Have you noticed that this show doesn't have any commercials?
I'm not selling you diapers or vitamins or smoothies or gasoline.
That's because I don't want any corporate sponsors telling me what I can investigate or what I can say.
Instead, you are our sponsors.
This is a production by our nonprofit, the Inform Consent Action Network.
So if you want more investigations, if you want landmark legal wins,
if you want hard-hitting news, if you want the truth, go to ikandeside.org and donate now.
All right, everyone, are we ready?
Yeah, let's do this.
Action. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening.
Wherever you are out there in the world, it's time to step out onto the high wire.
Well, last week we're obviously bathing in all the success that we've had on the conversations
around freedom, mandates, vaccinations, but the pundits keep going and the news keeps going
and they keep screaming and yelling about how dangerous it is that we should have choice
over six of the vaccines that were just moved into shared decision-making,
meaning between me and my doctor. It's kind of amazing to watch it, but in case,
for some reason, you've been under a rock, this is what that's looked like.
Big new changes for the childhood immunization schedule. This dropped yesterday.
The CDC is dropping the recommended 18 vaccinations down to 11 instead.
This is a big change and I think it's going to potentially cause a lot of confusion.
What they have done is sown a lot of uncertainty, doubt, fear, and so a lot of parents are
going to be confused. This is going to decrease vaccine confidence,
more burden on providers, not what we need right now.
The American Academy of Pediatrics calls today's recommendations
dangerous and says it can continue to give their own recommendations.
Changing the pediatric vaccine schedule based on no scientific input on safety risks
and little transparency will cause unnecessary fear for patients and doctors
and will make Americans sicker. These sorts of things so distrust in vaccines and the
minute that you have a question and somebody says to you, okay, you can go and think
about it. You are going to take that opportunity to go and potentially think about it and never come back.
What I find interesting about this, and it's something that I talk about rarely,
which is why did I get so focused on the vaccine issue at all? I mean, I had a
perfectly great job at CBS as a producer or an Emmy-winning producer of the day.
Time talks for the doctors. But as I looked into this vaccine issue and of course,
went on to make the documentary vaxed, what was fascinating were all the issues around
this and especially because I grew up a progressive liberal. My parents marched in the 1960s for
freedom of choice to choose what university, to have total freedom of speech. That's what it meant
to me to be a liberal. So when I started looking at this issue and realizing this isn't really
about health, this is about an authoritarian government having control over my body,
the bodies of my children. Of course, we're in the middle of SB 277, a law that was going
to take away anyone's right to an education. The taxpayer money that we were paying didn't
matter. You had to be fully vaccinated based on what the pharmaceutical industry had sort of
convinced the CDC was the best way forward. And that then separated us from what I think
is the founding fathers declaration or mandate to have freedom in this nation. It flies in the
face of that. And you know, I often think back, you know, this really comes down to do we trust
the American public to make decisions? That whole news montage shows you this is going to
cause fear. This is the one of the most dangerous things ever done, meaning it's dangerous to
give American people the right to choose, to give them information and let them decide what
they want to do with their children and their bodies. And remember, you know, we are
somewhat copying the Denmark schedule at a chicken pox, but what we didn't copy is Denmark
trusts its people to make the right decision. And they allow them the right to choose vaccination.
So there's Germany, these other nations. So why is it that the one nation that, you know,
yells the loudest is supposed to be the beacon of freedom for the entire world
is one of the few nations that forces through authoritarian mandate this product in order
to walk through life? It's really shocking. And I think about our founding fathers because
certainly this was a question. Are the American is our population too stupid to make decisions
for themselves? I mean, it really is the bedrock of freedom. If we're to be free, we have to
allow everyone to be free. And certainly that was a hotly contested idea. Our founding
fathers thought, should we only allow landowners to be the ones that vote? Because
certainly that would mean they're probably better educated. They're educated enough to know how to,
you know, raise money and buy a farm and run a farm. If we only have them vote for who's president,
then we get an intelligent electorate that decides the future of this nation.
But our founding fathers decided, you know what, this is a nation of foreign buy all the people.
We're going to trust those that maybe don't even have the high school education. I mean,
imagine. I mean, of all the times if we think, if we're worried that the people, our constituents,
and our neighbors here in America, you know, lack the ability to vote for a good president,
can you imagine what it was like back when a high school and college education were rare?
Can you imagine what they were surrounded by there? And even then they looked out at the
peasants and said, they should vote too. So at the heart of this, as I watch these news
agencies fight for how dangerous it is to give people the right to choose, I think what they're
really fighting for is the right to have an authoritarian government destroy our constitutional
rights. To watch all of mainstream news say we stand for authoritarianism is what I think is
happening here. If you want to question me on that, let's just talk about this term
anti-vaxxer. If you look at anti-vaxxer in Webster's dictionary, it's a person
opposed to the use of vaccines or regulations mandating vaccination. That's actually a change
that's been made over time. But that's it. If you simply want to delay one vaccine or skip
one vaccine, you are an anti-vaxxer. You realize what I think that they're making
a huge mistake here because what they're doing is labeling millions and millions of Americans
that simply believe they had the right to choose a pejorative like anti-vaxxer. Essentially,
my understanding is somewhere between eight or nine out of 10 people that are currently
eligible for the COVID vaccine in America aren't getting their booster. That means that 80 to
90% of those that once believed in the COVID vaccine program are now opting for their right
to choose. Are they anti-vaxxers? If there's a mandate, should they have to take it? Do they not
want to live in a nation where they get the right to choose? Whether they think a ninth or tenth
booster shot makes any sense whatsoever. Certainly, I believe if you ask them and they're not
getting that tenth booster, they might say things like, geez, if I'm not immune for this
thing by now, then make a better product. But I wouldn't be happy being mandated with
this vaccine. And I think more and more Americans are moving in that direction saying I should have
the right to choose. So in the end, this issue is to me only just partly about health.
This is the tip of the spear when we talk about freedom. Because if you do not control your
own body, if you do not control the bodies of your children as parents, then you are not
a free citizen. There's no way to say that you are. In fact, I've said over and over again,
you have about the same exact rights as a farm animal. And that is apparently what most of
mainstream news believes, that that should be your way of being. And let's be clear,
what risk is it for you to delay a vaccine or not take a vaccine? Are we going to mandate
things for your own good? Or is it for the good of people? I mean, I think that most of the time we
should only think about, are we hurting someone else? And in this case, now that so many vaccines
are proving to not stop transmission, the argument that you're protecting your neighbor is now
dead. In fact, the definition of a vaccine has changed. It no longer protects your neighbor,
it just protects you, which means it should be my choice. So as we watch this debate roll
out, as we watch Robert Kennedy Jr. and the support of Donald Trump and all the great doctors that
are around Robert Kennedy Jr. fighting for your freedom, you should ask yourself about the news
agencies that are fighting for authoritarianism. And remember, even if you're a liberal,
one of the great liberal voices had this to say, we are not afraid to entrust the American
people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values.
For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market
is a nation that is afraid of its people. John F. Kennedy, we've allowed a corporate infrastructure
to take control of decisions in our government, not only have they pushed for a mandate that
other nations do not have, nations that we consider to be even more authoritarian than
our own. On top of that, once they got us to be mandated to take these products, then they said,
and we don't want to have any liability whatsoever. So if it injures you, sorry,
you're out of luck. You want to talk about the most ridiculous system ever built in a nation
that says it's supposed to be free? That's it. And it's crumbling down,
and it's going to continue to crumble because I believe human beings ultimately are intelligent,
and we should trust our neighbors. If we get back to that place, we'll get back to being
the shining beacon of light and freedom and hope and faith that makes this nation great.
We're going to talk more about this. We're going to talk about your right to choose
what blood that if you need an infusion, should you get to choose where your blood comes from,
or should that also be a right that's taken away from you? I'm going to be talking about that,
but first it's time for the Jackson Report. We were just sitting, Jeffrey, in the meeting
yesterday talking about this show with the team, and what would it mean to say that
mission accomplished? I think about when we started this out. After Vax,
we started the informed consent action network. We started the high wire. You came in,
we started reporting on this, and it really came down to the conversation we have around the nation.
It would be once we are back to freedom, once we have got freedom of choice on all vaccinations,
and frankly, liability is back on the manufacturer. Once we've restored the free market forces
that make products great and give American people that right to choose that they were born
with, then in many ways, I think we could move on to greener pastures and other conversations,
and in some ways, Jeffrey, it feels like we're getting really close to that moment.
Yeah, and there is still some unanswered questions. During the COVID response,
which is roughly since vaccines started going into arms,
roughly six years ago in the United States with the COVID shot,
we still really don't know how many people have been harmed by that shot. We hear a
lot of studies saying it saved the world and the pandemic. It ended it because we had the COVID shot
and we've shown studies that refuted that point, but there's not a lot of studies showing how many
people are hurt by this coerced, mandated shot. And what we have to do is we have to rely on a
reporting system bears vaccine adverse event reporting system that is really not a robust
reporting system, although we're told it is, but we know it's not. So we look at headlines
like this with interest. This is a Rasmussen report, a telephone poll where people were called. This
is human intelligence. This is how people talk. They get a telephone call and here's the headline,
millions experience COVID-19 vaccine side effects. And it says more than a third of Americans who
were vaccinated against COVID-19 say they had side effects from the shot and nearly half
suspect the vaccines killed many patients. It goes on to get a little more fine-tuned here.
It says, however, 26% say that minor side effects and 10% reported major side effects from the vaccine.
Okay. Now stay with me here. This is kind of a back of a napkin calculation, but we have to have
approximations here because there's not really any great studies showing this. We just keep
hearing bears is great. It catches everything. It's the best in the world. Go back to, you
know, the COVID pandemic is over. You can go back to your normal lives, but there's still
a lot of people suffering from this COVID shot. We know this. And so let's take some really broad
approximations from this Rasmussen report and overlay it on the bears and see if we can figure
something out. So in this Rasmussen report, they called almost 1300 people and of those adults
that answered the phone, about 68% of them said they had been vaccinated during the COVID
pandemic with the COVID vaccine. So at the time of this report, there's about 258 million adults
in the US of this Rasmussen report. So about 68% of that. So about 175.4 million. So again,
total approximations here, people are going to tear this part, but that's fine because that's all we
have. Now let's go to bears. So we have of that 175.4 million adults who received a COVID shot.
We go to bears. How many of them really reported what would be considered a serious
side effect? Well, serious side effect, as you can see from open bears, you would probably
be hospitalizations. You get the shot, you find yourself in the hospital for an extended
state, not knowing what the heck just happened. That would probably be a serious side effect.
So let's choose that 221,872. So here we go. Stay with me here. You take that 175.4 million
adults who received that COVID vaccine. And according to Rasmussen, according to those
phone calls, and you take those hospitalizations from bears, 221,872, and you get about 0.13%
of those people ended up with a serious side effect. According to bears reporting,
now this is all to see how robust is bears. How much is bears catching? Is it catching
everything? So you have 0.13%. Well, Rasmussen poll, because we're going to compare it to
that with these random telephone calls, said 10% of people said that they had a serious reaction.
So you take 10%, you divide that by that 0.13%. Bears is under reporting at a rate of about 77
times when it comes to major side effects. And the caveat to this, again, this is very broad
strokes on these calculations, but the caveat to this is those hospitalizations that we chose
for bears, that was children and adults. So we actually gave bears some help on this one.
We over calculated how many reports were coming in, and even by doing that, 77 times
under reporting. And remember, Harvard Pilgrim did the study, and they said less than 1%
is what bears probably was catching before COVID of the vaccine schedule, the flu shot,
the childhood vaccine schedule. So again, anytime we do these calculations,
bears never comes in over reporting. In fact, it comes in massively under reporting in this case,
77 times. You know, it's interesting because I mean, you know, I remember when you were
bringing this up and we're looking at, you know, where is bears at? It's under 1% reported.
If we're going to go with what Rasmussen says there, which is super interesting,
what's fascinating about that article is, you know, remember, we were reporting somewhere
between 40% and 50%, depending on the poll, we're saying they knew someone that they thought
had died from the COVID vaccine. But to add in that one third think they're injured and 10%
think that they've gotten a serious injury from it. That is a massive, massive number.
But I remember when we won the V-safe data, and you know, this is the data, this is the app
that the CDC created to track any sort of vaccine injury. And we built the portal in
people can still go check this out at icandeside.org. But if you pull up that portal and you could
search it any way you want to, what we ended up seeing with those numbers was that it was about,
I believe, was like 7, 7.5% somewhere in that zone that we're having serious adverse events.
And up to 30% were visiting doctors or missing school or, you know, in some way it was
altering their life. And that actually goes really closely with what Rasmussen is reporting here.
And again, data that we only have, Jeffrey, because of Aaron Seary and millions of dollars
spent to both get to the Pfizer data, which the FDA wanted to hide for 75 years, would be in
hiding for 75 years if it weren't for the work that ICAN does. The Moderna data is available
to the public because of the work that we do here. But that v-safe data, which anyone can read
through and go through our dashboard, which is super interesting, you can see that too.
But again, what we're seeing is what has been reported. Harvard has said in their, you know,
experience when they were tasked, like I think they paid, were paid a million dollars
to investigate it, bears is capturing less than 1% of the total amount of injuries.
There's that study that does that. And so, you know, and this matters.
This matters when you're going to rush a totally experimental product onto all the
population and have your president of the United States say everyone's going to have to get it,
or they can't go to work, or they can't go to school, or they can't get on plane.
It matters that your one major capture system is so flawed and that you want to hide your
v-safe system and you want to hide your Pfizer data and your Moderna data. This is what I
think America is waking up to and why we're seeing such change, you know, as we're moving along
now. Right. And so we just want to be adults. Let's talk about children.
So here's a headline somewhat recently out of the Atlantic. Yes, some children may have died
from COVID shots. Well, we've come a long way since safe and effective or, you know,
anti-vaxxers have a crazy conspiracy that the COVID shots may kill people.
We're actually getting these headlines that from legacy media outlets that they're admitting
this. And this brings us to a study out of Spain. And this study found something
kind of accidentally. They were looking at the safety and the effectiveness of the COVID mRNA
vaccines in children ages six to 11. And they used the entire population database of Madrid's health
system. And they looked at it really during the hot years of the pandemic around May 2021
to December 2022. So a lot of deaths going on there. And remember, they rushed these vaccines
into children's arms. There is typically unanimous voting from Virbac, from ASIP,
to both these in, despite massive problems, despite the fact that children were not
dropping like flies from COVID. So this study looks at that time period. It looks at a lot of
children. And where did they find no deaths attributable to COVID-19 occurred? Now let's
look at the numbers because there's some questions here. I'm sure people are watching
going, well, this is a vaccinated study. So isn't that proving that? You can say that.
But let's look at the image here from the study. This is the table. Vaccinated 183,273,
the controls. So they chose five times the controls of basically unvaccinated compared to
vaccinated for six to 11 year old and 12 to 17 year old. So you add up those controls. It's
about 2.7 million children. And if you go into this study, it says during the follow-up period,
a certain percentage of those children in those controls received one vaccination.
And so bottom line is about one, almost 1.4 million children in this study. And they're
monitoring them for hospitalization, for mortality. No children died. You would think if they
hit the dartboard, you know, they threw a dart like that with that many children. If this,
if COVID was as dangerous, we are told that every child, every child had to get this shot,
every infant had to get the shot. In fact, the West Coast Alliance and East Coast Alliance
are still making their own recommendations to put them in the arms of infants. As we speak right now,
you think that they would have captured a death or two in this just by a blind chance and they
did not. And so that brings us kind of to the next question. We talk about the reporting
systems, but there's people that are injured from this. There's children that are injured
from this, myocarditis and the list goes on. You can look and what are we doing here in
the United States? Well, we have the countermeasures injury compensation program. It pays out
almost nothing to people that have been injured. It was never meant for a pandemic. It was that
reporting system and a compensation system never meant for that. And we have, we have basically
trying to move that into something else to get compensation. But in the UK, as of last week,
they're putting forward bills in their parliament to try and get compensation for their citizens.
Here's one of them, COVID-19 vaccine damage payments bill. And you go into and read about
this. It says a bill to place a duty in the Secretary of State to make provisions
about financial assistance to persons who have suffered dis, dis, disablement following vaccination
against COVID-19 and the next can of persons who have died shortly after vaccination. So that's what
the UK is doing. What's the US doing? And I want to bring people to a time really quickly because
there's a lot of polarization out there with RFK Junior at the head of HHS. There's a lot of
people thinking the vaccination schedule should have stayed the way it was, should have continued
to be mandated without giving informed consent and choice to parents and children. So
I want to talk about both camps. We have the camp of informed consent. We have the people that
kind of want the old guard back. We'll call it now. I call it the Dark Ages of Medicine now,
so it seems like we're turning the page. And that's represented by people like Stanley Plotkin,
Walter Ornstein. These are legacy researchers who laid the groundwork for the current
vaccination program over decades of research and vaccine development that
we have lived under until Kennedy took office. Well, they wrote a paper.
Well, before we get to that, to be clear, if someone happens to be watching the show for the
first time, our own Aaron Siri, the lawyer that brings all of our cases, went and represented us
and had a deposition of Dr. Stanley Plotkin, who is considered to be the reigning godfather
of our vaccine program, was a nine-hour deposition. You can find excerpts of that
in the entire thing at thehighwire.com, just search for the Plotkin deposition.
But under that deposition, he admitted things like lack of safety testing and things like that.
He was caught off guard, was not ready for it. And in our own FOIA requests,
we found requests to CDC and FDA that Dr. Stanley Plotkin then reached out to
Walter Ornstein and others that are the heads of the departments inside the United States
of America and their health system saying, I just had a very uncomfortable experience with
a lawyer, essentially. And we have to start preparing ourselves for the argument they're
making. I wasn't prepared. So very interesting. I think it sets up this article that you're
about to describe. Absolutely. And so this article, and just put it in context, this was in
summer of 2024, July, to be specific. Robert F. Kennedy didn't drop out of the presidential
race until a month later in August. So Kennedy was not at HHS. He wasn't talking about going to HHS.
He wasn't really even talking about vaccines. In fact, I remember when he was running for
president, he did an interview, a couple of podcasts, and he said, you know what,
I'm not talking about vaccines anymore, because I'm running for president. There's
also other issues that I want to talk about. So it wasn't really on the docket.
And out of the woodwork comes Stanley Plotkin. When Stanley Plotkin speaks,
a lot of people in medicine listen. And he published this study in the New
England Journal of Medicine, not a small journal talking about vaccine safety science.
I piqued her interest. This is what we had to say about it. He said, the widespread vaccine hesitancy
observed during the COVID-19 pandemic suggests that the public is no longer satisfied with
traditional safety goal of simply detecting and quantifying the associated risks of a vaccine
after a vaccine has been authorized for use. The public also wants public health authorities
to mitigate and prevent rare but serious adverse reactions, which no longer seem rare
when vaccines are given to millions or billions of people. Huh, it kind of sounds like the
entire group of people that helped Kennedy ascend to his presidency and into office.
Sounds like he's one of them. He's actually saying because millions and billions of people
are having these rare side effects, they kind of add up. And we need better safety science.
And he goes on to say this, identifying the biologic mechanisms of adverse reactions,
how and in whom they occur is critical for developing safer vaccines, preventing
adverse reactions by expanding contraindications and equitably compensating
vaccines for true adverse reactions. Kennedy himself couldn't say it any better.
It's really amazing. I want to really drill down on this because these things can fly up.
Bring up that last paragraph because this is what we're arguing. This is what mainstream
keeps arguing. We have identified. We know everything about the vaccine. You don't. Here's the
God for the vaccine saying, you know what we should do? We should be identifying the
biological mechanisms of adverse reactions, meaning we know they exist. They have to be
happening. You know, we study rare diseases. Why don't we study rare injuries from vaccines?
Why aren't we giving it the same concern instead of gaslighting people and saying that
this doesn't happen? And I want to go back to the original paragraph because I think it's
critical as you fly through that sometimes like, Oh, would that really mean? But however,
the widespread vaccine hesitancy observed during the COVID-19 pandemic suggests that
the public is no longer satisfied with the traditional safety goal of simply detecting
and quantifying the associated risks after a vaccine has been authorized for use.
That should have been bolded when you read that. What they're saying is what we have
proven. There are no placebo trials of any of the childhood vaccines that was totally
acceptable back in the day by Stanley Plotkin and Walter Ornstein. But now as it turns
out, because of Jeffrey Jackson and Robert Kennedy Jr. and Dell Baytree and others like us saying,
you know, why are we doing safety tests like we do on every other drug we take? I guess we're
going to have to start doing those safety tests and figuring out before the vaccine is being
injected and mandated on every child and, you know, with COVID every adult. So it's amazing.
You're right. It's actually what good science is supposed to be in that article also says the
only reason we didn't do it is we didn't have the funding. I mean, you're talking about an industry
that makes a hundred billion dollars on the COVID vaccine doesn't have the funding to do proper safety
tests like they do on every other drug. But now that we have someone at HHS, to your point,
doing exactly what Dr. Stanley Plotkin would have done himself, he needs to be torn down.
Oh my God, this guy is a danger and a menace to society because he's actually
got Marty McRee saying we're not going to prove any more vaccines
without a placebo trial. And you're going to have to prove that the flu shot
actually stops the flu that that season has to offer. And God forbid this be happening. This is
why we're winning this argument, Jeffrey. It's why we're going to continue to win,
why I think it's going to affect elections from here to come, you know, until
everyone gets on board with the fact that we all just want safety. And there's only
one side that would prefer authoritarianism over safety.
And, you know, behind closed doors, what this says is the both sides are intellectually
shaking hands. They're patting each other on the back. They're saying,
we know what direction we're going and let's walk there together. This is what
they're saying. It's just a kumbaya moment. So let's, let's talk about the door. I will
love when they actually come out in public and shake hands and Stanley Plotkin says,
Bobby, thank God for you. Thank for you for getting the funding
into what I wish we could have done all along. And for those people that are ringing their
fists at Bobby Kennedy and what he's doing, they got bigger problems because it's not just
a federal level and it's not to Bobby Kennedy. This is expanded to states. States rights and
states are now moving along in lockstep with the U.S. government. One of those states is
Florida and take a look at what they're doing now. New concerns about what's inside some
of the most common baby formulas, a warning for Florida families. The state's been testing
baby formula and some of the results are scathing. According to the Florida Department of Health,
the state tested 24 infant formulas and 16 of them contained at least one heavy metal
above federal safety standards. Mercury was found in all 16 of the samples that tested positive
with three formulas showing three or more undesirable results. Casey DeSantis backed by
husband Governor Ron DeSantis alongside Florida's Surgeon General, Dr. Joseph Lattapo,
announcing test results Friday. Neurodevelopmental injury. We're talking about injury to your
kidneys, to your lungs, to your livers, to other pretty much every organ in your body.
The governor says this is just the beginning. That is part of their exposing food toxins
initiative that they will be independently testing even more products in the near future.
We want people to be able to make the best decision for them, not necessarily what would be
in the best decision of some, you know, manufacturer or something like that.
You know when I watch this, Jeffrey, I think about, like, what was it? What was it like
six Surgeon Generals or something wrote a letter against Robert Kennedy Jr.,
you know? And I'm like, oh, the same six that allowed poison toxic chemicals in our
baby food. Never thought to test it for the United States of America like that.
Like the same six that allowed arsenic in the baby food, which is one of the things that are
finding mercury, petroleum dyes in our, you know, in our fruit loops, those same six Surgeon
Generals. I mean, it's amazing to see. It's so exciting to live in a nation that is starting
to act like the nation you believed you lived in. Unfortunately, this is just Florida,
hopefully other states, but honestly, you know, our own federal government shouldn't be
testing all of these things. Shouldn't this be a part of what it takes to get on the shelves?
Was that not what the food and drug administration was supposed to be doing all this time?
Right. And what's powerful about this is you have Florida doing these studies for the entire
country. So they're kind of doing what the FDA should have been doing. And so, so in light
of that, in respect to that, we're going to give this information as they are. We're going
to present this to the rest of the country that are watching it. You can see if you go to
exposingfoodtoxins.com. That's Florida's new website. And it's not just food. So you can see
by this infographic, they're looking at the food industry, they're looking at big pharma,
they're looking at nutrition and chronic disease and mental health and substance abuse. So
this is a first of many, many things that they're going to be going after essentially and
trying to really investigate. So you look at the scorecard here, and this is all the food
with heavy metal, baby food with heavy metal contamination. So you can see there in the
red, the M's, those are mercury's that are over the limit. You probably, you know, if you're looking
to have your child, your infant not have mercury in this system, you're probably going to want to
avoid these foods. Oh, it is just a small amount of mercury. And I'm sure it's fine.
You know, forget that you're taking it, you know, you're feeding this stuff two,
three times a day. Don't worry about it. It's just mercury. It's the safe,
it's the safe form of mercury. And as the Surgeon General Lotpo said, these recommendations by the
EPA, these standards that are set are for adults. So when they're talking about this is over for
adults, obviously children have different systems, much more delicate systems. So
just keep that in mind. So let's continue now because it seems like everywhere you look now,
people are really concerned with the toxins and the chemicals in food.
Here's Daily Mail. Here's an investigation they did. You might want to pay attention to this if
you drink a bottle of water. This is Daily Mail Graphic reveals the bottle waters with the most
cancer-causing forever chemicals. These are these PFAS chemicals. They do not degrade in the
environment. They're around forever. And they give us this infographic here. We're going to go
through these bottles individually. So 0.1 part per million per, I'm sorry per trillion is what
is recommended by most health professionals. Anything over that, you're probably not
going to want to ingest that into your system. A lot of issues this causes. Cancer is the big one,
but there's a huge amount. So let's go into these bottles here. Topochico mineral water,
that's a glass bottle, by the way, 3.9 parts per trillion. That's 39 times over the limit.
Desani, 0.2 parts per trillion, two times over the limit. Smart water, same thing,
two times over the limit. Aquafina, again, two times over the limit. Then we get to
Perrier sparkling water, 1.7 parts per trillion, 17 times over the limit. Ascension alkaline water,
0.2 parts per trillion, two times over the limit. Deer park, 1.21 parts per trillion, 12 times
over the limit. And then we have Fiji water, 0.05. So that comes under the limit. It's the
only bottled water that came under the limit there. And so Fiji water is the only one they
tested. Not a lot of good odds there if they're just grabbing water off the shelf and testing
them with these things. So something to keep, we have baby food, we have bottled water. There's a
lot of other things that can be tested. We know that the environmental working group has done
cereal and know moms cross America has done a lot of other things as well. So it's important to
look at these to shape consumer behavior if you don't want these kind of things in your body
or your children's body. And this is what Florida's doing. Any state can do this. Any
state can do this testing. It's not very hard. It doesn't cost a lot of money.
I want to point out just right now, Jeffrey Jackson, one of the great things that we do here in the
High Wire is all you have to do is, you know, give us your email, which is right on the main
page at the High Wire. And we send you the transcript to this entire show, every video,
every article. You want to, oh, I didn't catch it. What bottles was it? You'll get the video,
but you'll also get the actual documents themselves. There you just go scroll down
the page where it says Brave Bowl news. Just put in your email. We don't share it with
anyone else. And then usually by Monday of every week, you can get every single video,
every single article, everything that we discussed. This is what, you know, sort of truth
and transparency. This is our charter with the High Wire. We'd like every other news agency to do
the same thing. Don't just tell us what the experts said. Show us your evidence. We are
showing you our math every single week. And that's also because I don't want people to have
to go out and say, well, Del Bigtree said or Jeffrey Jackson said, I want to be able to read
the article. And frankly, the whole article, not just the excerpt that we took out. Go ahead and
read the entire Stanley Plotkin letter slash study that he put together with Walter Ornstein.
It's super interesting. And if you think you're, we're cherry picking, then call it out.
That's what transparency is all about. That's what news and information is actually
supposed to be about. We call it the High Wire protocol. And we're asking every
single network and news agency in the world to adhere to the same principles.
Show us your work. If someone says that there's a placebo trial, if you say it,
prove it. Where is it? Post it? Print it. That's what we're doing on the High Wire.
Now, I want to talk about a conversation that's a little forward-looking, but it's coming
quick. We've been talking about this before, but this is this rapid rollout of artificial
intelligence. And just to see if context, we came out of the COVID pandemic and AI was
dropped in our lap. Coincidence? Who knows? Maybe history will show that, but it's dropped in
our lap and all of a sudden it's aggressively accelerating into every aspect of our life.
And we as citizens are going around, looking around going, wait a minute, this thing is
moving really fast. We've got to have some big conversations here. One of them is about jobs,
employment, and universal basic income. And an interesting point, Yvon Noel Harari,
he is an historian. He's also really likes the WEF. He had a point that I want to really spotlight
here. Take a listen. Okay. Now, you can think about the AI revolution as simply a wave of
immigration of millions and billions of AI immigrants that will take people's jobs,
that have very different cultural ideas and that might try to gain some kind of political power.
And these AI immigrants, these digital immigrants, they don't need visas. They don't cross
as a sea in some rickety boat in the middle of the night. They come at the speed of light.
And I look, for instance, at far-right parties in Europe and they talk so much about the human
immigrants, sometimes with justification, sometimes without justification. They don't talk almost
at all about the wave of digital immigrants that is coming into Europe. And I think they
should be much, if they care about the sovereignty of their country, if they care about
the economic and cultural future of their country, they should be far more worried about the digital
immigrants than about the human immigrants. I mean, it's a good point, right, like focus on
the real issue. And it's a trippy thought, right, that for all the immigration and what it can
do to jobs, what if it's millions of immigrants that I think you could argue have the intelligence
of a nil-bill laureate and are going to work for less than minimum wage. And yet we're just all
looking and complaining about other issues. And this one is, as he says, moving at light speed
right now. Absolutely. And I want to read something that puts a fine point on it. In fact,
I read this and it really stopped me in my place. So this is an article called The Great
Decoupling. The title is White Collar Displacement Ignites 2026, UBI Firestorm. It
says that the United States enters 2026. The long-predicted AI revolution has transitioned from
a Silicon Valley slogan to a disruptive economic reality. For decades, automation was a specter
haunting factory floors and warehouses. But the last 18 months have seen a dramatic shift
towards the white collar cliff. This displacement has catapulted universal-based
income from the fringe libertarian experiment to the center of its 2026 political agenda.
It goes on to say that significance of this moment cannot be overstated. Unlike previous
waves of automation that replace physical tasks, the current egentic era of AI targets the core
of the middle-class professional identity, cognitive reasoning and project management,
and specialized knowledge. As corporate earnings reach record highs due to AI-driven
operational efficiency, while entry-level professional hiring has plummeted by nearly
40% in some sectors, the debate over who owns the wealth generated by artificial
intelligence has become the defining issue of the year. As we are given AI to transcribe our
Zoom calls and make some better meme images with Google Gemini, corporations are using it to vastly
accelerate their efficiency and thus take people out of the job market. The question is,
are we stumbling into a universal-based income? We have the State of the Union
address that's going to be on February 24th by President Trump, and a lot of people are looking
forward to that and saying, is there going to be conversation about an AI dividend or something
that's going to be given to the public, some kind of stipend or something because of this job
displacement? That would really be the first specter of this universal basic income we're
seeing. Again, I'm going to point to Florida here because we have a lot of governors and
people that are standing up in politics and wanting a different change here. This is Governor DeSantis
in Florida. He took the X. He said, why would people want to allow the human experience to
be displaced by computers? As a creation of man, AI will not be divorced from the flaws of human
nature. Indeed, it is more likely to magnify those flaws. It is dangerous.
This issue, I think, is going to become more and more a major topic on the
high wire because it's concerning me. I have a son that's 17 years old. He's a junior in high school.
My daughter is 11 years old, and I'm trying to imagine what the future looks like for them.
I'm trying to imagine, am I in the same position to guide my children forward for their careers
and their ideas of who and what they want to be? Am I in the same position my parents were at?
Because my son talks about perhaps being a lawyer. What freaks me out is really,
I imagine they'll still be lawyers standing on floors of courtrooms, at least for the near future.
But what about all the researchers? What about all the entry-level jobs coming in
paralegals or all the work that you could do, whether it's an internship? Why is any lawyer
going to bring on an intern to research other cases? Can you do some case studies on me
when AI is going to do that better than anyone can imagine? How much of medicine is going
to get wiped out? If your child wants to be a doctor, if the doctors mostly have become,
you know, essentially agents for the pharmaceutical industry, almost, you know, how much of the
medical profession is just, here's the drug for that problem. Here's the drug for your reaction
to that drug for that problem. Oh, you have another problem. Here's the three drugs,
and we know that's what's going on. AI can do that way better. It certainly,
as well as any doctor, that job's gone. So to your point, all of these, what used to be what you
wanted your child to go to school for, they seem to be the one, those careers are almost in the
firing line more than a plumber, more than an auto mechanic at the moment. I know Elon's working
on some robots to do that stuff. I don't know how far down the line, but I'm in a quandary
right now on, you know, what is it I want my child to be good at? Right now, I'm like, you just
better be good at surviving, being creative, being able to think outside the box to bob and weave,
because your world is about to be decimated. And then you think about universal basic income.
Let's just take away the greatest motivating factor all of us had that got us off of our bed,
whether it was in college or after college or going out to get a job, and that's survival.
You know, survival is what kept me alive in New York when I was, you know, trying to get that job
waiting tables while I was pursuing a career in the arts, simply having to survive it. That was
taken away. How many people lose really the will to fight or live? How much of this society will
be what, smoking weed and playing video games? And I guess the great overlords will keep voting
for them to get a raise to do that. More UBI for the people that aren't working. I don't buy it.
Yeah. And what's it replaced by? That's the question. What's replaced? What replaces that drive?
If in the monetary system is not perfect, I think you and I both agree on that,
but what replaces that drive? Is it creativity? Is it some type of blissful life? Or is it
more of a dependence on who's giving out the UBI, which is most likely going to be the
government? And that's a recipe for disaster as we've seen throughout history.
Yeah. Well, Jeffrey, I appreciate the reporting. Fantastic work. Again, I think there's going
to be a super interesting year. So many things are moving really, really fast. And I love
that you're just, you know, keeping it all eye, you know, eye in front of us. Let's not worry,
you know, yeah, immigration, but what if immigration is coming light speed and it's
coming after all of our jobs in a different form? We've got to keep our eyes on all of that.
Great reporting. I look forward to talking to you next week. All right. Thank you.
Right. Well, look, I say it at the top of this show. There are no sponsors for this show.
You are our sponsors. This is an experiment in media. You know, much of my team, my executive
producer came over from CBS where I worked on the daytime talks to the doctors. Our director
of an inconvenient study came over from the doctors. We all had a dream. Imagine if what
we were reporting, we could do something about it instead of just complaining about it.
That's what this is. The informed consent action network doesn't just report to you.
We get involved. We fight in courtrooms for places where we see an issue. We believe in
your freedom. I'm not just saying I am complaining about the desire for authoritarianism by
mainstream media. We are doing something about it. We funded the lawsuit that brought
finally over years of fighting freedom to Mississippi and the right to choose.
They can opt out based on a religious exemption in Mississippi, something that had been taken
from them in the 1970s. We are deep in that fight now in West Virginia. We won the case.
We won against all the lawyers there, but of course, Pharma and all the funding and God
knows who's behind the 20 lawyers on the other side of the aisle are marching this straight
in to appeal. We are in an appellate court now. The fight continues. In order for us to
stand in that courtroom, remember, there's no money to be won here. These are not court cases
that your average lawyer would take up. Frankly, no one thought anyone would fight for you
because who's going to fight a lawsuit that doesn't pay us any money? Who could spend
millions of dollars fighting for freedom? Where is that money going to come from?
Well, that's what you've made possible. That is what the high wire is doing. That is what Aaron
Siri is able to do. One of the greatest attorneys in the history of our Constitution in this nation
is fighting for us through ICANN. We have the Pfizer data, all of the Pfizer data. Yes,
we're America's public health watchdog. We have the Pfizer data, the book Pfizer Papers
by Naomi Wolfe was only possible because of you, the Moderna data and knowing how many
injuries, how many died for real, not just have to take their work for it,
happened because of you, the V safe data and the dashboard that you can, you know, look through
and figure out what their own app captured as far as injury on the COVID vaccine. We were
informing you of how safe that was in real time because your donations. And so I just want
to ask you the beginning of this year, why don't you be able to look back as like an
investment instead of buying a little Bitcoin today or some ETH? Why don't you invest in the
high wire and ICANN and the work that we do here? God knows you're funding papers,
you're funding cable networks for them to lie to you and fight for authoritarianism.
Don't you want someone fighting for your freedom and talking about every week?
You just go to the highwire.com, go to the top of the page, donate to ICANN.
We would love it if you would become a recurring donor. That just means this is
how much $26 a month. You may maybe skip a lunch, maybe intermittent fast once a week
or once a month and decided to do something about your health in many different ways. But that
recurring donation, we're asking for $26 for 2026 to everybody that is a sponsor and donor
donor to ICANN. I want to thank you for making all that we've achieved here possible.
You don't even know everything we're involved in. We can't even talk about all of it.
And the lawsuits that are ongoing, 90 as we speak, we'll make it super easy. Just type in 72022
on your phone, text us. 72022, type in the word donate and we will send you out. I'm going to
respond to you and send you a link so that you can get involved with donating to this amazing
work that we're doing here in Jeffrey Jackson and Aaron Ciri. You get to tap yourself on the
shoulder and say, I did that every time we have a legal win. All right. Also, I want to
point out that we have a great store with all sorts of great t-shirts for the high wire,
how you high wire. I mean, I run into people in airports that are wearing the high wire shirt.
By the way, if you're wearing a high wire shirt in an airport, I will come up to you and say
hi. If you're wearing a hat, I will come up to you and say hi. If you knew how much I was
traveling, the odds that I'm going to meet you are better than you think. But I want to
point out, this is one of the favorites. It's one of my favorites. While AI is now studying
everything you're doing, probably listening to you through your phone, even when you think it's
on silent or you've got an airplane mode, who knows? This is a Faraday bag. And it's a great
gift to even start a conversation starter. So you can just go to our website and order
Faraday bag fits all of the different cell phone sizes. You stick it in there, especially
if you have a conversation that you really want to be private, but also block all those
EMFs. Keep that out of your life. There's so many great things about this. It's a top seller,
and you can get it right now at our store. Several years ago, in the middle of,
actually, it was like April of 2021, I had a sort of surprising health scare. I was running
all over talking about COVID, talking about these issues. Then I thought I caught COVID.
I was really weak. I was having trouble walking across the room. Luckily,
some friends of mine sort of forced me to go to a heart doctor. I didn't end up having a heart
issue, but that heart doctor through blood tests discovered that my hemoglobin was down to 4.8.
They said to me, I mean, I got an emergency call in the morning. It was a Thursday morning.
I was supposed to be heading to the show in about an hour. I was not feeling very good,
but I'm a guy that's like, the show must go on. I'm going to be there. This doctor said,
you aren't going to any show. You need to get to an ER right away. You need emergency blood
transfusions. Your hemoglobin should be somewhere between 13 and 17. You're at 4.8.
Mandatory emergency infusions start if you're below, I think, 7 at the time. I was at 4.8.
It was a serious emergency. I had an issue. I didn't want blood from people that had been
vaccinated with the COVID vaccine. I don't want that spike protein in my body, that
man-made, manipulated product that was never properly tested. Don't want it. Don't need it.
Even though I was really on the verge of death, luckily a friend of mine called
the blood bank here in Austin, and there was only, I think, it was seven total units. I'm
B negative, which I guess is pretty rare. In all of Austin, only about seven units,
and they don't track whether or not there was a COVID vaccine. Luckily, the person at Blood Bank
made some calls and found one. By the course of the day, meanwhile, I was saying, well, look,
I know people that have negative blood. My wife is O negative. I could get her blood.
And here in Austin, Texas, they said, we can't process it fast enough. It would take 10 days
to two weeks to process your wife's blood. I called a friend who has a clinic in
down in Mexico in Cancun. I said, are they testing blood there? Do they know whether
there's a COVID vaccine? He said, let me look into it. As it turns out, they were testing
for it. Always amazing when they're more thorough than we are in the United States of America.
And he said, and we can turn your wife's blood around in probably under four hours.
So I flew to Mexico. My wife went with me and I went down and started getting transfusions in
Mexico. Oh, a great headline. Top anti-vaxxers unhinged quest for unvaccinated blood leads
into Mexico. Del, look at this, Del desperately needed transfusion, but first he had to
track down the blood of a donor who hadn't been vaccinated. And his doctor friend in Mexico was
ready to oblige. So it made headlines. It's weird the things that make headlines. But look at that.
I mean, that dude right there didn't know he was dying, totally green, no oxygen moving
through my blood. I think that's only four transfusions. I needed 10, about four in.
I was feeling a heck of a lot better. But this is an issue. Should I have the right to
have blood for my wife and people that I know? Should it take? Why is it that concierge medicine
is much more available in Mexico than it is here in the United States of America? These are questions
that are being asked right now. And they're very important for all of us, whether it's about
a vaccine issue or some other blood issue may have. This is a recent hearing on a law in
Texas. Take a look at this. Blood is not something most people think about until they need it. And
yet one in 70 people will require a transfusion each year. So this is no small thing, especially if
you have a chronic disease like these girls have or a condition that requires transfusions regularly.
In situations where someone has a rare blood type or particular blood disease,
often it can be difficult to find high quality blood that may be necessary for them to
receive a transfusion. My daughter sitting here next to me were born with a rare blood
disorder called beta thalassemia major. It's a disease where they do not make any blood of
their own and they require transfusions every month for the rest of their lives. I was born
in China with a disease called thalassemia. I had to live in an orphanage until my parents
could come and bring me home. When I first got home I was really really sick. Every two
weeks I had to go to the hospital to get blood. I still felt awful. But then we found some
incredible donors who matched me exactly. I started getting super fresh blood.
After I started getting blood from those wonderful people, everything got better.
I was adopted from China when I was three years old. Sadly when I got adopted I was very sick
because the orphanage I was in couldn't take me to go get blood. I was adopted after my sister
when I got my first transfusion. They found out I have harder blood to match than my sister.
One time they gave me bad blood that didn't match exactly and I had a bad reaction. I couldn't
breathe and I had bumps all over me. After that happened my mom told the doctors I was going to
get special blood like my sister. It was hard to find my special blood but my mom finally found
enough and after that I stopped getting sick at the time too. Direct donation is the collection
of blood with the intention of it going to a specific individual. Unfortunately many hospitals
and blood banks are recently refusing to fulfill position prescribed and ordered
autologous and direct donations despite the fact that they are legal safe and have a long history
of prior use. Two years ago our lives got turned upside down. Carter blood care called me out of
the blue and told me that our donors could no longer donate blood to our girls anymore.
Even though for the past 10 years they had agreed to let us do that. Almost immediately
after their first transfusion with anonymous blood their health rapidly began to decline.
It was so awful. I slept all summer long. I had itches. I itched all the time.
I had terrible sores in my mouth and I even told my mom I couldn't live like this anymore
which made my mom cry every day. When they took our donors away two years ago
I got super scared. They've got super sick and I just was too tired to do anything.
All I want to do was sleep. I prayed and prayed every day that we would get our special blood again.
There's a growing number of situations where entities within the blood donation industry have
made the business financial decision to override the doctor's order for the directed donor blood
effectively keeping the doctor from practicing medicine in the best interest of their patient.
We had to change blood banks hospitals and doctors which was a little scary but I got
my special blood back. Now I feel great. For the past 18 months the girls have gotten their
direct donors back and they've absolutely thrived. It's mind-blowing to see the positive changes in them
compared to 2023. I'm in the junior high. I play volleyball and basketball. I'm a cheerleader
and I have enough energy to run track this year. No one at my school would ever know I have
thalassemia. I'm so happy. I feel like a normal kid now. I love gymnastics but probably the
best part about getting my special blood back is having the energy to annoy my family with
my constant giggling and goofiness. I also talk a lot. The worst part about not getting my special
blood was seeing my mom cry and worry so much. I don't ever want to go through that again.
Well obviously a very important hearing. I am joined now. It's my honor and pleasure to be
joined by Liz James who is the founder and president of Blessed by His Blood.
And Tanya Lear, the mother of the two beautiful kids that we saw there. Tanya,
Liz, thank you for joining me. Thank you for having us. Liz, you know, I think about back in
the movies, car accident, you know, television shows, people were like, oh, you know, find
neighbors and friends that had the right blood type so that you could donate blood and help the
person out. The system seems to have changed. But tell me a little bit about before we get
your company blessed by His Blood. What is it? First of all, thank you for having us today.
We are 100% not for profit cooperative. There's nobody that gets a salary or any benefit from
this other than we know we're doing the right thing. And what we do is we match donors and
recipients for people who have chosen to abstain from mRNA technology. And we are nationwide.
So nationwide, if you want, if you need a blood transmission, you match people that have the
same blood type. Is that a sense of this word? Correct. We work within our cooperative
membership. And we're a faith based, although you don't have to be of Christian faith to be
a member. But we are modeled after John 1513, which is no man has greater love than to
give his life for his friend. And we jokingly say you're not giving your life or just giving a pint
of blood in a couple hours of your time. And we've just had some really beautiful stories
come out in the last two and a half years since we've since we've been doing this.
You know, I never would have thought I would need a company like yours or a
nonprofit like yours until you know, I went through the health crisis that I did.
Tanya, what was this debate that's taking place about?
So basically when we adopted our two daughters, we found directed donors who had been donating
blood for our girls for 10 years. And there was zero issues. The girls were thriving.
They were healthy. They're doing great. They were actually healthier than other patients
who have the same blood disorder in the wide DFW area because of what we were doing.
And without reason, suddenly one day they called me up and said, hey,
sorry, your direct donors can no longer donate blood for your daughters. There was no explanation as
to why. No, nothing, just your cut off and a story. And so this bill that we were created
that Liz actually went to, we hadn't even met each other. I didn't even know there was a bill.
She was fighting for this right to, you know, something that we've had in this country
since 1980. She was fighting for this bill and for all people who need chronic transfusions or
if anyone needs a transfusion from, you know, an operation or if they have cancer or anything,
that they would be allowed to choose their donor, which we have been doing since the 80s in this
country. Are there states where, you know, like here in Texas, what are you actually fighting
for? It's really not a state by state problem. It's a, it, it tends to be a blood center
by blood center problem. And what we have is, is even a corporate entity making medical decisions
in a blanket way. And so one size fits all, which is what I'm completely against. This is,
this is exactly right. And not just that, but taking away the right for the doctor to practice
medicine as they best see fit, as well as the patient's own rights. I mean, if you're, if you're
saying you have, you do not have the right to choose and you're stuck between a rock and a hard
place, the hard place and the rock being if you don't receive a transfusion, you will die.
That's, that is quite a conundrum. And, and it's also not, not a great time to have to
make that decision. I mean, you're under stress already. And one of the, one of the things that,
that doctors should be doing and any, anybody in healthcare should be doing is creating less
stress in a patient, not more stress. If you're in a car wreck and you're bleeding out,
you're going to get whatever you're going to get, you know, unless you have something on that
says you're a Jehovah's Witness or something like that, which the Jehovah's Witness,
and there's a, there's, there's a protocol called the Jehovah's Witness Protocol.
But if you're Jehovah's Witness... What is that protocol? I'm curious,
how do they survive a situation like that? Well, in some cases they don't, but they're at,
they absolutely do not take tissue or blood. Okay. But as anybody else in the public can also
opt into the Jehovah's Witness Protocol and the Jehovah's Witness Protocol
is, is a little bit different depending on the situation is, because the question is,
why do you need blood? So for somebody like Faith or Mele who don't make red blood cells,
it's not, it would not behoove them to receive an erythropoietin promoting product that would,
that would promote the production of red blood cells because their body doesn't make it.
But there are other things that they might be able to do, not for the girls, because they
have a very specific problem going on. But for somebody who's going through chemotherapy or has
anemia, there's trans-examic acid, there's platelet producing drugs, there's iron infusions, there's,
there are lots of other things that can be done depending on the individual.
So, and you can ask for those things too. There's
radial embolization, which, which, where they can embolize certain vessels. There's also something
called cell-saver technology where you can, if you know that you're going into a surgery,
they can actually harvest the blood as you're bleeding out, clean it in like kind of a dialysis
cleaning situation, it's through a perfusionist. And then put it back in. That's actually the safest
way you can receive a transfusion is for them to clean your own blood and just put it right back
in again. Interesting. What is the argument that's being made? I mean, your daughters are giving
this incredible testimony. What argument's being made? No, sorry, you know, young ladies.
So, if you watch the rest of the hearing, you can hear, because all of the politicians asked
these people from that particular blood bank why. And their biggest thing that they said is,
well, people lie. And the people that are, people lie. Directed donor blood is not safer
than the voluntary blood donors that we have. They have a two to seven times higher risk of
infectious diseases. And the critical elements when you donate blood is to fill out a donor
questionnaire and also the testing that we do. But directed donors are incentivized to donate.
And they are, have been found to be more likely to not be truthful on that donor questionnaire.
Now, we do test all blood for infectious diseases, but there are window periods for
each infectious disease, HIV and hepatitis C, 10 days, hepatitis B up to 24 days. So,
it's possible for a donor to be infected with these viruses and not test positive.
That's where this donor questionnaire becomes very, very important,
because we're evaluating the risk. So, if a donor is incentivized to donate,
they may not be truthful. And this is why you see an increased risk of directed donor blood.
And so, the people that are closest to you are motivated to donate for you. And so,
they're going to lie about their extracurricular habits. And that is just wild to me,
because let me just tell you who our donors are. Whenever we, whenever we brought the girls home
and they were not thriving, our hematologist at the time actually came to us and said,
listen, your girls have rare antigens on their blood, they're difficult to match,
and we don't always have a bag sitting on the shelf ready to give one of your girls.
And if we do, sometimes the bag that they have is going to expire the next day.
So, if you give a patient a bag of blood that is fixing to expire,
you're giving them empty red blood cells that do them absolutely no good,
and all you do is create iron overload, which is a big problem for chronically
transfused patients, because iron collects in every major organ that you have,
and there's absolutely no way to get the iron out except to bleed or take really dangerous
key later medications. So, she said, if you find some donors that match your daughters
exactly, then we can solve this problem, because they can go in and donate the week
before, we'll always have the blood on hand, it'll be fresh and they'll do great.
And so, I had a mission and I did it. So, I didn't ask close friends and family,
I did a Facebook poll that was public, and I asked people if they had any kind of calling
to come do something good for these little girls who were not thriving to help us,
people came out of the woodwork, because at the core of every human being,
we all are created to do good. And so, people genuinely, I feel, want to be good people,
deep down, everybody. And so, these strangers came out of the woodwork.
You believe in humanity too, it's kind of the whole point of my perspective today, right?
And so, these people came out of the woodworks to help us, and we tested hundreds of donors,
and we didn't find hundreds of donors, but we did test that many,
and we found a few that matched exactly, which was really, really hard to do,
and it didn't happen overnight, it took us a while to find these donors.
But these donors, faithfully, some of them I have yet to this day to meet them face to face,
and they, you know, I don't have any money, I have seven children. We don't have gifts to give
people. So, I just thank you so much for everything that you're doing for us. That is the text
message I send, and it's genuine, and they know it, and that is it. They've never met my girls,
and they don't care, they genuinely want to help our kids, and that's it. But this blood bank
says that, oh, well, they're going to lie. What's interesting, and I'm just going to add this, is
that I was writing up here with Liz, and she got a phone call from my blood bank, and they said,
hey, we know you donated a couple weeks ago, but we need some platelets. There is a
shortage of platelets. We'll give you two $30 gift cards if you'll come do it right now.
Right now. We need it right now. And if you do that, we're also going to put your name
in a hat for our all-expense paid vacation trip for two to the Super Bowl. Yep. Come on, come on,
let's do it. And she said, you know, she couldn't, and why not? But you need to. And so like,
they were pretty pushy. Yeah. And I actually get that call about every three or four weeks.
But what's crazy is that they're incentivizing anonymous donors. They're
incentivizing everybody. I mean, the entire process is anonymous. The fact that you'd
lie is though, somehow that lie is going to permeate the blood that's going to be tested
for and all the issues anyway. It's going to go through the same blood test as anyone else. And
why is why is anyone that knows you or doesn't have any greater propensity to lie than someone
that's trying to pick up some a ticket? But that says to me, there's huge funding behind
it. There's something bigger than what we're seeing. This isn't just about, oh,
we're a blood company. We want to help people donate blood. Where's the cash cow that I'm not
seeing? So this is very important. This is what people don't understand. I think
blood is maybe the only industry where somebody is giving something away altruistically,
and it is turned and sold. And the United States supplies 70% of the world's blood products.
Around the rest of the world. 70% of the world's blood products. In terms of commodity,
it's ahead of gold and coal. Really? That is correct. And in addition to that,
only about 20% of blood total that's collected in a community actually stays in the community.
But it's not just sold overseas. It's sold to Big Pharma and it's sold for research. And the
Big Pharma component is really interesting. And I have quite a lot of experience in it. I'm a pharmacist.
I realized back in about 2012, the biologics, which is a class of pharmaceuticals that is
the fastest growing, most profitable aspect of pharmaceuticals that we have now,
about 10 to 20% of those biologics are actually made from human blood. And that in itself is concerning
because it's not just, like, if I give blood, it's not just my blood going into one person's
pharmaceuticals. It's batched in vats. And so it's literally untrackable. And that creates a
other set of problems. So when people donate blood, how much value can that have? They're
giving away football tickets. Do we have a sense of overseas? Is blood worth more than it is here?
That is very interesting. So contract prices and the blood industry is very tight-lipped
on pricing. I have been able to acquire some pricing from various hospitals. And on average,
a contract pricing runs about $700 a bag. But if I'm donating to you, and it's a direct donor
situation, that barcode bag belongs to you. If it's an anonymous donor bag, they can look at
a bag and say, oh, there's something unique about this bag. I have all of these antigens.
Perhaps I'm unvaccinated, whatever. I know I will only get $700 by giving it to you, Dell. Or
I can make $4,000 because of these unique properties by donating to this pharmaceutical
company who is looking for those particular things or somebody overseas or whatever.
On top of that, I will say I was at an event a few months ago talking to a doctor and one of her
patients had gone overseas to have a procedure done. She said that she wanted unvaccinated blood
on standby. And they said, well, that will be an additional $70,000. So I don't know,
that's an anecdotal story, but she came back with that information. So that, if true, and I
believe it probably is, if true, that says that, of course, all blood is different.
So when you go and donate blood, they're studying it, and it starts getting categorized
into having different special needs. That's exactly right. I'm curious with your daughters,
you said that once they went on to sort of the pooled blood, if you will, like not direct donor,
that they started having health issues. What is wrong? Why is that blood not as good? Do you
know where it's coming from or why they would be having health issues? So according to where
they were going, they said that they matched it down to the last antigen. So I hope that
they did, but I did read the expiration dates of the bags because I was very curious at that time
what it was. And the expiration date on one of the bags was two days from the day we got it,
even though they assured me that they were going to have the freshest blood available,
and they didn't. And so for a person who gets chronically transfused, you need the
freshest blood. You also need blood from a healthy donor. So another thing we have
in our population is the most people that donate blood are usually over the age of 65.
And why is that? Is because you're retired and you're like, you know what? I got nothing
better to do. I want to give back, okay? But the 20, 30 and 40 year olds don't typically go donate.
Why? Because they're busy. They're working. They don't want to take two hours out of their day
to drive and then sit there and then have to drink some juice and do all the things you
have to do to donate. It's just not convenient. And so those are the people that don't donate.
So basically when we got a bag of blood that was anonymous, I don't know who it came from,
you know, but the girl's hemoglobin was tanking. And so a pre-transfusion hemoglobin for my girls,
for them to actually be able to thrive, needs to be above 10. Theirs was coming in at seven.
That's not compatible with any quality of life whatsoever. A normal hemoglobin for a person
who does not have a blood disease for a female is about 13. For a male is 14 or higher. So
they had no quality of life. So they laid around all summer long. One of my daughters
got fever blisters. Well, that comes from a particular virus. That virus is not one of the
viruses that's true. Somebody lied. It's not one that's tested. So there's certain diseases that
they test for in the blood, but there's a lot of them that they don't. And the CEO of this
particular blood bank that we were having issues with went on stage and said there is a
10-day window for HIV that we don't know if someone donates. There is a 12 to 14 day for hepatitis C,
and there's a 24-day window for hepatitis B. And that is a random donor off the street who decides
I want to go do a good thing today and donate. My donors have been doing this for 10 years.
So if they had one of those problems, they would have been screened out by now.
So their arguments are completely invalid. They make absolutely no sense.
They also argued that it was so expensive. Like, this is so much more expensive to do this.
And, you know, basically they're tagging with a special little tag and they're putting it on a
shelf. And the blood that goes to the hospitals, blood goes to hospitals all the time. So you're
not hiring an extra courier or paying those fees or anything. So there's no extra cost.
The only extra cost that I had in that particular situation is they made me pay
$111 to donate my own blood with a money order. I could not do a credit card, a check,
or anything. How to be a money order? Well, obviously, this is something that I think we
all need to be focused on. Again, this is just about, I think, sort of corporate capture of
things that we think should just be wide open and free, especially here in the United States
of America. How do people follow the work that you're doing? They just go to-
It's www.blessedbyhisblood.com. Okay, awesome. Look, if you guys will stick around. I'd love to
have an off-the-record. I'd love to know what it's like to adopt out of China.
That's got to be quite a ride in sort of what inspired you to start.
Thank you.
Blessed by His Blood. I want to thank you for joining us today.
Thank you. Thank you for having us.
Thank you very much. Absolutely.
Look, you know, our founding fathers said if you want to remain free,
you're going to have to remain vigilant. These may seem like bizarre stories until
you find yourself in a situation where you actually need blood or you need freedom.
You need the right to choose your doctor. You want your doctor to be able to do whatever
they want to do, not what's forced down by some corporate infrastructure that doesn't have you
personally in mind. This is about concierge. This is about living the life that each one
of us deserves. Remember, this country is founded on the principle of the individual,
how dynamic you are. We recognize you're unique. We recognize that your body isn't exactly like
your neighbors. We recognize that you may want to make different choices. That is what the
high wire is perpetually reporting on is what we're standing for, is what we're fighting for
for you. So when you donate, you continue to not only, you know, fight for the things that
you know you care about, how about the things that you didn't know might be an issue until
maybe it's too late. We're looking at those things too. One of the great ways you can donate is we
still have our terrorist project, which is we're adding to the high road, which is this beautiful
walkway walk. Every single day that I come to this show from the offices to the studios here,
the benches are gone, but you can still choose a brick. And we hope that once you
choose that brick, you can come and watch the show and find that brick yourself. This
is my favorite brick of the week. Hey everybody. Well, this beautiful walkway is about to extend
onto the terrace. And this is my favorite brick of the week. Always fight for freedom of choice,
the Malin family. In fact, that's really what this show has all been about. You've been
watching it. This is more than just vaccines. This is more than body autonomy. This is a
fight for freedom. It is truly what the high wire is involved in, of what ICAN stands for.
So I hope you'll join us in continuing to fight for freedom.
Of all the nations that should celebrate freedom of medical decision, medical freedom, it should be
the United States of America, whose founding doctrine is based on freedom. Well, what happens
when you take a medical freedom advocate and you put them ahead of HHS, they don't just
bring freedom back to this country. They are that beacon of light and shining hope for the
rest of the world. And that's what happened in an announcement this week by Robert Kenyon Jr.
Take a look at this. Today, I want to tell you about a letter that I just sent to Germany's
federal minister of health, Nina Workin, because what's happening in Germany right now demands
a clear public response from the United States of America. I've learned that more than a thousand
German physicians and thousands of their patients now face prosecution and punishment for issuing
exemptions from wearing masks or getting COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic. When any government
criminalizes doctors for advising their patients, it crossed the line that free societies have
always treated as sacred. In my letter, I explained that Germany is targeting physicians
who put their patients first and punishing citizens for making their own medical choices.
The German government is now violating the sacred patient-physician relationship,
replacing it with a dangerous system that makes physicians enforcers of state policies.
Your health is no longer your doctor's priority under this system.
You're a doctor instead of serving the welfare of the collective as determined by
unelected technocrats with no medical training. During the COVID era, governments across the world
expanded their authority. Even in America, doctors were unjustly attacked for challenging
the status quo. Germany followed that same pattern. And now doctors who raised questions
are challenged official directives, face conviction, the loss of their licenses, and even exile from
their professions. Germany has long held a respected place in the global community
as a nation committed to democratic values and human rights.
Policies that suppress dissent, that silent speech that criminalize medical decision-making
undermine that legacy. A confident government listens to its innocence. A free society
protects the rights to think, the rights of question, and the right to choose. In my letter,
I made it clear that Germany has the opportunity and the responsibility to correct this trajectory,
to restore medical autonomy, to end politically motivated prosecutions,
and to uphold the rights that anchor every democratic nation.
History will record how leaders respond at moments like this. Thank you.
What an incredible statement and it really points out concerns we should all have.
You know, if you've watched this show, sitting at this desk have been countless doctors and
scientists that actually saw the truth before anyone else did, said that the
vaccine was never going to stop transmission, said that you were going to have blood clots.
The leading heart doctor in the world, most published, Peter McCullough,
has sat right here. He sat here and warned people this is raising the risk of myocarditis,
pericarditis, all which has been backed by, was backed by science then. Now there's even more
science that exists. But how does a free society allow the persecution of science?
We have watched that in the darkest times throughout history and even darker is when
the media gets behind it and becomes a propaganda machine for that authoritarian
government attacking free citizens. Real science, real scientists simply because they
have a differing opinion. And I want to point this out. Without freedom you don't have science.
Without freedom you don't have health. Because ultimately one thing I know to be true about
the history of mankind and especially of science, I can't think of a single circumstance where the
consensus in the body of science made the altering shift and change that evolved that
science practice. From Galileo we threw him in jail. We wanted to believe we were the center
of the universe and when we didn't get what we liked our authoritarian government said you
should be arrested. Certainly we should have evolved from that. Certainly we should recognize
that the evolution of science and medicine and the advancement of society relies upon
doctors being able to step outside of the norm, step outside of the consensus and offer a differing
position and offer science that can be repeated. And if that science does repeat and does show
that that mask is incapable of stopping a particle as small as a coronavirus then it should be
you know not mandated upon you and certainly doctors should be able to write an exemption
like those that are now under threat in Germany. And if a vaccine doesn't stop transmission
then why do you have to take it? If it cannot protect your neighbor why would that doctor lose
their license? And when you start seeing all the harms caused by this vaccine and we're
doing an investigation now look into the future it looks like our concern of prion disease
you know which is essentially a form of mad cow disease maybe being caused by this vaccine
we're doing a deep dive I'm not going to bring it to you until we have more information but we are
continuing the research because you know we have to know what's happening inside of our society we
have to know if we're in the clear but more importantly than anything else we have to
learn from history and it has never been intelligent to rush science and to arrest
the scientists that have a dissenting perspective open market free speech that's what America is
based on and I would really love to see news and media begin to support freedom instead of
authoritarian controls which clearly are being funded by large moneyed interests the high
wire doesn't work that way and we hope that others will follow our lead this is the work
that we do here and we're excited more than ever to continue this work because this may be the most
important year in the future of our species I hope to stay tuned in to our work and I'll see you
next week on the High Wire