Will Cain Country - Elon Musk & DOGE Dismantle USAID! PLUS, Can A.I. Cure Cancer?

Episode Date: February 3, 2025

Story #1: President Donald Trump says 'You're Fired' to the bureaucracy as Elon Musk and DOGE expose and dismantle USAID. Plus, President Trump's 'The Art of The Deal' with Mexico & Panama. Story #2: Could A.I. help us find the cure to cancer? A conversation with the CEO of SELLAS Life Sciences, Dr. Angelos Stergiou. Story #3: A whistleblower on what DEI meetings within the military were like under the Biden Administration. Retired Air Force Brigadier General Christopher Walker was appointed to the Air Force's DEI office, but little did they know he wasn't having any of it. He shares what he learned with Will Cain.  Tell Will what you thought about this podcast by emailing [e-mail] Subscribe to The Will Cain Show on YouTube here: Watch The Will Cain Show! Follow Will on Twitter: @WillCain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio. Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for $5.5 plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. One FBI, DOJ, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, U.S.A.D.D.T. Trump says, you're fired plus panama mexico and the art of the deal two what role will artificial intelligence play in medicine will it with its incredible calculations soon be coming up with vaccines medicines to literally cure cancer three a mole inside the united states air force appointed to boards overseeing

DEI, but all the while thinks it's communist crap joins us next on the Will Cain show. It is the Will Cain show streaming live at Fox News.com. Fox News YouTube channel on the Fox News

Facebook page every Monday through Thursday at 12 o'clock Eastern time. Just make sure you tune in to one of those digital streaming channels. While you're there, hit subscribe. and you can become a member of the militia. Jump into the comment section. Hang out with this, become a part of the show.

If you're listening on terrestrial radio in some three dozen markets across the United States of America when you're finished and you decided your commute tomorrow just doesn't fit the same schedule, head over to Apple or Spotify, hit subscribe,

and then you can also, at your own schedule, listen to the Wilcane show. We have a big show for you today, and I'm going to break down some big political news. It's a lot happening as we speak. the television outside of my studios breaking just before I go live today that Mexico has capitulated

to Donald Trump and the tariffs imposed upon Mexico 25% have been delayed for one month. That and what's going on in Panama, while Donald Trump cleans house in America, we're going to get into all of that in just a moment. But I'd be lying to you. I wouldn't be real if I didn't tell you that my attention for the past 36 hours has been focused on the NBA. I hate the NBA, Will. Nobody watches the NBA. NBA sold out to the CCP. I hear you. Okay. I hear you. But I care. And a lot of people care. And today, people care in Dallas. Let's bring in the boys in Florida and New York now to join the conversation. I was sick, as you guys know, late last week. I sound better.

today right you do the voice sounds a little back to normal very good i don't think i'm batting a thousand yet but i'm back to hall of fame numbers um the thing is i wanted to go to bed early on saturday night went out to dinner i even left i said sweetheart we're leaving this dinner early i did not stay for dessert i'm generally opposed to dessert at restaurants i'm a 50 50 apse guy i'm a pretty much never dessert guy overpressed at restaurants why you're in good shape I mean, I've done it all, man. Like, okay, you have crim brulee, right? I've had crim brulee.

Like, there's no need. I don't have to sit around. Chocolate lava cake. Ooh, the Bananas Foster. Yeah, I'm not into it. And I don't know who drinks coffee at 10 o'clock at night or 9.30 after dinner, but not this guy. So I tapped out after the entrees. So, babe, I'm tired.

I've got to go to bed. I got to recuperate. So we did. Which meant I was in bed before 11 p.m. central time. because I believe this went down about 1130 central time Saturday night. And one of the most shocking, seriously, this is not hyperbole. So if you don't like the NBA, let me put this into context for you. One of the most shocking trades in sports history, not Dallas history, not NBA history,

in sports history took place on Saturday night. And unfortunately, for me, it affected my Dallas Mavericks. The Dallas Mavericks traded generational superstar, if not now, soon to be the face of the league, Luca Donchich, to the Los Angeles Lakers for Anthony Davis and won first round pitch. Sorry, sorry, sorry. That's a bad thing. Just a bit of more context. When players of this caliber are traded and they're never traded, essentially the team treading for them is gutted from now into the indefinite future.

They give up, they mortgage their entire future to the team that's selling. Like, you get their firstborn son. I'm serious. You get every first round pick. You get their firstborn son. And we hope you win because you're going to spend the next decade in purgatory. That did not happen. They got Anthony Davis in one first round pick.

But I don't even care, fellas. I don't even care. I just got done taping an episode of the Rosillo show, a Spotify Ringer podcast. Ryan Russell is an old friend of mine from ESPN to talk about this. There's no recuperating. There's no explanation. This is an iconic figure.

People name their dogs, Luca. Okay? There are some stars that transcend even what they do on the court. And that's Luca. It's who he... And I don't know why I can try to analyze it. Like, okay, it's because we drafted him when he was... What was he?

17, 18 years old. We raised him. He loved Dallas. We loved him back. He carried this franchise to the Western Conference finals and then to the NBA finals. I don't want to hear about any of his shortcomings. I don't want to care about his conditioning. Ryan Rusillo said it well.

He could be smoking a cigarette, bringing up the ball to half court. And I don't care. I don't care. He's Luca Donchich. I don't care if he's out of shape. I don't care if he doesn't play defense. Also, by the way, they were number three in defense last year after the trade deadline, so I don't buy it. so it's guys it's a national story so i know you probably do understand it to some degree

it's really bad in dallas really bad like i the backlash the the no one understands why it literally someone's i think the best there's two analogies for you and then i want to hear from you guys one analogy the cowboys jerry jones firing tom landry in 1988 89 now there are old cowboy fans who have never forgiven jerry jones because tom landry was an icon like you know of course just highways named after him he's got his bust up as you go under overpasses but i mean for being real tom landry was down for like two or three years before that he was old and lucas 25 and on the verge of entering his prime and by the way not down because they just went to the Western Conference Finals.

So the better analogy, I guess, is it's the Mavericks trading Dirk Novitsky in 2006. You guys remember they went to the finals, played the Miami Heat, they lost the Miami Heat. To this day, everyone Dallas believes that the refs played a gigantic role in awarding Dwayne Wade

an absurd number of fouls. Whatever, they lose. The Mavs had come back and traded Dirk. It wouldn't have mattered if we won two titles. They wouldn't be as valuable as the title They won with Dirk in 2011 He is ours

That guy is beloved in Dallas They have a statute of dirt We were 100% on our way to that With Luca Go ahead two days I've been reading I think it all started after that finals Or before the finals

Remember he got the owner of the Mavs or something like that Took the beer away from him And then he had that look It was Michael Finley Yeah that's what it was You remember Michael Finley right Yep, and that's where it all started. Michael Finley was All-Star.

All-Star, you know, Mavericks, I mean, one of the greats in our franchise history, which isn't that illustrious. So, I mean, I don't know if I buy that two days. I saw that, too. And then I like to. Because, by the way, Luca didn't demand a trade, too. I know. He didn't demand a trade.

I know. This was done to him. He didn't do it to Dallas. I liked your point you made with Rosillo that you said, maybe if it was Giannis. you would accept this if you're getting you like that point yeah because i would agree with that because then you then you could kind of understand that trade and you're getting something eventually you be okay with it well he asked me like okay they didn't shop it they just seem to give him to l.A which breeds conspiracy theories right yeah ratings are down how do you revive them send the league's

biggest star to los angeles when i say biggest star i'm fully aware that lebron still exists and those types of things but i think it's pretty clear that luka is about big part of the future. But Rosillo asked me, like, what if you'd done the normal thing and you had shopped him and gotten this great deal? And I was like, no. And all I could come up with, Dan, was I love, I particularly love Janus and

not as much as Luca. But if you'd done that, maybe I could swallow this pill. Go ahead, James. Do you think there's something that's going to come out maybe not in the next month or a couple years from now that, because right now it's just such a mystery, do you think there's going to be something that Tom Verducci reports and we say, oh, this is why

they did that? Well, the hard thing about that will be we won't know what to trust, because there's going to be a lot of CYA going forward, because I know a couple of things. Here's what I know. Number one, the conspiracy to move the Mavericks to Las Vegas is not true. That ownership group is

actually in the process of moving things to Dallas, not to Las Vegas. its face it doesn't make sense like Dallas versus Las Vegas is not a market to market comparison you know moving the Raiders from Oakland to Vegas is one thing like Dallas is a gigantic market to the way Texas is going with business

you're not leaving and they're going to legalize gambling in Texas so they don't even own casinos in Vegas anymore they don't have any so the that's that's not true um I don't think everything was rosy

behind the scenes like maybe Luca's relationships with everybody weren't as awesome as we want to believe but again it's luka so like nico harrison the mazgm okay so what did he seemed to think luca was an asset not an icon and there's a difference right there's a big difference uh between those two um okay i have a lot i want to get to today i want to get into some of this news though with USAID and the firings the cleaning house and international relations. We're going to get to this fascinating discussion about AI and medicine. So let's jump right in right now with story number one.

All right. Donald Trump has been busy. Donald Trump has been busy over the last weekend. And here's what's been going on. I'm going to run through this with you as quick as I can. There are FBI firings currently. The current acting director of the FBI does not want to turn over the names of FBI agents who worked on January 6th. Donald Trump and the incoming, you would assume, FBI director and the incoming DOJ, want to hold people accountable. They feel like politicized our justice system, okay? That's both at FBI and DOJ. So you are looking at firings taking place as we speak.

at those institutions. And I say good. It's not retribution. It's not revenge. It's accountability. You politicize these institutions, then these institutions have no place for your politics. Headline from ABC News, Trump administration fires Consumer Financial Protection Bureau chief. Rohit Chopra is out. And then perhaps most notably, USAID came under the crosshairs of Doe. Let me give you a little explanation here. Elon Musk has had the following things to say about USAID, who has a budget of $40 million. First, he said it's a criminal organization. Now, this is in response to showing how much USAID sends to various places.

All across the globe, Elon Musk also says they put USAID through the wood chipper, could go on to some great parties did that instead. He also said that USAID is a sci-op. It was a radical left political policy sci-up. I saw some reference to the USAIDID's budget of $38 million, $38 billion, half went to overhead. Okay? So like paying salaries, throwing parties, doing that. Guys like Bill Crystal, the neocon who said he'd rather have, he tweeted this.

He'd rather have the deep state than the Trump state. Yeah, well, he is one of the big beneficiaries of getting money from USAID. And the left is losing their mind about it. Here's AOC. She said, it's a five-alarm fire cutting USAID. The people elected Donald Trump to be president, not Elon Musk, having unelected billionaire with zone foreign debts and motives, rating U.S. classified information as a grave threat to national security.

This should not be a partisan issue. It's because this came under Doge's. guidance. By the way, since that time, some of the coders working for Elon Musk have been doxed. It's like six dudes, all like in their early 20s. Wired magazine did it. Put out their names, put everything, the ones that are fine-toothed comb going through the government. And here's Senator Jeff Merkley saying this. He says, a president is not a king. Trump cannot eliminate USAID without, with the stroke of a pin. Not only is it, illegal it's a gift to our adversaries um this is the beginning i would think this is a start

if you want radical change if you want a change in your government if you think it's inefficient you think if it spends too much money if you think there's too many federal employees don't lose your mind about every single one of these stories because it should be different again tomorrow last week it's everybody returned to work last week it it was uh hiring freezes this week it's specific institutions and it's also taking place on the world stage panama has taken back its memorandum of agreement with china to continue to develop the panama canal part of china's belt and road initiative that was just announced by secretary of state marco rubio now there's still china i believe still managed many of the ports in in panama the traffic flow through the canal

so there's still work to be done there mexico just announced they're sending 10 10,000 Mexican federallies to the border to intercept illegal immigrants and fentanyl flow into America, resulting in Trump pausing the 25% tariffs on Mexico for one month. He's also now talking about levying tariffs on the EU. What is clear, so whatever you see in market turmoil, whatever you worry about inflation, you don't know what tomorrow brings. People talked about strategic unpredictability when it comes to Donald Trump, when it comes to foreign policy and war.

I think there's something that you're going to have to expect when it comes. economies as well and that makes great he has said there might be short-term pain short-term uncertainty but it's also clear what's happening here is he is abiding by essentially his lifelong north star the art of the deal oh mexico came back to the table they're going to do something better that we want we carry a big stick what happens if we swing it maybe we get this country internally and on the world stage back to serving Americans first. All right, let's look into what AI will do to medicine. I saw this conversation on Fox and Friends just a few weeks ago.

I was kind of blown away by it. I have my own concerns like everybody else about the increasing medical vaccination of society, but AI threatens to make this entirely different. We'll debate, well, no, that's good or bad. but we need to know like oh my gosh could this literally cure cancer that's coming up on the will cane show hey have you ever wondered what happened to the legendary chick norris i always saw a video he made and i was absolutely shocked he's in his 80s and he's still kicking butt and working out and staying active and what's even more shocking is he's stronger can work out longer and even has plenty of

energy left over for his grandkids he did this by making one change he says he still feels like he's in his 50s. His wife started doing it. She says she's never felt better. She says she feels 10 years younger. The body looks leaner. She has energy all day. So Chuck made a special video that explains everything. Make sure you watch it by going to chuck defense.com slash C-A-I-N. Or by clicking in the link below this video in the text description. It's going to change the way you think about your health. Once again, that's chuck defense.com slash cane. And click on the link in the description below. to watch the video now. You won't believe how simple it is.

Just a reminder, the legendary Chuck Norris is a whopping 84 years old and yet he has more energy than me. I'm sure that's a fact. He discovered he could create dramatic changes to his health, simply focusing on three things

to sabotage our body as we age. Watch his method by clicking the link in the description box below. Chuck defense.com slash C-A-I-N. AI medicine. Cure for cancer. Next on the Will Cain Show. Following Fox's initial donation to the Kerr County Flood Relief Fund,

our generous viewers have answered the call to action across all Fox platforms and have helped raise $6.5 million. Visit Go.combe forward slash TX flood relief to support relief and rebuilding efforts. Could AI change medicine to the point where we find vaccines, put on quote vaccines for cancer? It's the Will Kane show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel and the Fox News Facebook page. hit subscribe on YouTube, then you're a member of our community, aka the Willisha. And you jump into the comments section, we bring you on the show.

Hit subscribe on Spotify or Apple and hang out with this whenever and however you like. So like I said, I was watching Fox and Friends. And I texted the EP who's my friend. I said, that was really good segment. I can't remember who did it. Could have been Brian Kilmead, although most of the time when Brian does something, it's, you know, it was okay. No, I don't know who was. It was really good.

I'm joking about Brian because the guest was Dr. Angelo Sturgio. And apparently he knows my friend, the executive producer of Foxen, friends. I said, I liked it. I want to do that conversation a little deeper. So Dr. Angelo joins me now on the Will Kane show. What's up, Doc? Hey, well, great having. Thanks before having me.

I don't even know where to go, honestly. So I'm watching you that morning and you're talking about, you know, AI and I'm, What do I know about AI, I guess? We're running computations. We're running through every scenario. We can, you know, virtually try every recipe to come up with what? Curious to what? What are we talking about revolutionary here with AI and medicine?

Yeah, I think firstly, I think the convergence of AI and genomics, really, will revolutionize medicine and research as we know it. And the truth of the matter is there are other countries doing this. and we should not be shy of really leading those efforts. And one of the things that AI will allow us to do, as we have seen already, it will allow us to expedite two things. One, to get new drugs to the market, and secondly, to really personalize treatments and vaccine for patients.

So it's really... Okay, let's go... Let's go number one first, though. Okay, you said, before we get to the personalization, personalization side. The first side, expedite medicines. Here's why I keep struggling, Doc, over the word vaccine. Are we talking about vaccines?

What are we talking about? I know you said genomics. What do we talk about expediting with what kind of like medical solution is AI helping us that arrive at? Because see, I'm going to tell you, I'm already, and maybe a lot of people listening are too, I'm already biased, okay? in a direction of we are too medicinally focused and not health-focused enough. So, in other words, preventative, make a milk healthy again, eat the right foods, exercise,

take care of yourself. We treat everything through a pill or a shot. And so I can only get so excited about the idea that AI is pushing us towards better shots. Is that what we're talking about here? Like, what is AI doing? Yeah, let me tell you a couple of facts first, if I may or will. Firstly, the U.S. healthcare costs in 23 alone was $4.8 trillion. It's going to go to about $6.8 trillion by 2030.

So we know that a big portion of that is because of what you just said. It's because of patients and underlying chronic illnesses. What AI will allow us, as we have seen, is you have a patient and coming back to the cancer vaccine piece. We're talking about therapeutic cancer vaccines. they're not preventative. So I'll give you an example of leukemia. So we have developed a cancer vaccine for leukemia where basically, as in many types of cancers,

you can get patients into remission. The problem is, unfortunately, the vast majority of patients will relapse at some point. So what we do, what we have done is we identify what we call epitope. So think of it like this. You have the cancer cell. And the cancer cells, you know, they're quite smart.

They have basically, I'll use the example of a lock. and now you have thousands of keys that you have to try and basically see which key will fit into that lock so you can kill the cancer cells. So over time, it's taken painstakingly about 15 years to do that type of work, cost about $2 billion, and only about 10% of the drugs that we've discovered actually make it to the market. So this will basically radically change that, A, to do it quicker, B, cheaper, and third, really with a higher chance of success. And again, we're talking about, in our case for leukemia, it's a peptide vaccine, not an MRNA vaccine. It's a therapeutic vaccine.

It's an immunotherapy. So we're basically boosting the immunotherapy. We're providing your immune system a picture of what those cancer cells look like. So if and when they come back, now your immune body, those great, you know, what we call cytotoxic cells and memory helper cells, they're out and they can go and kill the cancer cells. So you can stay in prolonged remission, which then prolongs survival. I heard you say this, and your motivation may simply be to be accurate, but I'm curious why you made the point of distinguishing a peptide vaccine from an MRNA vaccine.

Because I'm curious, did you do that because, A, you just want accuracy, but B, the skepticism right now publicly around MRNA? I think it's twofold. One is for accuracy, absolutely. And I think, you know, it's very important, especially for the views to understand what we're doing. Secondly, the MRNA component. It's just a different type of, if you will, technology that is available to treat certain types of, you know, infectious diseases as well as cancers. We work in the space of peptide vaccines. We've done the work with Memorial Sloan Kettering, where, again, in leukemia, we're in the cusp, God willing, of final data.

we have shown previously well that half of our patients who received our treatment, our immunotherapeutic, you know, stayed in survival for more than five years, which is considered a cure. Importantly, with minimal side effects. And what those are is just a retinas a site of injection and really a clean safety profile. So I think if you put all that together, it is revolutionary, but what AI, again, can do and will allow us to do is to expedite to really create safe and efficacious treatments for a particular patient based on his or her genomic profile, which is really unprecedented. The issue, though,

to be very clear, this will not replace human capital. This is just complementary to what we do to expedite and, again, to be more precise. But to be, you know, the intuition that a physician has, to really understand what the data ultimately means and go and do the real-world evidence we'll not be able to forego. And we shouldn't. First and foremost, it's safety. That's, to me, it's the paramount piece.

We have to make sure whatever we administering give to patients is indeed safe. So let me see if I understand, we'll stay with your, because it sounds like it's also your area of expertise. Let's stay with your example of leukemia. So I'm diagnosed with leukemia, right? I have a treatment schedule, I would assume, laid out for me that includes chemotherapy and

radiation, I would assume. And you're telling me, even having gone through all that, my rate of remission is high, or it'll go into remission, but its recurrence rate is high, right? So in steps, this new stage that you're talking about AI helping develop, which I guess we'll call it a vaccine, peptide vaccine, that I receive at some point after my initial treatment? Is that when you get it? How does it play a role in your treatment schedule? Do you still go through the initial radiation and chemotherapy to eradicate to sort of like mass assault the cancer? Or does this one shot? Is it the tailored version? And you just take that. Like,

tell me how it fits in the treatment. Yeah, absolutely. So, and that's why I want to make sure we define it correctly that we're talking about therapeutic vaccines. Right now, we're talking about therapeutics vaccines, AI, we're not there yet to create preventative cancer vaccines. In the case of leukemia, in the case of leukemia, if you're lucky, the ideal course of treatment should be for someone to get a bone marrow transplant, because that really is the best treatment schedule. Unfortunately, for many reasons, the vast majority of patients are not eligible to do that. So they undergo chemotherapy regimen to get them into a remission with all the good and bad side effects. So they are in remission and that's when we come in because

we have targeted what we call a Wilm's tumor 1 target, which is highly prevalent, more than 97% of patients express this Wilms tumor 1 antigen. And we administer subcutaneously our therapeutic vaccine, which again stimulates now the immune system. If and when those cancer cells come back, your immune system now can fight it off and you prolong survival. It's really, and what I need to reiterate here is not only the efficacy piece, but also the fact that it's safe. You know, we're talking aloud, I will, about vaccines, but this can also shape the actual treatment paradigm as we move forward. That's why I'm saying AI is important over the next decade we will see a big revolution in the in the space will be able to basically potentially

reprogram some of those T cells those white blood cells that are out to kill cancer cells if they don't work well to reshape them and reprogram them so they can really go into that into that lock if you will and and kill the cancer cells we're just we're just at the infancy if you will We had started, well, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center here in New York with this AI application to identify, if you will, those exact locks and keys how to penetrate and kill the cancer cells. But there's really a lot that we will do in cancer, but it also brings ethical questions. I mean, you know, I think part of the reason why I brought up MRNA before and why AI may be a little bit sort of in this question of bucket is we need a lot of. set of data, patient data, ideally. And the question becomes, you know, how we're going to regulate it?

No one wants to have their genomic profile out in the public or anywhere else that will be misused. We have to make sure there is no algorithm bias, you know, that there's a vast and a big portion of patients across ethnicities that will be embraced. And who owns the data ultimately? How can we share the data? So there's going to be a lot of regulatory and ethical pieces that have to come into play. And I think we need to get people comfortable, and we can only do that by being transparent.

And we have to be very careful what we say. I do not believe that we'll be able in 24 or 48 hours to turn around and give somebody a magic drug, maybe in 20-plus years. But I heard it's, you know, in 48 hours we may be able to do that. It's going to take more time. AI will allow us, though, to really patient specifically tailor a treatment that will very likely work for the patient, again, to be safe and efficacious. I want to go into two areas now. You know, I set it aside, but I'm coming back to it now, even though you've invoked it a couple of times, the personalization element. So what AI is going to allow you to do, because you're sequencing all these genomic combinations, right?

And that's why you need the data, the large data sets. and so you start seeing all of our different genetic profiles you know mine from yours yours from you know young james in the in the producers control room there next to you and maybe what works for me doesn't work for you doesn't work for james on cancer treatment right but now a i's helping you figure out i like your analogy of the key in the lock which key fits your lock your cancer um so so what you end up with is what tailored medicine to your genetic profile and your particular form of the disease. So what I take doesn't end up being the same thing you take for cancer.

That's accurate. And again, it's going to help us two-fold, if you will. One is that it's not going to be a drug that we just go out to the market with and give to everyone, because to your point, we are different. There's heterogeneity. So we have to tailor medicine. And I think what that will also in turn help is my first comment that I made. healthcare costs are going to be about $6.8 trillion in 2030, unless we become smart and we can

really create more personalized treatments, not just in cancer, but in other indications, it's going to be very difficult to really be sustainable. And secondly, to also compete with other countries. I mean, the U.S. has been, will be, the number one country in being innovative and forward thinking and we should not let that chance go. We have to be cautious, as I mentioned, both from regulatory and ethical considerations. But I think it's just something that we need to embrace. I want to go back to the ethical and regulatory considerations in just a moment. Here's my question. If you get to a place aided by AI that you end up with personalized medicines, and again,

therapeutic to your point, we're talking about after you get cancer, what do you take that helps you overcome cancer, right? If you're getting to a place where you have a personalized answer to that, it doesn't seem to mean, who am I? I'm just some dude on radio and TV and on digital and YouTube and Fox News channel. But just some dude. You know, what's the big step from a personalized therapeutic to a personalized preventative? It seems like once my genomic profile is set, and now you have a medicine tied to my genetic profile, it doesn't seem like a huge leap to go okay you know what else a i is done we've been we're able to pre-screen will you are clearly i think we already do this you carry this gene you have a high prevalence for this form of cancer it'll

probably hit you within the next 25 years here's this and we can say that we'll dramatically have lowered your your propensity to get whatever it may be x y z you know form of cancer so um in everything that you said, I 100% agree. The only thing that I disagree with you is I know that you are a math fan. I'm a Bucks fan. But so you're absolutely correct. Maybe I'm a Bucks fan now. I might be now. I don't know what I am anymore. So the key thing is you're absolutely correct. AI will allow us to be able, and we're already doing that. There are different types of even neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's where we can predict early on what the onset may be and when it's going to kick in and also types of cancer. So that's going to be the next step. And again, I'll use that

10-year time horizon. We will be there right now at this therapeutic cancer vaccines. I firmly do believe that here over the next 10 some years, we will be able to, again, once we know that somebody is at risk to developing X type of cancer, for us to then tailor it and specifically get a therapeutic in place for that patient to potentially prevent it. And I think that's really the ultimate goal of research and of medicine. And AI, you know, I want folks to understand it just, you need really large and large and large data sets. And ideally across many, many patients, and we as humans are just not able to very quickly review everything and assess everything. So AI will really allow us to get all that data to crunch it in a way for us then to.

to understand, okay, this drug works for Angelos, this works for Will, this works for James. So, talk to me for a minute about the ethical concerns. You know, by my nature, you know, somewhat conservative, skeptical of big power, even corporate, not just government. You know, there's a lot of things that go, oh, you know, I don't want anybody with all this. But there's also, like, this is just me talking out loud about me, but I'm just not the guy that worries that much about my information on the internet. I don't know.

Or the Chinese collecting my information on TikTok. I just don't because it's like, what are they going to do with it? Oh, they know some things that I like to look at? I mean, is that going to prevent me from running for president? Are they going to have like some info on me and, you know, I don't know. I can't tell it they've done it yet that I know of. But my point is I don't know the risk of my genetic information being made available for testing through an AI algorithm to come up with, you know, answers for everyone when it comes to cancer.

I just don't know it, Doc. Like, what's the big deal if my genetic profile is public? I think the issue will is, and I think you will agree, being out public is not the issue. It's if you can then go back and trace back and say, you know, this is Will's or Angelo's genomic profile. Why? it's, you know, it can have underlying issues both from, you know, with health care, insurance plans, you know, suddenly you're providing and disclosing data that otherwise they may not be, that may not be accessible and they can already sort of plan, okay, these are the percent and the chance of that patient getting XY disease. And secondly, I mean, it is regulated already, you know, we have HIPAA and when we do that type of work, It is highly regulated, but that data set in the wrong hands could be detrimental. And, you know, you use China as an example.

I wouldn't necessarily want Chinese companies and the government there to have access and know exactly because the genetic profile is different based on ethnicities, among others, to really be out there. I think it has to be highly regulated. It's, I think, one of the key things that this administration, has to look at among other things, but we need to assure that the people understand, and again, we can only do that by being transparent, that we have thought to this very carefully from a regulatory perspective, how are we going to use it, who's going to use it, from an ethical

perspective, that patient data names cannot be traced back as to who it belongs to. And then thirdly, who is going to utilize all this information, all this data set? I think that's the key piece. We need to make sure that U.S. researchers, U.S. companies will use it wisely and creatively to really support first and foremost people in need here. Okay, I want to know your opinion on something because of my general curiosity, but also I think it's a great symbolic issue of what's going on in health care. So I want to talk about Ozympic, but for that matter, any of the GLP-1s, right? Wagovi, Manjaro. So I looked it up this morning.

I was talking with a bunch of buddies of mine, okay? 12% of the U.S. adult population has taken a GLP one. 6% is actively using. That's really high, by the way. Those numbers are high for a pretty new drug outside of its use for diabetes, right? and you know some of the guys i was with this morning doctor were telling me it's not just about weight loss like it suppresses apparently it suppresses all kinds of urges so doctors are also using it to help with nicotine addiction even i heard gambling addiction which is super wild

because it's like what kind of like impulse control and urge control is it exercising within the brain but my point is this on one hand we have make america healthy again let's get rid of chronic disease, let's eat right, let's exercise. On the other hand, we have this medicinal remedy to the problems of neglecting to do Part A, right? Which is, for lack of a better word, we'll just say OZMPIC because it's like Coca-Cola, right? But there's a couple of Cokes now. And so what I guess what I'm asking you is, how do you see the role of this type of drug in general entering the market and rfk was fascinating on this and how much it could end up costing if it's covered by medicare you know and so forth it could bankrupt us um like we have been down the

path full head of steam this is our solution what's the next drug right but how do we balance that against this other side which i think you buy into as well like no no no we got to get on the chronic disease path here of preventative healthy lifestyles yeah listen i agree ozim because has become really sort of this new slogan, not just here in the US, but in Europe and everywhere else. The problem is, used outside of diabetes, which was really developed, and there's now a couple of drugs specifically approved by the FDA for weight loss. It's very expensive. You know, someone who buys it off-label has to pay, has about about thousand some dollars. In Europe, by the way, if you, you know, I was talking to some friends in Greece, they pay about

two or three hundred a euros versus about i think eleven hundred or something here it's fifty nine dollars a month in germany it's like you said it's close to fifteen hundred dollars a month in america that in and of itself by the way is worthy of its own deep dive as to why but i mean that that piece in itself is i mean that has to do something you know around among others with centralized pricing negotiations that in europe they take a complete different approach versus in the u.s in the u. we pay typically about three times more on drugs than in Europe, which is utterly insane. And also some of the patent and biosimilar regulations are different, but notwithstanding that, coming back to your question, we need to really get patients,

if you will, incentivized to live healthier. I'm not a fan of going just a prescription, to just use a magic drug to lose weight. But I do think that in order also to bring the health care costs down. If we can incentivize patients, you know, if you are healthy, you watch out for your weight, for other illnesses, there should be some benefit, not just in the form of health insurance, but potentially something different, you know, from tax credits to whatever else may work. I mean, I'd send some RFK juniors team, some of my thoughts around overall, you know, drug approval and the safety parameter and other things. I do think it's very important to get patients, obviously, to live healthier so we can bring down the health care cost.

I'm going to say it again, close to $5 trillion. Only 10% of that is prescription drugs. 90% are other things. The U.S. is the first country, number one country, in running all sorts of diagnostics that in other countries you don't do. So we spend more on different diagnostics, but sometimes the outcome is as good. it as another country. So we really have to change the mentality, I think the view of people as it relates really to a healthy lifestyle.

Okay, this may take us back to cancer, but what you described sounds absolutely revolutionary. Like, when my son was just shy of his third birthday, he was burned, he pulled a a crock pot off a, off a kitchen counter. He had third degree. They don't really do degrees anymore, but third degree burns over 7% of his body, mostly his arm and chest. And we were in the hospital for a month doing burn treatment. Burn treatment was horrific, like maybe worse than the initial injury, you know.

And it goes on and on and on for weeks. But burn treatment from what I've led to believe and understand has gotten way better in the last 10 years like way better um it's not that torturous you know trying to get find your way to healthy skin thing um my point is i'm not i don't know whether not to call that revolutionary but medicine can change fast what you're describing for cancer kind of sounds revolutionary and i want to ask you like over what kind of time frame are you talking about within 10 years 25 years the idea of cancer being a death sentence is gone and we look back on and go do you realize that my grandparents, you know, cancer absolutely wiped them out.

Is it even treatment is revolutionized, where it's like chemotherapy is like this thing like burn treatment, it's terrible, it's awful, we don't have to do it anymore. Just describe for me the time frame and the revolution. Well, firstly, I hope and pray that your son is doing well, and I'm really sorry to hear that. He's great. Thank you for that. It was 14 years ago. He's great.

He's a beautiful 17-year-old boy now, and he's got scars and chicks dig scars. I'm really glad he's doing well. So to your question, I'm a question. As I mentioned, we spent about $2 billion or so, and it takes about 15 years to get the drug approved, if you're lucky to get it approved. And I think with AI, and not just AI, I think there's much more to it. We as Salas in our group, our company, we're in the cusp, as I mentioned, for a leukemia vaccine, God willing, this year. but I really think over the next 10 years what you will see

and I don't want to restrict it only on cancer but in other diseases you know, be it in cardiovascular be it in neurological we will be able over the next 10 years, diseases that we could not treat today we will be able to treat them.

I have absolutely no doubt about it death sentences where patients may have a median survival of only a few months will be able to push that out to years and ultimately for something like this to become a chronic disease. It's difficult to put a time horizon on it. I do believe that over the next 10 years,

starting this year already with ours, that God willing that we will be able to really revolutionize change the medical landscape. And I want to make clear it has to come from the U.S. That's why this whole AI is just a little tool or is an important tool in what we're doing to get patients healthy and to be able to treat those patients.

but we really all of us need to embrace it and be smart about it. So other people will not, you know, have some, be leaping ahead of us. I think to me that's fundamentally most important thing. All right, Dr. Angelo Sturgeo, it was fascinating. I thought it would be, and I'm glad we did this. It was fascinating. I appreciate that. Stay in touch with here on the Wilcane show.

Anything you see come up in health and medicine, we want to hear about it. We want to know. Thank you, doctor. Thanks, Will. Thank you. okay um a mole for years inside the united states air force appointed to boards overseeing involved in debates over dei why because he was black but all the while he never believed any of it that is coming up next on the will cane show it is time to take the quiz it's five questions in less than five minutes we

ask people on the streets of New York City to play along. Let's see how you do. Take the quiz every day at thequiz.com. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz. I'm Janice Dean. Join me every Sunday as I focus on stories of hope and people who are truly rays of sunshine

in their community and across the world. Listen and follow now at foxnewspodcast.com. Your Young Will, says Chris Hart on YouTube. First Rule of War is getting to know everything about your enemies, as God the Father said, keep your friends close, but your enemies closer. Over on YouTube, Sweet Girl 777, sub-sup sweet girl, said, because you cannot figure out what the Chinese can do with your data from your phone,

doesn't mean it's not a risk to you and others. I get that. There's a lot of people pointing that out to me because I said, like, I just don't personally feel the risk of everybody knowing stuff. Like Julie Brandt over on YouTube says, privacy is privacy, all caps.

Why most every detail of me and my body be made public with no less than five question marks, Julie? Yeah, look, here's the thing. Like, as a maxim, like, is a thing to say. Privacy is privacy. I get it. I'm with you.

but I want to know what's the risk like forgive me that curiosity is just part of who I am I want to know and then by the way then you what you do is you do measure the risk against the benefit and Julie you do it as well you're commenting on YouTube even if that's a fake name you've given me there's an IP address associated with your YouTube account you've traded away some privacy that's readily accessible because you find some value thank you in watching the Wilcane show and commenting and subscribing to at least some things on YouTube We've all done the cost-benefit analysis. We don't have to explain that.

Every single one of us have. You have traded privacy for convenience. We're all debating it on a regular basis. It's what we do. We debate it every day, all day. You are debating, whether it's conscious or not, how much privacy should I trade away for this convenience? When you go to the corner market in 1870 to buy some sugar,

the man sees your face. You are suddenly less private. You traded away that anonymity for some sugar. We're only doing that times a thousand. Well, really probably times millions. now so the question is how much privacy when it comes to our genomics do we trade away for the benefit of miracle drugs that are tailored to our own personal genetic profile and like rfk said this last week it's pretty fascinating he said um a healthy man has a thousand dreams a sick man has one my suspicion

is once you're that person if you had a personalized drug you trade a lot of privacy way because you know what like private death less valuable than public life if you value survival that existential debate's going on in Dallas right now here's the December 25th 2024 game I was lucky enough to go there it is great seats I know big baller and there he was Luca just a few feet away little did I know that's the last game of Luca in Dallas. He limped off with a calf injury, never to be seen again in a Dallas Maverick uniform. Kyrie there with him, right there. Once upon a time. He was a mole as he was on a DEI board inside the Air Force. Last week, he was on the Will Cain Show on the Fox News Channel, and he's

with us now today for a little more time, a little more relaxed atmosphere. Let's bring General Christopher Walker joining us now. General? How do you do? Happy Monday. How do you do? I don't know if there's such a thing as a happy Monday, but I'm going to wish it to you anyway. Thank you so much. You know, we began this conversation. We were interrupted by, I believe that day, it was either the President of the United States or the Secretary of Defense, who was booking. It was the SEC death booking himself on the Wilcane show with about seven minutes notice.

I realize where I stand on the food chain, and so that's more important. Well, he rudely interrupted our conversation, but we wanted to make sure we had this more depth because it is fascinating. So give us the background. You are a Brigadier General in the Air Force. You are...

I retire. Right. And what I mean by you are, I mean, at the time this all goes down, and maybe you weren't yet a Brigadier General. Maybe you were, I don't know what your rank was at this time. I was a Brigadier General. Okay, and you're asked to come in on some DEI stuff.

Now, you told me last week it wasn't at the beginning because they thought you were a devotee, a disciple. But once you were in, they assumed you were because you're black. Correct. And quite honestly, everybody who knows me, there are thousands of people who know me know I'm a conservative. but none of them ever asked. Some of them did try to friend me on Facebook, and I refused.

And I say, hey, we're not going to do that. That's unprofessional, because then they would really know. And then, but I just kept it cool. But there are even times, quite honestly, when some of the people in the Office of Diversity Inclusion would be purely political and bad minds. Trump, bad mouth, all sorts of conservatives and things like that. And then I would say, hey, hey, let's look at the facts.

And I would give data. And they would assume that because I was a general and an officer, I was trying to be nonpolitical, but they thought that, oh, but secretly he thinks otherwise. And they were still wrong. Holy smokes. It astounds me the minds of the left. But hey, that's right. we'll use that to defeat them.

Okay, so you end up on these boards when it comes to DEI stuff, right? And you talk about their assumptions. So once you're in the room, they're looking at you, literally just looking at you, right? Nothing deeper. And it's because you're black. They're looking at you and going, safe space. He's with us. And what?

Had their open conversations? Oh, yes. And I would, again, I would just listen and sometimes stay silent because, and they would assume, okay, he's being professional, but I can still tell him everything I want to say. And I just listen and go, hmm, okay. What would they say? Give me some examples. What would they talk about?

Well, okay, there was a lot of bad-mouthing Trump. There was a lot of bad-mouthing, the GOP. There was a lot of bad-mouthing white males. And then sometimes I'd say, okay, let me ask you this. What if all of the white males decided to leave the military? Don't you think we would be forced to learn Mandarin at gunpoint? But they would not even listen to that. And I said, and I tried to gently prod them in the way of,

hey, how about we have some unity? And they didn't want to hear it. There were even times where I said, okay, here's something we can do. If the diversity is that important, let's do it like the NFL, the NBA, major league baseball, a professional soccer, let's start inspiring the youth in every corner of the United States and the world because we have Americans living all over the world and inspire them in aviation, cyber, and whatever else we might need it to be. and then have them in competitions. And then the ones who rise to the top, we start mentoring them and trying to pluck them for the military. All of them don't have to go in the military.

Quite honestly, this is something that will benefit the United States as a whole, whether they're in the military or a civilian. But those that we bring in the military, we will have first pick of the Michael Jordan's, the David Big Papi Ortiz's and the Tom Brady's. But they didn't want to hear that. They want to do it. Wait till they're 1822 and use propaganda.

And I go, okay, this is a losing battle. So I bit my lip and I just reported the crazy. Well, okay, what was the point of this DEI board inside the Air Force? It was not a board, but it's an office. There's a D.I. Office. They called it the Secretary of the Air Force Office of Diversity and Inclusion. Right. Okay.

They report to the Secretary of the Air Force? They reported directly to Secretary of the Air Force. And so my boss at the time was a senior executive person. And then her deputy was an 06. And that gave the opportunity for, let's just say, without mentioning names, because I didn't ask them if they like their names to be said. But there were people from the Trump administration who were still in charge or high up then, and I got brought in because they knew me. We had relationships, and they knew that I could be perhaps a speed break or a speed bump for the crazy.

Okay, and so this is the Secretary of the Air Force Department of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Office of Diversity. Yes. Office. I was going to say, maybe I got the name a little off, but we get the gist. And it's tasked with what, General? Like, what is its goal and what was it trying to accomplish? It was trying to accomplish DEI for both the Air Force and the Space Force, which would both fall under the Department of the Air Force.

and quite honestly again I want to reiterate diversity is not a bad thing it's how you get there that could be a bad thing and they started doing it the CCP way and that just

I can't go with that there are better ways if we do it like professional sports all will be well because we'll get the best right right I want to get into the tactics in just a second

when you said something because you said diversity is a good thing and to some extent I think we all agree with that. But, you know, the SEC DEF says this now, the new SEC DEF. He says, it's often said diversity is our strength. He said, that is completely backwards. Unity is our strength.

Unity is our strength. Quite honestly, if we have a lot of diversity, but they're all fighting, then we're going to lose. China is going to win. Unity is our strength. I'm telling you, the whole purpose of basic training and all of the services is to bring unity. The whole purpose of of really, really difficult training, for instance, the special forces and such, that is to bring unity because all of these people coming from Brooklyn, New Orleans, Browns, Brownsville, Texas, San Francisco, all of that goes to the wayside because they are all

now brothers and sisters. That's the purpose of all of this. But these people- And by the way, that's like professional sports. That's like professional sports. Holy smokes. Do you see any professional sports players said, I'm not going to play for this coach because he's white? No. So this is a total force.

But they got a lot of the stupid people in the United States going along with it. Okay. Okay, back to the tactics. So they are looking to achieve. achieve equity, inclusion. What types of ideas were they? You know, they didn't like your idea. So instead, you mentioned like Chinese style propaganda. What were they doing to force equity inclusion into the Air Force? So throughout a lot of the service academies and throughout lower ranking service members, they'd have different kinds of

training that would hint and sometimes even be blatant saying that white people are the enemy. And I go, holy smokes, how's that going to work? But then consider this. There is a course that the Georgetown University, holy smokes, it's supposed to be a Catholic university, but that's, it's gone off the reins. But they convinced the Air Force to pay good money for a course called the executive course for managing inclusion, something like that. And it was targeted toward senior members of the Air Force, so generals and senior executive service. And in that course, we had two Georgetown University professors telling us that if we meet

a new person, if we don't ask their pronouns, we're wrong. And in my mind, I go, wait a minute, no sane person does that. What is this? But they were trying to convince us that if we didn't do that, we were wrong. And we should be ashamed of ourselves and we should go self-flageulate. And then they also tried to say that no people of color can be racist because they are the oppressed. And white people are the oppressors. and they are the, they are higher on the totem pole

so these lower people cannot be racist. And I was like, and then I have one of my friends, and she won't mind me saying her name. She's a general as well, and she's going to be retiring in the spring, but Tracy Smith, she started challenging these ideas, and then they started pillorying her and try to make her feel like she was dirt.

after that class that day she calls me and says was I did I look like an A-hole and I said no no no no Tracy they were gaslighting you

they were trying to make you look like way stand strong we're not going to let this stand so you're taking all these courses the courses are saying stuff like white people are the problem white people are bad you can't be racist if you're a minority

you got to use the pronouns A lot of corporations are doing this. It's disconcerting that the United States military adopted it, you know, so, so passionately or eagerly. But did you see it manifest? Based on industry, they said, oh, the corporations are doing it, so it must work. Holy smokes. Did you see it play out? When is the last time we want to follow in corporations?

Did you see it play out, though, beyond this training? Like, would it play a role? in professional advancement? Would it play a role in unit selection? Yes. So I spoke about, I'm not afraid to name names because I'll tell her to her face. So the S3, the deputy chief of space operations for operations, Deanna Burt, her call sign spice. She actually went on a speech in uniform, and you look it up on YouTube, saying that the laws in Texas against having minors be mutilated for transgender surgery is going to affect readiness.

And I said, she said that, wait a minute, she was in uniform and she said that in a speech to the American public. they were they were emboldened by all of this BS and many others were as well you saw Millie say oh well I want to I want to learn about white rage right holy smokes they were all emboldened by the politics on this and not by the war fighting mentality

when did all this start in your recollection it really accelerated in 2021. Okay, but was there... 2020, well, actually, let me go back, 2020. So after George Floyd's death, then we had a lot of folks who were willing to come out and be really political in uniform. We actually had the Air Force Academy and the football team and their coach put out a video

phrasing a BLM, not knowing what BLM really stands for and all of their tenets, for instance, that they are avowed Marxists and they are against the nuclear family and such. They just fell for hookline and sinker. And then the white officers had, I want to say it, they just have this white guilt and said, okay, I got to go along with it so that I could, they were virtue signaling. And I said, holy smokes, stand strong and pay attention to what it takes to win wars. Let the politicians do that, but they didn't want to do that. Everyone felt comfortable and the snowball got bigger as it rolled downhill. I'm going somewhere with this as our kind of our conclusion, but so that

office, and I've already forgotten the name of it, but the secretary's office. Office of Diversity and Inclusion. The Secretary of the Air Force Office of Diversity and Inclusion. Did it exist before 2020? Did that office get created? No, it was formed in January of 2021. Okay, okay, that's interesting. Because a lot of this, as you point out, like, BLM, that's an older organization.

BLM dates, you know, it was playing a role publicly, you know, I believe, maybe, probably hit my radar around Michael Brown. So what year was at, that was like. Like, that was probably like, was that like 13, let's call it? I'm not going to put out of date on that. But, yeah, that was around the Michael Brown, you know, hands up. Hands up. A BS. Right.

So the reason I ask you, like, how long this has been around is what I'm curious about is how hard is it to cut out. Something has been around longer is going to be harder to cut out. If it's only four years old, that gives me a little bit more hope. But as the SEC DEF has said, And I know him, of course, and he's like, there are targeted replacements you have to do at the top. And that incentive structure will roll downhill. And, of course, he did a, just a complete, you know, the president within EO, a complete whack of DEI within the military, right?

But in, and HECSeth has said, we're not going to let it be rebranded and buried in some other departments or broken up and scattered like cancer into smaller departments. But from your perspective of someone who is in those rooms, how hard will it be to excise? So previous, you know, I don't want to be bad on previous GOP administrations, but they didn't know how to handle things like this. The current administration, President Trump does. He's a New Yorker and he knows, all right, get rid of them, fire a lot of people and make it known. And then the thing is going to happen and the thing I see happening all the time because I go up to New York City, Jamaica, Queens, pretty often to take care of my 92-year-old mother. And I wear shirts like saying there are only two genders, X, X, X, Y, or Ultra MAGA, fully expecting some sort of conflict. and I got people in that black neighborhood coming up, yeah.

And so I said, okay, I know the tide is changing. People are not being fooled anymore. And so people across the government, across industry, across corporations, are going to be very readily talking against it and coming out and speaking on what's on their mind because they were scared before. Now they're not going to be scared anymore. And so the remnants that remain in government, they're going to be in hiding, and they'll be in hiding, but most people in the government know who those people are. And they're going to say, hey, if you don't like it, resign, retire, get out.

This is the way it's going to be. We're not letting that happen again. So you're hopeful that it can be cut out. Oh, believe me. I know it will be. Okay. Oh, this is good. I'm glad we had a chance to talk more in depth.

General. By the way, I appreciate your service. Appreciate your honesty. Appreciate the line that you held as well. And sharing all this with us today here on the Wilcane Show. Lieutenant, Brigadier General Christopher Walker. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right. There he goes. All right. That's two fascinating conversations we've had today. I don't think it's over. I think if you tune over to the dial in about a little less than three hours, we'd love for you to hang out on the Fox News channel as well. for the TV edition of The Will Kane Show.

Until then, I will see you again, same time, same place right here tomorrow. Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad-free on the Amazon music app. Listen to the all-new Brett Bear podcast featuring Common Ground, in-depth talks with lawmakers from opposite sides of the aisle, along with all your Brett Bear favorites like his All-Star panel and much more. Available now at Fox News Podcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts.