continue. We need change. We need people that care and are passionate.

And I think that that was what we were, you know, trying to put together to say, no matter what, this team, as it moves with Bobby, the four of us in the room was like Amarillus Kennedy, I think Charles Eisenstein and I. And we all left our lives because we felt this calling that this is a ride to get somewhere. And, you know, I've thought about it. I think, you know, I was standing in the Oval Office when Bobby put his hand on the Bible and got sworn in. And it was really, I just thought to myself, did I ever, first of all, this is perfect. It's perfect that he's going to be head of HHS, the most powerful position in health in the world. The main reason I was with him was I want medical freedom. I want people to be able to make their own medical choices. I want transparency in science, which has disappeared.

Bobby stood for all those things. And so the idea was if he runs for president, if he could get that job, he can put someone into HHS and start. cleaning up, you know, what I think are corrupt agencies that are not out for our best interest. And now he's not going to be distracted by wars or any other problem. He gets to focus right on that. But it's interesting because I thought about it. I was thinking, did I ever picture him being president? I mean, I passionately stood there.

I put up the big shows when he went into, you know, when he announced, I, you know, decorated that stage, directed it. I put up the stage when we ran his independence. And now all of a sudden we're going to join, you know, President Trump. And I'm running ads to move Bobby's, you know, voters over to Trump. And but I just thought, you know, a lot of like sort of, you know, new age thinking would be put the vision board, you know, put Bobby at the Oval Office desk. Like, I never did anything like that. Yeah.

And I don't think anyone on the team did. I don't think, I think what we felt was something big is happening. We're on a wave. We don't know what this wave is. We're not going to judge it. We're just going to keep just doing. doing what seems like the next right move. Bobby is going somewhere in here.

It may be president. Whatever it is, it feels too big to stop. And so, you know, I think that's how I see the world now, which is I don't know how this all ends. But I know that my job is to just do the next right thing, very simply. I invited John because I had a fascinating conversation with Gavin, the Becker. I've talked to that Gavin and I have become friends as a result of this. meeting and I really wanted to talk to him in person here. Again, he came in once,

it was maybe a year ago, I guess. Yeah. And forbidden facts came out. Yeah. And I read it. And I thought, oh, God, I'm just asking for trouble, but I need to talk to him. And so a couple weeks ago, we had a chat. And, you know, this podcast gets its share. And I got whatever, 8 million people on social. But I wrote what I wrote and I put it out there and, man, I'm telling you, whatever this is indicative of, you tell me, but people don't share little videos and podcast posts. It's just a promotional thing. I mean, this thing is, thousands of people have shared it.

Hundreds of thousands have read it. The people who are angry are very angry. The people who are relieved and emboldened and grateful for a book like this are tremendously so. And so I'm like really seeing in my ecosystem no middle. Well, are you sick of it yet? Are you sick of AI hogging up all the headlines and sucking up all the bandwidth? You find yourself wishing we lived in a simpler time. Do you miss a rotary phone?

Well, get over it. The genie is out of the bottle. The poop is out of the goose, I'm afraid. AI is here to stay. And every business in the country is asking themselves the same question. How do we make it work for us? Well, the answer to that question varies, but you'll find it in a free guide that you can get right now at netseweet.com slash Mike.

It's called demystifying AI. It's totally free. It's essential reading for anybody trying to make sense of a future that appears to have arrived yesterday. NetSuite, of course, is the number one AI enterprise resource planning software out there, trusted by over 43,000 businesses. With NetSuite, you can use the AI of your choice, GROC or Claude or Chat, GPT, whatever else is out there to connect to your actual business data, all of it, and automate all of those tiresome, time-sucking, soul-deaddening manual processes.

This is AI built into the system that's currently running your business. Learn more at netsuite.com slash Mike. And while you're there, pick up their free business guy, demystifying AI. It's filled with super useful information. And again, it's free at netsuite.com slash mike. That's netsuite.com. There's no middle. And it was the fall out of that initial post, and I sent you my rejoinder.

Yeah. Just because I wanted you to see what was going on in a tertiary way as a result of Gavin's book. And now the whole thing has just got me thinking more broadly about what in the actual hell is going to happen as a result of this colossal erosion of trust. Yeah. Not by everyone. There's still plenty of people in the country who are quick to tell me the science has been settled and that all that nonsense has been debunked and that Bobby Kennedy is a loon and that haven't you heard? What are you talking about? You don't get your advice from a criminologist.

I get my advice from a scientist. And I'm like, do you not remember what just happened over the last four years? Never mind Agent Orange. Never mind thalidomide. never mind the Tuskegee syphilis study. Right? And so I'm most interested in getting your thoughts. And obviously I want to talk about your movie,

which I watched last night twice. Thank you. But I want to... I think the reason I took that meeting with Bobby, and I think the reason we're both kind of fumbling to articulate the strangeness of whatever it is is happening, is because at least half the country, no longer trust the experts.

Right. And I understand why. When the experts can't agree, then it falls to somebody somewhere to make a call. And that's an awful lot to ask when the stakes are mortal, when they're your kid and when you're a parent who is not a scientist. But hoping against hope that something persuasive

and rational is going to land in your lap. End of rant. But that's where I am. Yeah. And since you've, this is your stock and trade. Yeah. Well, I mean, it's funny because you sent me that post and your response to that post about 30 seconds after I was sitting at lunch with my friend here in L.A. And I said the fact that Mike Rowe is going to have this conversation shows you where we're at that he is going, that he is stepping into a space.

I don't believe two years ago he would have ever stepped into. Three months ago. You know, and I think COVID is a part of it. I think there's a lot that's happened. But also this conversation has changed. We've managed to make it a mainstream question. Maybe, as you said, I think we're at least, I think we're at 50-50 now, whereas it used to be three to five percent, at best 10 percent of people against the 90 that just thought it's settled.

And so there's been a massive shift, and that shift has been being driven when you talked to, Gab, when you look at the data, as they say, vaccine hesitancy tends to be higher educated individuals, lawyers, doctors that are questioning it, which is not what you would expect. And so, you know, we have got to be allowed to ask questions. And, you know, you're in media. This is what I say is a journalist, which is what I'm not a medical expert, just like Gavin. I'm just a journalist. So I'm not here to give anyone medical advice.

I just know how to research things. I know how to read studies. I know how, and I've been suing the government looking for information that the say is there, which hand it to me. I'd like to see it. But, oh, ye, you've little. Yes, right?

I mean, you know, but ultimately, if we can't ask questions, which is the heart of a journalist, that's my job. My job, as far as I'm concerned, is the fourth the state. We're the fourth branch of government. Our founding fathers said, there's going to be this other non-official part of our government, which is essentially media.

The press has got to never shirk its duty to ask the most ridiculous questions, the most pressing questions, the most important questions. It should have no allegiance to a government that's in power or to any industry around it. It should be completely free to investigate whatever it wants to investigate. And profoundly skeptical. Profoundly skeptical. And deeply annoying to power. in every event. The press, the last thing the media should care about,

the last thing a good journalist should care about is ratings, likeability, Q scores, they should be inherently disagreeable and as free of ego as a good scientist. I mean, those two things are so close to. That's why I'm bringing it up because I think it's the same foundational principle for science. It's the exact same principle. The question is the core of the value of the task.

Science must be questioned. If the question ever stops being asked where it's not allowed in the room, then science has just been converted into a religion. And the entire purpose of science was to get out of this faith-based, we're afraid of, you know, I remember going to the Anasazi ruins and reading that they had a ceremony. I don't know how they knew it, but they had a ceremony where they would asked the son to come back in the winter. And I just, like I almost had tears, the humility that these people didn't know if the sun's going to come back. We have to have a ceremony to ask it to come back. We didn't want to live like that. We want to know what is the sun doing? What is, you know, science is going to explain everything. And, you know, finding that balance

with religion and science. But now when we're in a culture where you're a herit, I mean, it's a religion. You're a heretic if you question the vaccine program. You're a heretic if you question, you know, the regulatory agencies and why are they making decisions? You're a heretic, wait a minute, how much funding is coming in from pharma into government? You know, why can't we ask these questions? And, you know, just to, and we're going to get deeper into it, but I would just, I said to Bobby just the other day when I watched the last hearing with Bernie Sanders railing into him, I said, Bobby, you know, the next time Bernie rails, you know, lays into you, I would point out, Bernie, we agree that pharma lies all the time. We agree that

pharma puts out products that are dangerous. We agree that there's too much funding coming from pharma into the government. If you and I sat down, we would be in total agreement that the drug companies are out of control, that they're pushing products on kid, that were over-diagnosing things. You would agree, agree, agree. But if I take this word drug and convert it and suddenly call it a vaccine. Bernie's out. I'm out. You're out. Now suddenly you're out. There's no questions. There's this is made by angels. It's not the same industry. It's got to be a different part of the building, a different wing, beautiful people, only there to help people. Doesn't need to be tested. Doesn't, you know, what the hell happened? We just took some letters. Same thing. Some sort

of witches brew of something that affects your body. And why can't we question it? I look, dogma is such a great word. You used it before. You know the book? I, morals and dogma. No. Alfred Pike. For years, it was the book that came out that revealed all the secrets of Freemasonry. And so for many, many, many years, there was a standing order among the Scottish rights to, you find that book in a library, you take it and you don't bring it back. You just get that book out of the space. But I just always loved the combination of those two things, morality and dogma. And how one does not necessarily lead to the other

and how the religiosity that you're talking about has, I think in the minds of a lot of people infected both the fourth estate and the scientific community. Because look, science and journalism have so much in common, but the first is real curiosity, right? Like you've got to be genuinely interested in getting at the enlightenment of a thing. But you can't possibly be curious without

being humble, which is in other words you just used, humility. Because to be curious is to be fundamentally ignorant. You can't know the answer and be curious. So then how did both institutions wind up abdicating on humility, replacing it with arrogance, but still claiming curiosity. We're curious now, but we act as if we know, and we become offended if we're questioned.

I googled a bunch of stuff. I asked AI when you were on your way up here. And I said the same thing to Gavin. It's the AI can't talk about either one of you without every sentence being filled with these parents, parentheticals, right? Who's since debunked and not proven. And I mean, it's to the point where it's almost impossible to read the sentence without all the qualifiers in it.

Right. Right. So I guess if there's a question in this, it does feel like it's, we're just running into a place. So if journalism and science have both lost the trust of the American people. what is the future of your film an inconvenient study and how will that land? Because it just came out, right? It came out, I guess, like, three,

just over three weeks ago, November 11th. We won the Malibu Film Festival here in town, and then we put it out that night for free for everyone to watch an inconvenient study. It's put out by my nonprofit. And I'm really excited about what I'm seeing worldwide. I mean, the response is worldwide right now. What is it?

What is the response? You know what? What is the movie? Okay, yeah. Let's just be clear. All right. At the heart of this conversation of vaccine safety is how do we determine it? How do we know if vaccines are making us healthier or if they're making us sicker? Or if there's a balance or is it just some people? Maybe there's just a small group of people that are really having a bad outcome and we should figure that out.

None of those questions are currently allowed to be asked. As soon as you question it all, we've broken into safe and effective, safe and effective, this mantra that we've been living by. So I had the opportunity when I put out vaxed in 2016, I was traveling the country, and we had a big bus that said vaxed on the side of it. And of course, that was about really autism and the MMR vaccine. It was a very specific story about a whistleblower inside of the CDC named Dr. William Thompson that said, we're committing scientific fraud in our vaccine safety study, especially this MMR autism story. people were signing the names of their injured children, their dead children after vaccines. And I'll say this.

You know, as a filmmaker, I made that film. I was an executive producer on it. I knew there was an issue. But when we got kicked out of Tribeca Film Festival, that created the, you know, a tidal wave of negative press like you've never seen, calling us baby killers, everything else. It was fantastic. It was like Passion of the Christ. Suddenly, I opened up in an art house theater and there's a line down the block like it's the first. Star Wars. It was amazing. And in the second screening, I asked, you know, I want to know who that

audience was. And so we were doing Q&As after every screening. And so I got up and I just said, would everyone with a vaccine injured child, just please stand up? And three quarters of the room stood up. And it felt like the oxygen had been sucked out of the room. And it was shocking. I knew, I mean, I'm thinking this is a small problem, autism small problem. And, you know, obviously they're being drawn to this film. But you should have seen the other, you know, 30 people. looking at all of these people around them that are going through this really horrific experience. I ended up asking that question for three or four shows a day, five days a week, an entire year. And the whole time, three quarters of the audience stood up.

This thing is so much bigger. And you had no idea. And I really did, had no idea. Well, people are still raving, raving. I tell you about my mother's performance in the latest. Pure Talk commercial, and if you haven't seen it, I encourage you to give it a look on my Facebook page and read the comments. They're hysterical. In this commercial, you'll not only see Peggy Roe gently criticizing her oldest son for his longstanding and well-established commitment issues,

you'll learn about the latest offer from Pure Talk, which includes unlimited talk, text, and data for just $3499 a month, with no contracts and no commitments of any kind. You can see why I love these guys. If, on the other hand, you have better things to do with your time, then watch my mom and me be impossibly charming together, then allow me to remind you, here, without all the cleverness and charm, that unlimited talk, text, and data on a blazing fast network for just $3499 a month, really is an unmitigated bargain from an American wireless company that keeps all their customer service in this country, supports our veterans in a meaningful way, as well as the Microwworks Foundation and allows me to exploit my own mother in a national advertising campaign.

Do what my mom did. Get yourself unlimited high-speed data for just $3499 a month at puretalk.com. You can switch in as little as 10 minutes at puretalk.com slash row. They had been silenced. We don't know how many are out there. No doctor knows how many, you know, how many people actually have autism? What is this thing? All of it.

So anyway, I was on tour with that film, and we were pulling up through Michigan, and someone said to me, I know the head of infectious disease at Henry Ford Health. I'm like, wow, that's like one of the greatest research institutes in the world. And I'm always up for a conversation, as you are. You know, I'm a journalist. I'm fascinated. I don't know where this conversation is going to go. You're curious.

So, yeah, I am. And he sat down with me at dinner, and he started. of the conversation. Nice guy, Dr. Mark Zervos, tiny little guy. And he said, you know, I watched your film back. It's very compelling. But you've been saying something as you're traveling the country. I've been watching your YouTube videos. And I found it very disturbing. You keep saying that we've never done the proper science to establish that vaccines are safe. And he's like, obviously, I take offense to that. I'm, you know, I'm head of virology. I do, I mean, I'm a huge proponent for vaccines, and I sit on the biggest databases in the world. So I went to do the

research on that so I could bring it to you and show you you're wrong. And he said, but I'm shocked that I actually have to tell you you're right. I mean, you could tell. He's like, I cannot believe I have to admit this to you. And he said, now, that doesn't mean that vaccines aren't safe. It just means we can't say that they're safe. And I said, that's all I've been saying. And he's like, and he even said, I've been watching. You're actually very careful about it. And I am. Mike, I'm not some, you know, of course, if you look at my Wikipedia or anything like that, it looks like you're some crazy lunatic as Gavin De Becker. Yep.

But, you know, I'm just asking really honest questions and looking for decent answers. Anyway, he said, I don't know what we're doing here. I don't know where this is going to go. I'm still pro-vaccine. I said, well, hold on a second. If vaccines are really making our children healthier, I think there'd be a way we can prove. There's a study we keep wanting to see done, which is, why do you compare the health outcomes of a completely vaccinated group of children

to a completely unvaccinated group of children and just ask obvious questions who's got more ADD, ADHD, who has more autism, all these things that are skyrocketing in this country. And he said to me, I'll do that study. Is it really because CDC won't do it? No government in the world has ever done it.

Shockingly, don't know why. There must be reasons. I'm sure there's reasons. I speculate to those reasons in the film. Well, you do, and they're logical and nefarious in equal parts. But are there other, like, is there an ethical concern about double blinds and placebos and using a vaccine that has already been deemed safe and effective and deliberately not giving it?

Definitely. Is there that? Yes. Well, that's the argument that's being made. The argument is we can't do a double blind. So, you know, there's two things to talk about. What is the study, what establishes safety for a pharmaceutical product? It's very simple.

The gold standard is a double-blind placebo-based trial. One group gets the drug. The other group gets a sugar pill painted to look just like the drug. They're double-blinded, meaning the scientists don't know who got what, the people taking it don't know. And then we just track them for five, ten years sometimes. Tripline, really. Scientists don't know.

That group doesn't know and that group doesn't know. Right. No one, right, correct. No one knows. The drug group doesn't know. The placebo group doesn't know. The scientist doesn't know. So definitely. And then after the end of a long period of time, we look at health outcomes. And then we unblind them and say, okay, who had more cancer? Who had more diabetes? Who did anyone have a mutagenic effect? Something like that. I mean, it's obvious. We learned this in high school. And what was so shocking is once I started investigating this, when I was working at CBS as a producer on the daytime talks to the doctors, I won an Emmy Award, making a science and medicine into entertainment. Your hair was long. You know, it was longer, it was darker, it was darker, I remember. I remember. I was right with you. But, um, so when I started looking into it and what Dr. Mark Zervos said is true, we have never, ever done that study on any of the vaccines. Now, that's a problem. What they'll say now is they obfuscate this, the answer. And when you see it on the news, you know, a Dr. Paul. all off. We'll say, of course we're not doing placebo studies now, as you said, because there's

already products for measles. Why would we deny, if we were to deny, if we wanted to study the measles vaccine, what you're saying to us is now you want to do a placebo trial where one group's going to get the already available vaccine, but we're going to deny access to a life-saving health measure to a group, you know, in the placebo group to test the measles vaccine safe. We can't do that. Now that would be unethical. And that's true. I mean, I think there's a. argument to be made there unless you had some perspective that what if the question is what this measles vaccine is actually shortening your lifespan we don't know you would only you're going to have to do some form of a study to find out and and I mentioned in the film there have been studies

that have found very alarming things like the DTP vaccine right you know what I mean because to merely conduct a study to gauge the efficacy of the vaccine is different than engaging the unintended consequence of the same drug. Right. And you can't test for those two things at the same time or in the same way, which means you have to do what you call a retrospective. Retrospective study. Okay, so the retrospective study is flawed.

Right. The way they all are, but the double-blind placebo is unethical because now we know too much. Right. And or maybe because simply, separating vaccinated from unvaccinated, maybe there are other, I don't know, mitigating factors. Confounding. Confounding factors.

Right, right, right. Yes. So I'm just trying to make the point that there are certain arguments. Yes. Yes. Limitations, difficulties. What are the limitations of the study? We should not find ourselves in this position.

And that's what's still alarming. What is alarming is that we find ourselves in a position where we're, where we're hog tied by the ethics of science and we tied ourselves up. We never did the proper safety study to see are these vaccines having some deleterious effect that we do not see. The only thing we look at in our studies is does it create antibodies? Is there antibodies being produced? And by the way, that's not even a true understanding of its ability to stop disease, stop transmission. We learn that during COVID.

But it's all that they do. All you have to do is prove that. This vaccine created antibodies in this group of people. It works. Eureka. And we know it's safe because we just know it's safe. And so these things have been pouring onto the market. And so now when, you know, and I would say this, Mike, there's no question that I'm not here.

Why would I be in this investigation if we had the healthiest kids in the world? I mean, if everyone's running around shiny, happy, and healthy, then who cares? Who cares, you know, if they did a safety study on vaccines or not? Is there a sicker country in the world right now? There is not that I know of. Like in the industrialized West? Certainly in the modern world, we are the sickest nation in that world. I think you could argue, I mean, I don't know.

I suppose children are dying in Africa of starvation, so you can't really make that comparison. But anywhere where they have running water, cars, and elevators, we are the sickest. Well, we have a cure for starvation. It's food. Food. You're right. I mean, what we're talking about now is what happens if the food you use to cure starvation turns out to be tainted.

Right. Now, what have you done? It's like gangrene in your foot? Oh, I can fix it. We'll just take it off below the knee. No problem. It's funny. You're moving towards a sort of an analogy that I want to make.

I was planning on making it someday, which is here's how I think the vaccine program you could describe it. I could go to Texas and say, I'm going to eradicate athletes' foot from Texas. I'm going to eradicate it from the planet. I'm just going to chop everybody's feet off and then say, see, see, not a single person in Texas has athletes foot. But you say, but hold on, there's all these people that are dying. There's people that are bleeding out.

There are people that you can't prove that that happened. You know what I mean? And that's not my problem. I was here, and what science has done is I was just here to make antibodies. I made the antibodies. I'm walking away. Job done. No, hold on in a second.

What is the process of making those antibodies doing to this body? Is it causing other problems? As I said, the DTP study in Africa, Guinea-Bissau Africa, a very pro-vaccine scientist, finally, just a few years ago, it was about like 2017, I think he did it, looked back 30 years and said, I had a DTP program. We were giving it to all the kids in Guinea-Basau Africa, and I realized we only got to like half of them.

What's it stand for? Huh? DDP. Depttheria tetanus and pertussis. Okay. Pertesus is whooping cough? Wooping cough. Correct.

And so he would look back 30 years at the health outcomes. They track all the data that had really. good data and lo and behold the kids who got his DTP vaccine program died at 2.5 to five times the rate as those that didn't receive it no one had ever looked no one as you pointed out no one ever looked at all-cause mortality no ever looked at is there mean and here's the deal they didn't die of pertussis they didn't die of tetanus the vaccine did its job but it obviously did something to the immune system that made them more vulnerable to other issues in their environment and they didn't survive.

No one would ever know if he hadn't done that study. They're still, by the way, I've sued UNICEF because they still give that vaccine. Now that we know this, you are killing, I think girls, it's much worse. And there's some instances

where it's 10 times the rate of death. Given, you know, what other vaccines they got at the same time, some of the vaccines are protective. You know, keep that event from happening. So there's a lot to be studied. And we've never done that in America. We've never asked the question.

Okay, let's say measles vaccine does stop measles. It keeps you from getting measles. Great. But does it have down the road consequences that actually cost us in the long run? And, you know, we could get into details. But there's studies that show that a man who gets measles and mumps naturally as a child not vaccinated has, you know, a 50% reduction in heart attacks and heart disease from those that don't have that infection. So if we look at, you know, 900,000 people dying every year, let's say just, let's just limit it to the most like conservative number they would imagine. 25%.

25% of them wouldn't have died of heart disease if they'd have had measles as a kid. Well, measles only killed 400 people prior to the, a year in America prior to the vaccine being getting here. But, you know, 250,000 people would have been saved had I let you get the measles. We got to do some new mass here. We need to ask these questions now. We're too smart to not ask these questions. You know, why is that? Why would it be?

Why did these studies? I'm not saying these studies are perfect, but these studies exist. They show, you know, reductions in ovarian cancer if a woman gets mumps and measles as a young child. So there's going to save you thousands and thousands of lives. And yet the virus itself that we were going after was only hundreds of people, probably weak, people that would die from the virus every year. So we have to be open now. We've got to ask ourselves and look, maybe the vaccine program was brilliant when we had horse-drawn carriages and sewage running in our streets and our water systems weren't perfect and we didn't have refrigeration.

All of these things have to be looked at when we look at why did we get healthy? Why did we go like this and then why are we suddenly crashing now? Was there a point where 10 vaccines like you got? your generation or I would have gotten, was that the better amount of vaccines than the 54 that our kids are getting down? By the way, there's three or four elements in every vaccine. So 72. So 72 moving towards, they predict 100 within a year or two vaccines by the time you're 18. So did we make a mistake? Is there too much? Where might it end if it doesn't stop? Right. When would we go? 250 seems like a lot. Right. We're a thousand vaccines by the time you're 8.

I mean, is there a threshold? Is there a limit? And when are we going to be allowed to ask that question? When are we going to be allowed? And what would that science look like to determine that? Well, to be fair, we're allowed to ask it. But, as I've just learned, there will be a consequence. Yes.

Do do do do do do do. Dumb. Is it weird to love people but despise human resources? sources. If so, well, color me weird. It's not to say I don't respect the millions of people who work in HR departments and companies all over the country. I do. It's just that I don't envy him. That's why MicroWorks doesn't have an HR department for better or worse. And it's also why I use ZipRecruiter whenever we need to expand. ZipRecruiter has proven themselves a million times over by helping countless employers get through the hiring process faster and more effectively than ever before. And now

have a new feature that instantly shows you the most interested, the most passionate, and the most qualified candidates first. This is a huge time saver, hours and hours of save time. And it helps people like me find the people who can function in a non-traditional work environment like MicroWorks. In other words, ZipRecruiter works for me, and they'll probably work for you too. Post a job for free at ZipRecruiter.com slash row. And watch what happens. Odds are you'll find a human resource that just happens to be a great fit for your company in 24 hours or less. ZipRecruiter.com slash row. ZipRecruiter.com slash row.

The smartest way to hide. It's not the consequence you would expect from a curious population. And this is, again, I was talking to Chuck about it earlier. You know, it's not about me or you. It's not even about the institutions. It really is about 340-some million people who are living here, who are suddenly driven by this. And I think, you tell me if this tracks, but six, seven years ago, people who thought the earth was flat were looked at in much the same way as anti-vaxxers. and you could get away by saying, look, I'm not going to engage with you because, no offense, but you're off, you're nut.

Okay? Peter Hotez, who famously declined to debate your friend, Bobby Kennedy, on Rogan show, did so because he said, and many, many people agreed, Bobby's a loon, and Joe is not an impartial moderator. Right. And you're a scientist, man. You got the white coat and everything. You got it all. Don't lower yourself. Now, I think he could have gotten away with that argument, 2018,

because it was still, it still felt like the bulk of the people in this country. You know, don't waste your breath trying to tell some lunatic that the world is round. don't waste your breath. But I feel like we went through a hell of a time. And whether you call it gaslit or whatever it is, our faith, our fundamental faith in the dogmas of journalism and the tenets of science has been shook. So the thing that happened with Hotaz is the reason that I sat with you in Memphis. And we talked, and it had just happened. Yeah.

And I was like, wait a minute, man. This guy, Peter Hodes, he really is a scientist. And he has an opportunity to talk to 12 million people. Yes. And prove his point. It's on the same kind of microphone, in the same kind of setting. Right. And so suddenly, to me, it's like, wait, I don't think you have permission to take the high ground and say,

no, I'm not going to sully my credentials by mixing it up with the likes of Bobby Kennedy or Joe Rogan. Because it's not about either of those guys. It's about 12 million people like me in that audience who are genuinely wondering what you're going to do as a representative of science. How are you going to win my trust back? So here's my point. Half the country in my last dust up on Facebook, they're saying, no, no, no, the institution doesn't have to win your trust back. You simply have to put your trust back in it. That's called faith. That's exactly right.

And that's why my real problem, and if you really want to peel back this thing, I think as a country, we've entered an age where skepticism has never been more important on every single level. And that is an affront to a lot of people who are fundamentally faithful. So a lot of worlds start to collide from religion to science to journalism to politics. And in the end, it feels to me like people are being forced to choose between the benefit of the doubt and all the faith that comes with that and the cold, caldial. calculus of skepticism, upon which science and journalism both rely. Right.

So for the average guy who's trying to raise his family and not his kids with a dumb decision, he slash she is now being forced to assume the mantle of skepticism that is supposed to be worn by the super curious, humble people. in search of the truth, but they've abdicated. Yes. And so now we're left with this, this malaise, this hot bullion, a major task. Most of us didn't go to med school because we didn't want to do the eight years of education.

I don't want to have to think about this stuff. I don't want to have to understand it. I don't want to have to look at trials. What the trials mean to me? I don't know why is this my problem? And you said earlier, you know, it's like one side against the, you know, And how are they going to win us back? Evidence.

Mike, evidence. Right? Documentation. We are now told that this is a group of physicists and we're going to have to have the faith, but show us your math. All we're asking is just show us the math. Where is the evidence that this is this great product? Where is the evidence of this mountain of studies I keep hearing about?

I'm telling you they're not there. Because, you know, I've had people under oath. I've had, you know, the head of our entire vaccine program under oath in a courtroom. And what he says there, we have videos all over our website, what he says there will blow your mind. There's not, this isn't, this conversation is not what people think it is. What you have in your movie, blew my mind. Yeah. I mean, my listeners are sick of me referencing this title, but it just has come back to haunt me.

I read a book years ago. It was actually a Christian book, Apologetics. by Josh McDowell called the evidence demands a verdict. And it feels like you've got evidence in this movie. So I don't know how you feel about spoiler alerts, but I don't care. Let's lay it out. Yeah, why would you? You're giving it away for free.

Inconvenient study.com. And Inconvenient study.com. Yeah. So the guy you mentioned, the small scientist at Henry Ford agrees to conduct this study. Vaccinated versus unvaccinated. How many in the group? It's roughly 18,500-ish in the entire group.

16,500 are vaccinated, 2,000 unvaccinated. Why so lopsided? Well, if you look at the population. I mean, it happens to be the population in their Henry Ford health system. In some ways, I think it's even bigger than what we might imagine. in that our population is 95% vaccinated.

So you only have, you know, in any given spot in America, you're gonna have a group that's far smaller that are unvaccinated. It's just always gonna be the case. But science has looked at this many, many times and said you can have a fully robust, you know, statistically significant study. These don't have to be the same size.

Because what you're not, you're not saying, look, there's two here that have in two here, Therefore, they're even. You recognize it's the ratio. You know, what proportion of this group had an issue? What proportion inside of this? Inside of their own microcosm. Inside of the unvaccinated, what percentage of them have ADHD?

What percentage of them have a neurodevelopmental disorder? We're doing the same thing in the 16,500. And what you see in the conclusion of this study done by Dr. Marcus Zervos, and by the way, unpublished, I want to make that clear. I received a cease and desist letter from Henry Ford Health. You read it at the end of the movie. It's amazing. Yep.

And so, but I just want to make that clear, they didn't publish this study. But what you see in the conclusion is 2.5 times the rate of chronic disease if you've been vaccinated compared to those that are not vaccinated. And I want to make it clear. We hear numbers. And I know when we hear numbers, it kind of just goes over, you know, it's like, oh, yeah, that sounds. It's like two or five. this isn't 20% more, which would be bad. It's not 50 or 80% increased risk of something.

It's 250% increased risk. To have a chronic disease, which to my point, we wouldn't be here if we had healthy kids. But depending on how you look at it, if you include obesity, 54% of our nation children have a chronic disease. Without obesity, it's about 40%. And so we're talking about a coin time. cost now. And the question would be, what's doing it? What's doing? Is it vaccines? Is it fluoride in our water? Is it, you know, pesticides, herbicides, glyphosate sprayed on 80, 90% of our crops? Is it plastics? P-fast chemicals? All of those things, as Robert Kennedy Jr. points out,

all kind of hit our world, our environment right in the early 90s, late 80s, early 90s, that's where all this autoimmune disease, autism just starts taking off. Something is affecting us. And so this study is just looking at vaccines. And incredibly, what it finds, it does a graph, over 10 years, what is the likelihood that you will have a chronic disease? If you've been vaccinated, the likelihood is 57%. 57% of these children will end up with chronic disease if they were vaccinated. In the unvaccinated group, it's only 17%.

That is a, that's Mount Everest, man. It's gigantic signal. And as I point out, I mean, it's, you know, also four, five times the rate of ADHD, six times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. Just horrifying numbers. And if this study stood alone, it is a retrospective study. It has weaknesses. It didn't have a control.

It's not a placebo group. We didn't perfectly match this many African Americans and this many African American. I mean, it's just the best that taking all the data that Henry Ford Health had, all the kids that were born into the system so they had all of their records they could track, take out all the kids that would have had a predisposed birth issue, and we're left with this 18,500 kids. And these horrific numbers, I point out in the film, if this study stood alone, you know, maybe you take it with a grain of salt.

We should definitely do more studies. It's showing you a signal. More studies need to be done. This is now the fifth, in my mind, the fifth. In my mind, the fifth study like it. Some people are saying there's 10 studies out there, but I talk about five that compared vaccinated and unvaccinated. There were smaller, 600 kids in a homeschool study, but same results.

You know, nearly 10,000 kids in pediatricians practice named Dr. Paul Thomas. Same thing, the vaccinated are sicker. And here's what's... Wait a minute. No retrospective study has ever indicated that the vaccinated are healthier? Not one. anywhere in the world, by any institution in the world, any government, any health agency, no one in this world has been able to compare, do the simple comparison of these two groups of

kids and shown us the vaccinated are healthier. And wasn't that the whole point of this program? Now, your guy, why doesn't his last name stick with me? Dr. Zervos. Zervos. That's why. Zervos. I'm making a mental note of all the Zervos as I know. Not a lot. Servos at the outset agrees to publish the study, irrespective of its results. The results come in. He goes dark. You, being a curious journalist, pick up the phone and ask for a meeting.

Yeah. You eventually get one. And then you do something that just purely from a cinematic standpoint made me so uncomfortable and engaged. I literally watched it with my head turned because you videotape him without his knowledge. Bringing hidden cameras. From a hidden pen. Yeah.

And you record the conversation in a restaurant. Yeah. So I don't know how to dive into it, but cinematically. it's an extraordinary moment. It's like candid camera without the funny part. Yeah, it's not funny. It's not funny. No. And I can't decide if I'm watching humanity at its most poignant or cowardice at its keenest or tragedy.

Because the guy is sitting there agreeing that. that the study is solid and that he would publish it as is. And he doesn't know he's being recorded when he says, but I'm not that guy. I don't want to lose my job, so I'm not doing it. Yeah. Just walk me through what that was like as a journalist and a professional communicator to be on the receiving end of that.

You know, I keep getting asked that question. And, you know, to be honest, I'm there with an agenda to get this guy to publish this damn study. And so every time, I mean, he goes through that multiple times. You can see I bring, let me try to inspire the guy. Let me threaten the guy. Let me, like, I try everything in this dinner to get him to just publish the study like you promised you would. The Galileo moment. The Galileo moment.

You could, I, look, I'm going to make you a hero. While we're going to change the world with this, we're going to fix the vaccine program. It needs fixing. He's like, I agree. It needs fixing. It needs to change. Something needs to change. But, I mean, at one point he says, I'm not a good person.

I'm not a good guy. You know? It was like, and it's, it's an amazing, you know, even in, and you've done a lot of films and things. There's those moments when you're making something, when it takes on a life of its own that you didn't really see. The truth is, as I was sitting there, I'm just thinking, damn it, I am failing. that's all I'm not thinking about what he's saying frankly I got back and said what did we get I don't know did the cameras work did we get what have did I get him to say it I didn't all I was thinking is I am failing to get this guy to publish a study that could save millions of children's lives that's what I was thinking about is there one other way is there something I haven't thought you know to tell him so as I reflect on it now and watch it I have tears am I, for many, and I don't know, it is. It's an amazing study of a human being.

It has nothing to do with vaccines, though. Yeah. My guest today, Tom Albanyse, is an American giant, and I'll tell you why. Tom understands, on a fundamental level, that the business of mining is a non-negotiable prerequisite of our civilization and our economic independence, just like the business. of making things. American Giant knows this, which is why they committed themselves 16 years ago to make all their excellent clothing right here in this country. It wasn't easy, but they did it. They sourced locally grown cotton, and they built factories in towns across the nation where

they could hire hardworking locals who cared about making a quality product. And then they went about the business of gently reminding people that when you buy a piece of clothing, from American Giant. You're not just buying a high-quality sweatshirt or t-shirt or another pair of jeans. You're investing in a local supply chain. You're supporting communities from the Carolinas to California. And you're getting a piece of clothing that won't just survive the wash. You're getting a garment that'll get better with age. Check out their high-quality staples, hoodies, teas, denim, built to be worn year after year at American-giant.com Mike. It's quality you can feel and a true American success story that you can be proud to support.

Use code Mike. Get 20% off your order at American-giant.com slash Mike. American Giant American Made. American Giant American Made. That moment in your movie is transcendent in so many ways. It's just so, I'm going to say it again. tragic. Because in the same way that I think curiosity and humility are two of the three legs on the stool that hold up journalism and science. The third is courage. Because there are times in both of those institutions when you have to endure the slings and arrows of that's been debunked.

You sell out, you traitor. You're going to be, he's not wrong to not volunteer to be burned at the stake. Yeah. Who wants to be Joan of Arc? Who wants to be Galileo? They arrested him. They threw him in jail. They took everything he had.

So my heart breaks for the guy. Yeah. Because you did. You offered him a branch to greatness. Yeah. And he didn't want it. But you also filmed him and didn't. tell him. Yeah. I don't know how I feel about you either. I don't either. To be honest,

I'm conflicted about it. I am conflicted. It's not, to be clear, that is the only, you can look at my last 15 years in media. I, you know, there's not a single other instance where I've ever, that I can think of, that I remember ever wearing, you know, a hidden camera. Actually, once for Dr. Phil, which was one of the first jobs I ever had a long time ago. He sent me as a homeless guy to Las Vegas to be a panhandling to see how many people would give me money. So you will find that one. It just doesn't care to be. Let's make it off track. When you were doing that, I was selling the health team infrared pay reliever at 3 a.m. on the QVC cable shopping channel. So look, we all do what we do. But it's really not my journalistic style. And I don't like it. I don't like it because I have a lot,

in the work that I do, I work with a lot of whistleblowers. I need them to know that they're safe, that I never out of source. So in many ways, I didn't see myself in a journalistic position here. This is more a man on man. I had a bet with this guy. I challenged him. Prove me wrong. Do a study and no matter how it turns out, publish it. That is not a journalist.

I'm not like doing a story. I'm asking you to do science. I'm in a different space here. So you're not living up to this challenge. And so I'm there trying to gather some evidence for something I don't know where it's going to lead to. I don't know if I'm ever going to show the world. But I know this is the last time we're ever going to have this conversation.

And by the way, I hadn't seen the study yet. You see him hand me the study for the first time at that table where I actually get to look at these numbers and see these numbers. And they're mind-blowing. So again, I'm blown away at what I'm seeing. This is worse than you can ever imagine. It's the smoking gun you knew was out there and you were trying to get. Yeah. And now you've got it.

Yeah. And I mean, so even though he's not publishing it, and even though Henry Ford, it should be said, has specifically disavowed it. Yep. For all the reasons, you read their cease and desist on camera. Yeah. So, because that's science, right, transparency. People are like, there's people attack in the study. I'm like, good. Attack it. Attack it. That's what science is. I want the questions. I want to debate you on it. I want to push back. On our website, we have all the attacks at Henry Ford and other professional, you know, you know, biologists have weighed in the ones that have issues. There's some on our side. But we lay out what we, what we, think are the defenses to the attacks on this study. And this is, I would say, if there's one thing I'm proud of right now with this film and you ask what it's doing, I think we've just jump started the scientific method. I think we've just put some paddles on this thing and there's an international debate that is now happening because of this study. There are scientists from Peter Gutscha, one of the founders of Cochran collaboration, has weighed in saying, I've seen Henry Ford's complaint.

but these numbers are so astronomical, they can't be explained away by confounding issues, which you brought up, and we can get into those details if people want to know what that is. We should be questioning all of this. We should question this study. We should question the size of it, the quality of it.

That's what we do in science. And we should hear the rebuttals, and we should get more scientists in the room. We should have this debate, but mostly we should do bigger studies. What we need to say now is poking holes in the issues of a retrospective study done at Henry Ford is not going to get us to figuring out why our children are so sick.

And if this study is correct, and if the other five studies just like it are correct, we have a serious problem. We are poisoning our children. And so there needs to be a come-to-Jesus moment, a come-to-science moment, is what is needed right now, which is every major institution in the world says,

we're hunkering down, we're finding all of our unvaccinated kids, We're finding the vaccinated kids. We're figuring out how to balance that as best as we can in retrospective study. And we're going to do this study too. We are going to see how this turns out. Because if we've turned a corner and for some reason, something that was totally well-intentioned was delivered by impassioned, beautiful doctors that went to school to save lives and

believe they're saving lives. But if they made a mistake, don't they want to know too? Don't we all want to know? Because as I've said, our children are suffering. There is something drastically wrong. You know, you do work. A lot of the work you do is with animals and things. This is the, we're the only mammal on this planet that is starting to devolve.

We're losing the ability to live our environment. We're allergic to everything around us. We are starting, our immune systems are somehow, are they evolving so they're attacking our own organs, attacking the myelin sheath on our muscles. We've got multiple sclerosis, lupus, gut and bowel diseases in children. Crohn's disease used to be. Ashkenazi Jews that were over the age of 75. It's in 16-month-old infants. How? Why? And if you're like, what would be causing that? I don't know. But, but. I'm keen to find out. I'm keen to find out.

And shouldn't we? Shouldn't we when we look at this 1990, early 90s, all these chemicals come in our environment, all probably be, you know, it's a toxic soup that is clearly causing a lot of this. But fluoride, PFS, plastics, shouldn't we, when we're looking at an autoimmune disease crisis, let's call it immune dysregulation. Our immune systems have gone haywire in our children. There's no genetic way to explain that. We don't suddenly, our genes just start changing and suddenly our bodies, our immune systems don't work. Something's messing up our immune systems. And I'm just going to say from a lay position.

layperson's position, of all the things we see that are toxic right now and in our environment, should we look closest at the one product that we've described that is designed to alter your immune system for life? That's what a vaccine's attempting to do. It's attempting to mimic something in nature where you get an infection for five or six days, like measles. It's a Brady Bunch episode in the early 1960s with laugh tracks. Everyone in the family gets it.

So I'm not of this school as deadly. I'd like to know why, you know, they put a laugh track to it back when everyone's watching TV. Nobody went crazy. Oh, my God. How do they make this deadly disease so funny that it didn't happen? But to stick to the point, we are trying to mimic nature. And if you stop someone on the street and say, how does the vaccine work? Most people say, I don't know.

They like kill a virus or they make it less dangerous. And then they inject it into our bodies and it tricks our immune system and thinking it's had the disease. so we don't have to get sick and then we're protected for life. Okay, great, let's go with that version. So we're not just tricking our immune system one time or five times or 10 times or 20 times or 50 times or 70 times. You know, 72, going towards 100 times we are tricking the immune systems of our children. Sometimes 10 different diseases all tricked on the same day. You know, 11-month-old baby that just won a court case of dying from SIDS.

They finally have said this baby was killed by getting 10 vaccines, 11 vaccines, I think, at the same time in 11 months. So if we're tricking that immune system 72 times, is it that shocking that our immune systems are confused and are now attacking proteins that are our own body, not no longer not self? Remember, all it is is not self, self, that's what your immune system is doing. Is this self? Is it not self? Is it self? Not self attack it. self, don't go near it. Now it's attacking self, self, self. Attack my pancreas, diabetes,

attacking my muscles, multiple sclerosis, attacking. So is it possible? Is it in the realm of possibility? Can we just, are we allowed to ask the question? Did we do something wrong? If the humility, the aforementioned humility and curiosity, are still guiding, the ship, then yeah, we're allowed to ask. In fact, you know, it's incumbent. Yeah. But without the courage to answer it, trees are falling in the forest and no one's hearing it. Yeah. So what is your hope with this movie realistically? And given the impact that's already had, the response you've already received, what do you think it could do? And what looks like success to you? Success is I live in a nation that is of foreign by the people. It's one of the, it's the greatest charter for

civilization, I think, that was ever designed. It demands that we get involved with our government, that we ask for what we want. We vote for the things we believe and we focus on the things we care about. My goal is always because I'm in media. I'm not a politician. I'm not a lawyer. My job is to try and get as many people to recognize that their voice matters, and they need to get really loud right now with every doctor, with everyone they meet. They need to share films like this, books like Gavin's, as many out there. My attorney's got a great book. Vaccines, Amen. That gets into all the work he's done suing manufacturers and the government for us. But we can only change things that we care about. And when we get to that sort of fulcrum point, that that body of people

that are loud enough and large enough, we still have a nation that changes. course. I mean, and I can give the definition, you know, gay marriage, no matter what position you take on it was nowhere. It's nowhere when it's just some people complaining somewhere. But when you hit that point where enough of the population thinks, I don't think this is fair, courts start acting differently. Laws start changing. Things start moving. I believe we are at that fulcrum point now. I will say, Mike, I think the position I now hold on vaccines, and this is going to be upsetting to a lot of people after I've been investigating. I don't think any journalist has investigated this topic, certainly more than I have. I have international bodies of scientists

that weigh in every week with me. I have sued government agencies. I won back the religious exemption for Mississippi so that you can go to school without being vaccinated, claiming I have a religious right that hadn't had that since the 1970s. I'm funding the lawsuit to win that freedom back for West Virginia. I don't care about, I'm not here to eradicate vaccines from the planet. I'm here to make sure that you always have a choice. But right now, my statement is, if you are a pro-vaccine, from my perspective, you're anti-science. Because they've never done the science. They never did the placebo trials. They won't do a safety trial now telling it's unethical. And the only gold standard study that's left is a retrospective study. And every single one of them is

showing us the same signal, and they're trying to deny that. That is science denial. And until someone produces science, a come-to-science moment, I just thought of that today, I love it. A come-to-science moment is demanded. And it's got to be demanded by everyone that walks this earth right now. We are close. And I think deep down, I hope that this primes this conversation, because this is the study I wanted Robert Kennedy Jr. to do once he finally got into HHS. I pray that he's able to do it. I pray that he's able to get the databases together and get the, you know, and we talked about this when we were running. Bobby, you cannot just put people on that study that have a, you know, are skeptical about vaccines. You've got to have both sides. We've got to get totally pro-vaccine

science to sit down with those that are starting to question it and come up with a study that would make both of them happy, that studies the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, and it has to be massive. It should be the biggest study ever done by HHS. It's the only thing I care that he achieves. I mean, the rest of it, great. You're getting chemicals out of food. You're cleaning up baby food. All of it. Great, great, great. But this, we will not. I don't believe that we will get to the bottom of the chronic disease epidemic of our times if we don't take a look at this study. At least I won't sleep and neither will every parent of a vaccine injured child. That's my point, too, In a way, and that's what I would say to the people who are so disappointed in me right now for having you on and for not having somebody of equal passion on the other side to smack you down.

I don't do that show, really, and it's not because I think the other side's opinion hasn't been expressed. I think it's still the status quo. I think a lot of reasonable people say, don't you remember polio? Don't you remember protosis? Don't you remember? Haven't you read about the iron lungs? And the one of the, like, are you still open to the possibility that the vaccines could truly be one of the greatest breakthroughs and miracles in the history of modern medicine? Yes.

Okay. Square that then. Yeah. How can the, I know two things can be true at the same time, but how can Doug Del Bigtree? How did you get that thing, by the way? That's a whole other long story. Well, I'll land the plane there in a minute. But how can you say to people that you are still open to the idea that vaccines could be one of the greatest breakthroughs in the history of medicine?

And at the same time, so deeply skeptical of their unintended consequences. Shameless plug. Long before she was Peggy Rowe, my mom was Peggy Noble, daughter of Carl and Thelma Noble. It was her father, Carl, who inspired me to pitch a show called Dirty Jobs to the Discovery Channel and later start a foundation that honored the kind of work Carl Noble did for a living, trade work, skilled labor. That foundation is called MicroWorks, and today I'm proud to tell you that we've helped thousands of people get the training they need to begin a career in the skilled trades.

In fact, we'd love to help you. You can apply for a work ethic scholarship right now at microwworks.org. we've set aside $10 million for this year's applicants, thanks to a number of very effective fundraisers, including the one with my grandfather's name on the label. I refer, of course, to Noble Tennessee Whiskey, K-N-O-B-E-L, which is now available in a variety of delicious mash bills, all of which you can peruse at noblespirates.com.

In fact, if you spend $100 and use code Carl, C-A-R-L, you'll get one tube of orange bitter infused sugar cubes for free. That's Code Carl with a C to get nine sugar cubes, ingeniously engineered to make nine perfect old-fashioned every time. It's my favorite way to support microworks and my favorite whiskey to sip responsibly after a long day of interviewing people on this podcast. Pick up a bottle at noblespirits.com, k-no-b-e-l-spirits.com. Soon may the nobleman come to bring a bottle for everyone. One day when the waitin is done, we'll take a drink and go. Because, and people say this, Del, why don't you say your anti-vaccine?

You know, why won't Bobby make that statement? People in our movement, medical free, whatever, there's a lot that, you know, Del, why do you say you're anti-vaccine? Because I don't believe science has ever settled. I haven't, if I settle my science, if my science says that there is, is no such thing as a good vaccine, there's no way vaccines can ever work, then I am in the same, you know, entrenched position as the people I'm trying to talk to. I think most doctors and scientists have not looked closely enough at this. And I've proven that by the Dr. Peter

McCulliv's that have come onto my show. First, they thought it was just the COVID vaccine. They would say things like, but the childhood, I don't want this to hurt the childhood vaccine, and I would hand them all of my work and say, please read this. And now Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Pierre, Corey, these are all, you know, Dr. McCullough is the most published heart doctor in the world. He is absolutely say, he just said on my show last week, I believe the entire childhood vaccine program needs to be stopped immediately. We need to evaluate it. It appears we're doing more damage than we're alleviating. Dr. Paul Merrick, the most published ICU doctor in the world, same position. These aren't, these are people that once they looked, once they finally

looked at it, they're really having an issue with the same thing. There is no science. Brett Weinstein said that to me when he finally came around. It was one of the most chilling moments. We had had an argument about a year earlier. He changed his, wow. Yeah, because he said, obviously like you, COVID was like, that's a bad vaccine. We all watched it rushed onto the market. And, you know, in this debate I had at a dinner with Brett, I said, Brett, that is the best tested vaccine we've ever There's not a childhood vaccine that went up against a placebo, first of all, ever, and as long as the COVID vaccine did. So that officially, that one you think was rushed onto the market, there's no childhood vaccine that was ever tested that long, ever. He's like, that cannot possibly be true.

I said, Brett, he's like, I think you're doing a disservice to this conversation by moving it into the childhood vaccine program. I said, it just happens to be the investigation I've been on for like six years, Brett, and you're way too smart now. You're going to look into this. And I'm telling you, you're going to see what we've all seen. And a year later, he came up. And he's already said this on me show. I'm allowed to tell this story now. He came up and said, I have to apologize.

And I said about what? I mean, I totally had forgotten about the conversation. He's like, you were right. And what he said to me about the vaccine program. And he said something that, he said, look, I wasn't a fool. I know that every product has side effects. I wasn't one of these, like there's no way vaccine injury isn't happening. And it's probably a small group and we should probably study that group.

I've always been there. He says, but what I was shocked to find is that there is no science. That was, I mean, I hadn't even put it like that. I'd been added for seven or eight years. And that is the position we find ourselves in now. Whatever else science should ask of us. it's not permitted to ask me to take a leap of faith. I'll take my leaps of faith in romance,

you know, with the God thing. That's between me and really nobody else. Science is between me and everybody. And yeah, I think that, you know, I try and pay close attention to the language and the way it impacts me. today versus five years ago. And just the way I feel now when I hear somebody tell me the science is settled and when I hear them cluck and when I hear them say, oh, that's, that's been debunked.

It's been debunked. Like it's been, like there's so many ways to pet someone on the head. And there's so many ways to discourage curiosity and skepticism, which is very different, by the way, than cynicism. Correct. And we should be careful about that. Yes. Yes. Because nothing good comes from cynicism,

but nothing bad comes from being skeptical. I don't think. It might make somewhat disagreeable and not always fun to be around, but I just feel so strongly that at the root of all of this is a willful abdication of skepticism on the part of the institutions

we rely upon most. And that is the gap into which everything has fallen. And most regular people are simply trying to figure out how skeptical they need to become. And in my own little ecosystem, with my little 9 million study that I've been conducting for like 14 years now, they're split. There are a lot of people who claim to like me

and pay attention to the stuff I do are disappointed in me because I guess they have come to equate the skepticism you're talking about with something conspirator or mystical. And that's why I'm with Gavin on this one. He's saying, look, they're pre-bunking you. It's not just debunking anymore. They're getting ahead of it, and they're still making arguments based on authority and based on hierarchy. And it works in the military to a point. It works in life to a point, but, you know, we are living in an unprecedented moment, at least in my life, it's unprecedented, where we're still trying to get our heads around the fact that the white coat and, you know, all the harbingers of trust are tarnished. And here's the

point I really wanted to make. Sorry, I was just talking until I remembered what I wanted to say. I want to trust the institutions again. Yeah. I'm desperate. expert to. I just don't think you're going to get there by going, oh, okay, so I trust them. Something like giant has to happen. They have to earn it back. I'm still waiting for an apology, right? From? From every news agency that told us that, you know, the science showed that masks could stop a particle with small as coronavirus. That six-foot distancing.

which is why they locked us in our homes and destroyed our children's education and kept them gone from schools and how we standing somehow couldn't, you know, where it's dangerous had to wear a mask, but sitting in a rest. I mean, the whole charade is comical if it wasn't so terrifying that we all put up with it. We all did it. Wash the pizza box. Yeah. Eat the pizza. Right. Where is the apology? We know you got that wrong. We know what you got wrong now. The science has shown it. Tony Fauci has admitted it in front of the Congress. We just made this stuff up. Okay, then every news anchor that, you know, that intimidated us, that played on our empathy. I mean, that was what was so dark about it, you know, was that it used this if you care about your neighbor.

It used biblical Christ teachings as the way we're going to force this product into you and take your freedom away. from you because this is the right thing to do for you. Do you love your neighbor? Those people need to apologize. I don't know that it's enough, though. Maybe it is. Maybe it's a start, but I'm thinking more like the scene in Game of Thrones, you know, the walk of shame. Shame, shame, shame. Because, look, you're right, it was a colossal manipulation and they didn't do it. by begging you to take care of yourself. They did it by begging you to take care of your loved ones or your neighbor or a stranger. It's the right thing to do. So again, a lot of people listening, they're going, we didn't know. We erred on the side of this. Okay. You erred on the side of that.

What do you do when you err? What do you do when you accidentally keep kids out of school for two years? what do you do you do you do sorry moving on yeah you can try it but what i'm saying is i don't think we're moving on no no this is and and you know for for the issue i've been on covid was it was a horror experience but you know i was charging at gates i you know i've been looking at this there is no science i've sued the government they can't give me the science i've had top scientists under oath you know, with Aaron Siri admitting, I have no evidence that DTAP vaccine doesn't cause autism, even though the CDC website says it doesn't. How?

We've sued. Hand us that evidence. Just like we say, I say this to every New York Times, you know, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. They're at these events I go to. They write horrible articles about me that looks even worse than my Wikipedia. But I say to them, look, you're still here. You'll still come to my speeches, and I appreciate that. You're listening.

I'm amazed at how stalwart you are, though, in your position. because I keep seeing you right that the experts say Robert Kennedy Jr. is wrong when he says, there's never been a placebo-based trial of any of the childhood vaccines. And I keep saying to you, why do you keep writing what experts say? I thought we were past that after COVID. We now know experts can lie or can be wrong, certainly. It looks a lot like lying, but let's just call it wrong. And I've said, do you hand me a placebo-based trial of any of the childhood vaccines? You're the New York Times, the Washington Post. When did your job become quoting experts? I feel like Woodward and Bernstein, you know, in the modern day, would just call Richard Nixon,

hey, did you tap the phones at Watergate? No, I did it. I would never do something. All the experts have said, it didn't happen. We're moving on. Is that what reporting's become? You know? It's outrageous. Where's your evidence? And this is what I'm demanding people. Of the 50% right now, of your audience that are really upset, we just want to see the evidence. Ask your doctor to show you a placebo-based. trial. In fact, I'll make it easy for them. I'll show you what they relied upon. You can type in FDA license vaccines right now on your computer and it'll bring up all the vaccines you're about to give your kid or yourself. And then you can click on it and it'll say package insert will be one of the options. Open up that package insert. That's the warning label just like your drugs get that you

never see that your vaccines are getting. Read the ingredients. Ask yourself if you want hamster kidney proteins injecting your body or how about aborted fetal DNA of dead babies being injected in your children. Some people have a problem with that. They should be allowed to opt out of injecting dead baby protein into their own children. Mercury, formaldehyde, polysorbid 80. As Gavin so brilliantly put, it's like Macbeth. You know, eye of newt and, you know, bubble, bubble, you know, toe frog. Like, wow, that's, vaccines are just as disgusting. So many people have said, it's not mercury, Mike, it's ethelmercury. Totally different thing. Is it totally different? Right. It's not plutonium. It's ethel plutonium. You know, like, like,

Like as though that would matter. It's the second most toxic substance on Earth. Why would I want it in my babies? Why would we want it? We can't think of any other ingredient that put there. It makes no sense. Adjunct. Adjunct. What do they call it?

Adjuvant. Adjuvant. Yeah. Is that the answer? Is that the... I think, look, I've talked to so many experts that have, you know, dove deep into this. And, you know, mercury, they say it's a preservative. They say it's not an adjuvant.

aluminum and adjment. So people know what that means. Just very quickly. A vaccine, let's say you have a virus or a bacteria you're injecting the arm. In our infinite wisdom, your entire alarm system for your immune system is in your nasal passages, your mucosal, your throat, and then into your lungs. This is where you have to breathe in a bacteria or a virus for your immune system to act. You don't have, like if you believe in God, you weren't designed this way, or if you believe in evolution, we've never gotten a virus through our arm. so it doesn't know to react. It doesn't know how to inspire the immune system.

So you're going to inject something, and it's just going to go through your body, start running rampant. Your body's not going to fight it. So I don't know why we started here, but we did. So what we've done is say, you know what? If we add a neurotoxin, we've been bit by snakes. You know, our body does know to fight off a neurotoxin.

So let's add a neurotoxin like aluminum to the vaccine, create a massive allergic reaction here. Then our immune system goes, holy cow, there's a virus in my heart. arm, let's go get it. Not self. Not self. And go and attack it. And so that's, you know, that aluminum. I mean, and I think one of the hypotheses that we're carrying on the peanut allergies and the food allergies is this aluminum is inciting your body to see the protein inside of the vaccine as the enemy. It's inciting an allergic reaction. Aluminum, you know that when they want to test allergies, they give rats aluminum. They put eggs.

egg in them. They want them to have an egg allergy. They put egg into the rat and then they give them aluminum and it turns that egg into an allergy. That's, aluminum's brilliant at it. So, where in science did we not think, forget about the protein that's just, what about every other protein that's in your body at the moment you took that vaccine? What if your kid just ate some peanuts? What if they had peanut butter? What if they still have eggs in their stomach? And now you just injected aluminum and told the body, all proteins are your enemy. Is that why we have allergies? It's a hypothesis. It needs to be challenged, but it's an important question, and it's a study never been done. Why? No study ever gave one group aluminum and another group a placebo, because, I mean,

first of all, that'd be illegal to do that study. You cannot inject people with a neurotoxin on purpose that is no benefit. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Lawyers would love it. We could go on and on. It's absurd, but to the 50% of your audience, we should see evidence, not big, loud state. It's, by medicine. This is ridiculous. Bobby's crazy. Devil's crazy. They're wrong. We've done the studies. We've done the studies. Show us the studies. Show them now. We know how to read them. Put them on the front page of the New York Times. Hey, Robert Kennedy Jr. Here are the 16 placebo trials that were done over the years. Maybe it wasn't the current one, but the original version of the vaccine before there ever was one when we could have done a placebo study and it would have been ethical.

We did it. Here it is. Front page of New York Times. We're waiting. We've been waiting. I don't want you to miss your plane. Two quick things. Gavin said, when somebody tells you it's been debunked, ask them by whom.

Right. And wait. And say, look, if it's been debunked, I apologize, I didn't know it was debunked. But since you've told me it's debunked, show me by whom and when. And oftentimes that will end it. The second thing is just a passing comment on your film.

an inconvenient study, which you can see for free at an inconvenience study.com, there's such a small passing poignant moment. You mentioned Peter McCullough. And we meet him in the movie, and we hear from him throughout.

And then you're back to Zavis. And he just says, look, man, I don't want to lose my job. I don't want to lose my reputation. I don't want to wind up like Peter McCullough. And then you cut to Peter McCullough. Watching that video.

watching the video and the look on his face. It's just back to the Grecian part of this thing, man. You know what? I wasn't going to say this because it only occurred to me now, but this is where we land the plane. Your film is a Greek tragedy. It's filled with the hero's journey. It's filled with pathos.

It's filled with parapetia. It's filled with hubris and cowardice and courage and curiosity and hope. And it's making people angry. So I guess, Bell, mission accomplished. I guess if you're taking flack, you know you're over the target.

That's it. Next time, would you explain Bigtree? Sure. My mom's Mohawk from upstate New York. Oh. Parents still married. I was going to be in theater. I like Bigtree's last name.

I think it actually suits me because I think deep down, I feel like I'm a warrior. I wish Zervos was. I wish there was people in science. The McCullivs, those are real warriors. They're standing up against the most powerful industry in the world is pharma. It owns everything. It owns the governments of the world.

It owns the WHO. It owns our television. It says 70% of our advertising is pharma. It's paying for your show. It's paying for anyone that's on television. It's paying for the news anchors. Not this episode. and we'll see how this does online.

Yeah, yeah. And you'll find out it's paying for the internet too. I'll find out. Oh, God, Belmont. Who knows what mischief you've put in motion, but I truly appreciate your time. And again, to the people who see it another way, the podcast is called the way I heard it.

It's the way he heard it. Yeah. Maybe you heard it different, but in the end, the evidence will demand a verdict. Thanks. Thank you. When you leave a review, which we hope that you'll

do tell us who you are and before you go won't you leave if you work in university maintenance Granger considers you an MVP because your playbook ensures your arena is always ready for tip-off and Granger is your trusted partner

offering the products you need all in one place from HVAC and plumbing supplies to lighting and more and all delivered with plenty time left on the clock so your team always gets the win. Call 1-800 Granger visit granger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done. The ocean delights us. Some marvel at the colorful world below the surface. The ocean feeds us. Others find nourishment in its bounty. The ocean teaches us how our everyday choices impact even the deepest places. The ocean moves

us, whether we're riding a wave or soaking in its breathtaking beauty. The ocean connects us. Find your connection at Monterey Bay Aquarium.org slash connects.