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 non-profit, 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.
As you can see, I think I have a rant coming on here in just a moment.
But first, let's talk about the incredible day that we are sitting in right now
as we speak.
The advisory committee on immunization practices is in a meeting at the CDC.
It's like no meeting that we have seen in decades, maybe ever.
Real questions being asked, science being challenged.
What were the studies?
How long were they?
What evidence do we have?
How many kids are at risk?
What proof do we have of the risk?
Things that we have never seen take place, even though everyone in America believed
that this was how these meetings were happening.
But they weren't.
Back in 2017, the advisory committee on immunization practices at that point was a
country club for pharma.
This is where pharma went to celebrate the billions of dollars they were going
to be made as they just used ASIP to pass through their lack of safety testing
to rush a brand new vaccine onto the market.
And they would run out as soon as it was approved by the ASIP and the
newspapers would write, you know, Pfizer going to make a billion dollars
on their new vaccine.
That's when Aaron Seary, our attorney for the informed consent action network,
called me and said, Del, you know, we're winning lawsuits against the government.
We're beating the FDA, CDC, HHS, NIH.
But we're never going to make a difference here if we don't go to the
heart of the problem where these vaccines are being approved and put on the schedule.
That's the advisory committee on immunization practices.
Why don't we go to those meetings?
He said they're actually public hearings, even though the public
isn't going, and we might even be able to submit and have you make a statement on
a microphone from the public.
So back in 2017, Aaron and I went to that hearing.
We were the only ones there, as far as I know.
Maybe there's one or two others out there that weren't representing pharma.
I got up and spoke about the dangers of the vaccine program and a slight
discuss for how I had seen things happen there.
We came back from that and started broadcasting the live stream cuts
that we'd made of the ridiculous conversations that were happening at ASIP.
The next ASIP came around and we brought a bunch of people.
Now we had a handful of people all showing up.
The third ASIP after that, suddenly we had 50 people all getting on the
microphone and talking about our issues, parents of vaccine-injured children
stepping up and telling their story.
Something that had never happened in the halls of this country club ever.
And then finally, when hundreds started showing up from our side, the intelligent side,
the questioning side, the hesitant side, they suddenly changed the way the entire
format worked.
They put a giant rope across the room, whereas once we could sit amongst
everyone else, now we were pushed to the backs of the room,
like Rosa Parks on a bus.
Pushed to the back of the room with a rope we could not cross.
That side's pharma, the rest of you dirty people, you at the back.
Still we spoke on microphones and then moments after that, of course, COVID hit
and they made it so that there was never a public hearing again.
But today the tables have completely turned.
Today, live streaming on X, if you've been watching on the high wire, at
High Wire Talk, we've been streaming these hearings from the very beginning this morning.
They'll be going all day.
They're going right now as we're broadcasting on our own channel.
Tomorrow we'll be broadcasting on every High Wire channel, including our website.
And if everything sticks to schedule at 9.30 a.m. Eastern time, our own Aaron Seerey
will be giving an entire discussion.
8.30 Central, 9.30 Eastern time.
Aaron Seere is going to be giving a presentation at the Advisory Committee
on Humanization Practices.
So he's no longer sitting in the seat.
He's definitely not out behind some ropes.
He's going to be up in there.
And by the way, if you really wanted to recognize a shift and the way things are going,
Dr. Robert Malone has been the one overseeing these hearings
because Kirk Milhawn, who is supposed to be the chair, couldn't make it,
so the vice chair is standing in his seat and running the hearings.
It is clear now we live in a totally different world.
A world that those of you that have been helping fund ICANN, the work that we're doing,
today should be one of the greatest celebrations you've ever had.
You have literally proven that we can change the world.
You know, never doubt that a small group of passionate citizens can change the world
because indeed it's the only thing that ever has.
This is who is going to be voting.
We're expecting a vote today on Hepatitis B, which is the conversation of the day.
My understanding is there may be a discussion right now on whether they're
going to push that back.
They're terrified of that vote.
You know, pharma has got to be ringing the hooks,
ringing the phones of everyone that's on that panel.
Maybe even threatening jobs, I don't know.
But this is a historic moment happening in the United States of America.
It's a historic moment, certainly for health.
Health and human services and science, as we know it,
the scientific method is alive and breathing and real questions are finally happening.
But why am I sitting here in front of this?
What is this all about?
This is inspired by a video that Paul Offit was a part of.
This is one of the great vaccine shills known to man.
He is an author on the Bible on vaccines, Plotkin's vaccines.
He appears in court cases, defending vaccines, supporting vaccines.
There's the authors of the Bible on vaccines right there.
Stanley Plotkin, Walter Ornstein, Paul Offit, and Catherine Edwards.
If you watch this show, you know all of these individuals.
But Paul Offit, of course, who's made millions and millions of dollars off of his own
rotovirus vaccine, did not, by the way, recuse himself from this very committee,
the ASIP community, while he was making a rotovirus vaccine,
did not recuse himself for a vote to add rotovirus vaccines to the childhood schedule,
just to show you how completely corrupt these people are.
That's not a conflict of interest.
You stand to make millions of dollars in the future when you're done making your vaccine,
and you think it's appropriate for you to vote yes on adding a rotovirus vaccine to the schedule
when you are making a rotovirus vaccine.
I mean, you can't make this stuff up.
We've outed all of these things, and it's why, by the way,
Robert Kennedy Jr. is now HHS secretary,
and the advisory committee on immunization practices is now called ASIP.
Want to add that little feature?
They always wanted to call it ACIP.
We changed that.
We think it should be called ASIP, and it is.
So anyway, here is the video that really lit a fuse in me this week,
and not maybe for the reasons you might think when you first watch it,
but let's see what you think of what he's saying here.
If you alter the vaccine injury compensation program and make no
doubt about the fact that that is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s interest,
he's already hired a law firm out of Arizona that has an expertise
in the vaccine injury compensation program with a goal towards altering it.
And what I predict is going to happen,
and so I'm going to make something you should never do on any sort of podcast,
I'm going to make a prediction.
Here's my prediction.
Probably by no later than early next year, maybe the spring of next year,
you are going to see Robert F. Kennedy Jr. holding up some paper
that he's going to publish in a journal that is a fringe journal.
I'll put that nicely.
The journal that he uses is called Science, Public Health and the Law,
which has an editorial board that consists solely of anti-vaccine activists.
So he's going to publish this paper that says that
aluminum adjuvants in vaccines are causing harm.
Now, aluminum adjuvants are in seven different vaccines given to young children,
not like thimerosal, where you can just go from multi-dose to single-dose well.
There's no taking aluminum adjuvants out of vaccines.
There are certain vaccines that just need adjuvants to get a better immune response.
What he's then going to do is he's going to say,
see it's causing autism, asthma, eczema, whatever.
And he's going to either add that to the vaccine injury compensation program,
which will break that program, or he will take vaccines out of the
vaccine injury compensation program and say,
I don't think they should get the protection of that program.
Let's leave them open to the slings and arrows of outrageous civil litigation.
Obviously, Paul often now finds himself in an incredibly defensive position.
For many that were watching that video that was posted online,
I think the obvious thing is essentially what's happening here is Paul off,
it's looking to his little crystal ball and somehow psychically is going to predict
what Robert Kenny Jr. is going to do.
Essentially, this is the same thing as if the Wizard of Oz suddenly said,
I am going to predict that Dorothy and a lion and a tin man are going to come
and pull back a curtain and reveal that the Wizard of Oz is not a wizard at all,
that the science has sucked all along.
And instead of having real robust science that is stood for the scientific community,
all that is there is a little guy in a chair and that little guy might just be me.
That is what most people were talking about.
Of course, he's predicting the very thing that he's been a part of covering up the entire time.
But that is not what struck me in this statement.
Not that he's obviously afraid of Robert Kennedy Jr.
undoing the entire lie that he's weaved for decades and made millions from.
Now instead, what I thought was the most important part of this statement
is he has finally delivered something that everyone has asked me about.
Why, Dell?
What would possibly be the motive?
Why would the government lie about vaccine injury?
Why would it hide the science?
Why would it take away liability and then never do any actual science?
It doesn't make sense.
Are doctors just trying to kill people?
Is Paul Oppett really an evil person who just wants to destroy children's lives?
It doesn't make sense, Dell.
There's no motive.
Really?
Well, Paul Oppett just gave you the motive.
Let's focus in on exactly what that motive is.
Not just for Paul Oppett, but for maybe everyone in science,
everyone certainly that supports a vaccine program,
including every government of the world.
Listen to it closely.
Here comes the motive for the crime.
You are going to see Robert F. Kenney Jr. holding up some paper.
He's going to say, see, it's causing autism, asthma, eczema, whatever,
and he's going to either add that to the vaccine injury compensation program,
which will break that program.
There you have it.
Now he's going to say, Paul, I mean, what Robert Kenney Jr. is going to do,
I predict, is he's going to connect aluminum adjuvants,
which is in seven of the 16 vaccines, can't be taken out,
never been tested for safety, but cannot be removed.
But he's going to take aluminum, and he's going to say that it's connected to autism.
He's going to attach vaccines and autism.
And if he does that, he's going to break the vaccine injury compensation program.
Break it.
Okay?
So what is the motive for a cover-up?
He didn't say, if science, and by the way,
he's trying to make it about Robert Kenney Jr., but listen to what he just said.
Do you think he would be happy with any scientists in the world
doing a study that connected vaccines and autism,
if his belief is that will break the system?
See, this is what they know.
This is what they've been protecting.
Doesn't matter if it's Robert Kenney Jr.,
Del Baitree, or Dr. Marcus Zerbo said Henry Ford Health Systems at the
heart of our film and Inconvenient Study.
There can never be a connection between vaccines and autism,
or the system will break.
I posted about this video.
This is what I wrote in my post this week.
And by the way, if you're not following me at Del Baitree, you should,
because I have rants too in the middle of the night, like Donald Trump.
Dr. Paul Offit accidentally admits the real motivation behind the autism cover-up.
If aluminum is found to cause autism, it will break the vaccine program.
He is correct.
So never doubt why your government use shills like Offit to block
any science that would link vaccines to autism.
The cost would overwhelm the entire health system,
and thus the motivation for the crime.
Now there's one little post, some guy commenting,
I love this because this just shows when they really think they've got to
gotcha.
He said it will break the vaccine injury compensation program,
not the vaccine program.
Huge difference.
Geez, do better.
I wrote, you obviously haven't done the math.
Huge difference indeed.
So why don't we talk about the math today?
How big a motivation would this be?
There's a motive for a crime which is important for every single legal case,
whether it's a murder or a fraud case.
Why?
Why did they do it?
So let's go back to the 1986 vaccine injury compensation program.
This is the moment in the United States of America
that the pharmaceutical industry said to Ronald Reagan and our Congress,
we are losing so much money from death and injury cases,
we cannot make a profit.
Their statement, not mine.
A product so bad, we can't afford to make it anymore.
Not like all the other drugs where we lie to you,
we know we're lying and you discover years later in courtrooms that,
yeah, we always knew it caused heart attacks.
We always knew it killed people.
We always knew the talcum powder caused cervical cancer,
but it took you 50 years to figure it out.
And guess who made billions of dollars before that happened?
See, that's the pharmaceutical industry we all know and love.
But in this case, it had caught up with them.
So many lawsuits, they couldn't make a profit.
Ronald Reagan hates the idea.
He doesn't want to give liability protection,
but what's he going to do?
He doesn't want to see the end of the vaccine program,
especially somewhere in the future.
There's going to be a biological attack.
How are we going to make vaccines to protect ourselves?
And so with his hands tied behind his back,
he signs on to the 1986 vaccine injury compensation program,
which takes all liability away from the pharmaceutical industry
and puts it all on the government of the United States of America
and specifically a vaccine injury compensation program, VICA.
And in this case, every vaccine is going to have a little tax.
That little tax will go to a fund.
We will pay off everybody being injured by vaccines
because what they admitted is we know vaccines injure people.
That's why you're in court all the time.
But instead of having a regular court system,
we're going to have a no-fault court where we admit
it's injured your child.
There's a list of the injuries we admit to
and we're just going to pay you and send you on your way.
And guess what?
They were paying for autism.
Autism was paying out in the cephalopathy,
brain swelling, which they fully recognized took place.
One of the most common injuries reported
across the world from vaccinations.
But every payout was about $5 million.
But then suddenly the government realized, oh snap,
we got a problem.
No one bothered to ask Pfizer or Merck
or any of the pharmaceutical industries exactly
how many lawsuits do you have?
How big a problem is this really?
How insurmountable is it?
I mean, I guess we should have thought about the fact
that you wanted to walk away from the program all together,
but they didn't.
And then suddenly after 1986 by the year 2000,
this is what they saw.
Outside the courtroom, the vaccine court
of the United States of America,
over 5,000 cases of autism lined up
to be paid their $5 million
for being injured by vaccines.
And all of a sudden they realize, oh my God,
we have a little bit of a problem here.
How are we going to handle all these cases?
What is that going to cost?
What are we going to do?
They had no idea the problem was this bad.
So did they go and do better science
as they fix the vaccine, figure out why he's doing this?
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
We've got to run some sort of court scam
to kick all of these people out of court.
So here's what they came up with.
Let's have what will be called the omnibus proceeding.
So in the omnibus proceeding, they decided of the 5,000,
and by the way, just for visual reference,
this is only 1,000.
Okay, just going to put that out there.
Here's what they decided they're going to do.
We're going to take six, select six, one, two, three, four, five,
randomly selected six cases.
And we are going to have a court.
We're going to bring each one of these in the court one at a time.
If any one of these randomly selected cases
ends up proving that vaccines can cause autism,
then the 5,000 will get their day in court.
But if we get lucky enough that none of these six cases
can prove a connection between vaccines and autism,
this will be over, this will not be our problem.
And so this is how it goes down.
Case number one, Michelle Cedillo.
Michelle Cedillo ends up in this court case.
They decide that because of the leading witness in the world,
the leading authority on vaccines, Dr. Andrew Zimmerman states
unequivocally that there is no mechanism by which a vaccine
could have caused Michelle Cedillo's autism.
Therefore this case is thrown out, it loses, it's done.
One down, five to go.
Next up, Hannah Polling.
Now Hannah Polling, same thing,
regressed into autism right after vaccinations.
Only one problem here.
Hannah Polling's father is a neurologist, John Polling.
And to take it one step further, John Polling works inside
of the same health system as Dr. Andrew Zimmerman,
the world's leading authority on autism
and the primary witness for the Department of Justice.
He has the government that is fighting these poor parents.
The government's against them.
You against the government of the United States try to beat us.
Well John Polling says, hey Dr. Zimmerman,
we are colleagues.
I want you to look at the health records of my daughter
because I'm a neurologist.
I've tracked her all the way along.
I can show you something I never would believe in my own eyes.
My daughter did regress into autism right after vaccinations.
Obviously I gave her a vaccines
because I went to the same med school you did
and I thought they were perfectly safe.
But she regressed into autism before our very eyes.
Here's videos, here's proof.
Andrew Zimmerman studies Hannah Polling
and he comes to a new conclusion.
He says, oh my God, I've discovered
why for some kids vaccines can cause autism.
It's an underlying mitochondrial disorder,
the energy of the cells.
And somehow the energy is not productive enough
that when the inflammatory event
that is caused by vaccines happens,
it was unable to quell that inflammation
before it reached her brain,
causing encephalopathy, a swelling of the brain
and resulted in a symptom called autism.
So he rushes to the lawyers
at the Department of Justice.
The night before this is going to go
and he's going to be on the stand
and he says to the lawyers,
hey, look, I've discovered it.
I've discovered why many of these kids
may be regressing into autism.
I'm the leading authority in the world
and I've just studied Hannah Polling
and it's a mitochondrial disorder.
And they say, great Dr. Andrew, that's fascinating.
You're fired.
What?
You're fired.
We don't want you in court tomorrow.
That's how they handle their leading witness
and they send him home.
And they take the Hannah Polling case
and they take it off to the side
and they settle it on its own.
They move it out of the queue
and they end up paying
what is believed to be over 20 million dollars
over the life of Hannah Polling,
not five, 20 million dollars.
Before John Polling was silenced,
this was him on Sanjay Gupta and CNN.
Take a look at this.
We are here with Dr. John Polling.
He is, first of all, he's a neurologist.
He's also the father of Hannah Polling,
as you just mentioned.
Her autism, her case of autism diagnosis
was conceded by the federal government
as having been contributed to by vaccines.
That was a pretty startling thing,
I think, for a lot of people to hear.
We talk to a lot of experts about this.
They say, look, vaccines in no way cause autism.
You're a neurologist.
You're also the father of Hannah.
What do you say?
Well, I think you bring up a really important point
is that the government,
actually the Department of Health and Human Services,
conceded that my daughter's medical problems,
which are autism and cephalopathy seizures,
were brought on by vaccination.
That's startling, I think, for a lot of people to hear that.
Because we've been taught for so long.
You're a doctor. I'm a doctor.
We go to medical school.
We hear those vaccines, obviously.
There's so many good things about vaccines.
They prevent life-threatening illnesses
that we've heard about.
But in your daughter's case,
it turned out to be a problem.
I wouldn't have believed it till it happened to me.
To be honest with you, as a doctor,
until it happened to me,
until I saw the regression,
until I saw a normal 18-month-old toddler descend
into autism,
I wouldn't have believed it was possible.
So what you believe is that Hannah
has some sort of predisposition,
and then the vaccines tipped her over the edge
into developing autism.
What is your belief now?
Well, I don't think that vaccines
are the only way that you can tip over a child
like Hannah to regress and have an encephalopathy
and have a regress into autism.
There are probably multiple triggers.
In my daughter, clearly, it was the vaccinations.
That was our experience.
As far as other families' experiences,
it may be different.
The other cases that were at Johns Hopkins,
there were only a few like Hannah,
and then others regressed for other reasons.
It's not really a known entity.
I mean, I don't know, for those of you
that may be new to this show,
maybe that's the first time you've ever watched that.
So anyone that tells you
that it's never been proven that vaccines cause autism,
it has been proven in court.
And Sanjay Gupta knows it when he says this
on television ever since.
We don't know what causes autism.
I mean, that's fair to say.
We're not sure as a scientific community
what causes autism,
but we know that vaccines do not.
I wonder when he's saying that,
every time he says it, is it in the back of his head
going, Hannah, polling, Hannah, polling?
Don't think about Hannah polling.
Forget about Hannah polling.
Forget about John polling.
Forget about the science.
Forget about winning in court.
Just keep saying it.
Just keep saying, I don't know.
I don't know what makes Sanjay Gupta tick,
but I do know for a fact that is one doctor
and one scientist that knows for a fact
that this case right here
was thrown out of court,
hidden from the public,
silenced after that video
and settled for $20 million.
So next up, Yates Hazelhurst.
This child does have a mitochondrial disorder,
autism right after vaccinations.
They end up running the case.
And instead of Andrew Zimmerman showing up,
what do they do?
We look at the case right here.
They don't bring him on to the stand,
but boy do they quote him.
They still quote Andrew Zimmerman in the testimony,
there is no scientific basis
for a connection between the MMR vaccine
or mercury intoxication and autism,
despite well-intentioned and thoughtful
hypothesis and widespread beliefs
about an apparent connection
with autism and regression.
There's no sound evidence
to support a causative relationship
with exposure to both or either MMR and or
HD, mercury, all of these things.
That was Zimmerman's statement.
So they knew he'd evolved his statement.
They took this case, fired him,
took this case and settled it,
but kept using his original statement,
total and complete fraud
by the government of the United States.
That is a fraud,
his down by the Department of Justice
committed fraud
and then threw out this case
and everyone others,
not on their own using Zimmerman,
but lying about what his understanding was
because he had finally learned
and woke up
and they wouldn't let him
to a courtroom.
This is what took place
and why did it take place?
What is that motive
Paul Offit's talking about?
This is what Paul Offit's talking about.
If it is ever determined
that hand up polling was right,
had this case ever gone,
how it had,
suddenly every one of these people
can be lined up in this courtroom
with the potential to win
five million dollars.
So let's do some math.
When Paul Offit says
it'll break the system
and some dork is telling me
he just said
the vaccine
inquiry compensation program,
not the whole,
the whole vaccine program, Del,
get real.
Oh yeah?
You haven't done the math,
so we'll do it, shall we?
There are,
at this moment,
in 2007 in this case,
there were 5,000 cases, right?
Let's multiply that, shall we,
by the average payout
of five million dollars.
What does that equal?
25 billion dollars
is what was potentially at stake
for our vaccine
injury compensation program.
To date, right now,
as we understand it,
there's somewhere between
four and five billion
complete, totally,
in the system.
It's paid out five,
has roughly 4.5 billion
in the trust to pay awards.
Right now, after 40 years
of existence,
it has 4.5 billion.
So it's going to come up really short,
back in 2007,
we are going to pay this out,
25 billion dollars.
I have news for you.
That doesn't just flatten
the vaccine injury compensation program.
Obviously, it doesn't have that much money.
And this is just autism.
How far does this go?
This wipes out HHS.
This wipes out the vaccine program.
This potentially wipes out
your entire health department.
HHS gone.
What does it do with the government?
And it made me think,
and when I really started thinking about this,
was Jason Chaffetz was a congressman
that was the head of the OGR Committee.
He actually watched VaXT
and was really into VaXT.
Check out those numbers,
about 2009 to 2017,
but he'd watched VaXT
and I had several meetings with him.
In fact, I was joined by Mark Blacksell,
who was actually at the ACIP meeting today,
reporting on behalf of the CDC.
But Mark Blacksell and I were sitting
in a meeting with Jason Chaffetz
multiple times,
and he was really curious about
Dr. William Thompson.
But he said something in the second or third
meeting that I had with him
over the course of many months,
because we were trying to get him
to bring Dr. William Thompson
in front of the congress
to have a public hearing
to hear about the fraud
that he was talking about
at the center of VaXT,
of course, the cover-up
of the MMR autism vaccine study
that clearly was manipulated.
They kicked half the kids
off the study, committed fraud,
at this exact time period, by the way.
Same time period.
Remember, the government is looking
at $25 billion bill that cannot pay.
So we've got to do this.
We've got to do the omniscient proceeding.
We've got to do a fake study,
a fraudulent study inside the CDC.
Oh, guess what else is happening?
Over in England,
they're destroying Andy Wakefield's
connection to the MMR vaccine
because England's got the same freaking problem.
Billions and billions of dollars.
You've got to ruin this guy's career
because he's onto something.
He, even in this paper, says,
look, I'm looking at 12 kids.
It looks like autism is connected
to some bowel disease
that they got while they got the MMR vaccine.
He says this doesn't prove causation,
but means we should study it further.
That was the big smoking gun
that destroyed Andy Wakefield's job.
Daring to say to someone like Paul Offit,
just study it.
Yo, bro, if we study it
and we find out that it causes autism,
we are effed.
$25 billion.
So Jason Chaffetz,
and I'm sitting there across from him,
and he said something
that took me a while to figure out.
I said, Del, if we call William Thompson
in front of America,
what will happen?
I mean, in all honesty,
how big do you think this is?
Where does this end?
I didn't quite understand what he meant,
but as I laid in bed that night
and many after I thought,
he's right.
This is like the first time you divide atoms.
You're going to blow up a nuclear bomb
for the first time.
There's a question.
Do the atoms ever stop splitting?
Do they ever stop?
Does it kill everything in sight?
Because certainly,
certainly at $5 million a case,
it's going to destroy the CDC
and all the CDC credibility
if we discover that the government lied
about the safety of this product
that it actually causes autism.
CDC is screwed.
$25 billion?
No, wait, what do we add?
Like a $6 billion budget,
I think for HHS?
Screw it, gone.
All of the health departments
but then you got to start imagining
Jason Chaffetz is sitting there going,
but what about the government itself?
What happens to the government in the United States?
What happens about my job?
What happens about the president?
What happens about the greatest nation in the world?
What does a $25 billion bill do?
Oh, wait a minute, hold on a second.
That was $25 billion back in 2007.
Where would we be at right now?
Hey, how about we run those numbers?
It is now believed,
let's go over to my calculator here,
that there are 73 million,
100,000 approximately children in America,
as we speak.
There's numbers all over the country,
ranging at 31, now 1 in 31.
But in California,
why don't we look at California,
where the number has now gotten
as high as 1 in 12.5 boys,
with girls included,
look at the bottom, 53.1 California,
that's 1 in 19.
1 in 19 children in California
are being diagnosed with autism.
And they're saying in California,
it's not because there's anything wrong
with our water,
or the fact that Gavin Newsom
has one of the most authoritarian
forced vaccine programs
the world has ever seen,
it might weigh in a little bit.
But what they're trying to say in California
is we think this is the fate
of the whole country,
we just have better systems in place,
better tracking systems
than anywhere else in the world.
So let's just take it on,
because this is what you're going to do
if you work for the government of the United States,
let's take on a worst case scenario.
So if we go ahead and say,
all right, so 1 in 19,
let's divide 73.1 million by 19,
that means that there's potentially
3,847,000 cases of autism
in America right now.
Now imagine if it comes out,
whether it's Robert Kennedy Jr.,
just decent science
that proves that vaccines actually
can cause autism,
which makes perfect sense.
Certainly all these eyewitnesses
can be wrong,
and Hannah Poling wasn't wrong,
Zimmerman wasn't wrong,
John Poling wasn't wrong,
Sanjay Gupta wasn't wrong
for about 45 seconds of his life.
And so what does that mean?
Well, let's multiply that
by the cost of raising a child
with autism in America,
including taking care of them
once they're adults.
Get ready for this.
$19 trillion, $236 billion,
$842 million, $263,000 dollars,
dollars, $19 trillion.
Last I checked,
the entire debt of America,
which we're worried could sink us
all this $30 trillion.
Let's go ahead and add another $20 trillion
to that just for autism.
So when Paul Offit says,
if anyone called it Robert Kennedy Jr.,
ever gets as far as connecting
vaccines to autism,
we're finished.
This program that I wrote a Bible on
with Stanley Plotkin,
Walter Orenstein, and Catherine Edwards,
this program that I built
with my bare hands playing God
for the world is over.
In fact, I might have just bankrupted
the United States of America.
So, folks,
if you're going to commit a crime,
what would be the motive?
Would $19 trillion make you think twice?
I think it made Jason Chapitz think twice.
Almost, I think, weeks
after my final conversation
with him where he asked me
how big is this?
He quit.
Walked away from his job early.
I've never seen anything like it.
I can't say it's because of this conversation.
Pretty sure his grandkids
are not vaccinated though.
We had really good conversations
about vaxed
and he was very, very concerned
about this issue.
But think about it.
You're a class president.
You believe in the government.
You make it all the way to Congress
or Senate or maybe in President
of the United States
and suddenly you're handed
just a truth-telling moment.
Let's just do the science and show.
What everyone knows,
vaccines cause autism.
Oh, wait a second.
That's not just going to bankrupt
our health care system.
That might just bankrupt
the greatest nation in the world.
So, Yeh Tazelhurst got another day
in court years later.
This time, Erin Ciri
was working for ICANN
and we sent him down to that case.
And in that case,
which you've seen before,
they brought in Catherine Edwards,
another shill,
doing her job
to make sure that no one
ever connects vaccine to autism
because there's a mountain of evidence.
There's a mountain of science.
Obviously, we've never been afraid
of costing the government $19 trillion.
We rushed right in
into the best science
you could possibly imagine
to get to the bottom of that conversation.
And here it is in court.
Watch this once again.
In the expert disclosures
for this case,
it asserts that,
among other things,
you will testify that quote,
the issue of whether vaccines
cause autism
has been thoroughly researched
and rejected end quote.
It's your testimony
that MMR vaccine
cannot cause autism.
That's correct.
It's your testimony
that HIV vaccine cannot cause autism.
That's correct.
It's your testimony
that EIPOL cannot cause autism.
Yes.
It's your testimony
that HID vaccine cannot cause autism.
Yes.
It's your testimony
that Varicella vaccine
cannot cause autism.
Yes.
It's your testimony
that Prevnar vaccine
cannot cause autism.
Yes.
And it's your testimony
that DTAP vaccine
cannot cause autism.
Yes.
And you have a study
that supports that
DTAP doesn't cause autism.
I have,
I do not have a study
that DTAP
cause autism. So I don't have either. Do you have any study one way or another of whether
IPOL causes autism?
I know I do not sir. Do you have any study one way or another of whether N-DREX-B causes autism?
I do not have any evidence that it causes autism nor that it does not. And what about
Hib-Tiders vaccine? Any evidence one way or another whether it causes autism?
And what about Kravinar vaccine? Any evidence one way or another?
And how about Varicella vaccine? Let me just finish. Are there any studies one way or another
for whether it does or doesn't cause autism?
Part of MMR, but not as Varicella by itself. No sir. No studies that say it does or no studies
that say it doesn't. Right. There have been studies that have found an association between
Hib-Tiders B vaccine and autism correct? Not studies that I feel are credible.
Okay. Which study are you referring to when you say that?
Well, why don't you show me the study and then I'll see whether I agree with it.
According to your profile, you have done most of the charitable trials relied upon to license
many of the vaccines, correct, on the market? Yes, sir. Okay. So you're highly experienced
in conducting clinical trials, correct? I'm highly experienced conducting clinical trials.
And you're familiar with many of the clinical trials that relied upon to license
many of the vaccines currently on the market, correct? I am. In your opinion,
did the clinical trials relied upon to license the vaccines that Yates received,
many of which are still on the market today? Were they designed to rule out that the vaccine
causes autism?
No. You've badgered me into answering the question the way you want me to, but I think that that's
probably the answer. Is that your accurate and truthful testimony?
Yes.
Motive. What's your motive? Is it evil? Just pull off it evil?
I mean, you have to ask yourself, what would you do? What would you do? How much do you care
about the United States of America? How much do you care about our government?
If you realize that doing a study which clearly we've proven over and over again,
Catherine Edwards just admitted, we've never done any study because we're too afraid that if we found
a connection, it would bankrupt this entire system. Forget about our egos. Forget about our dream of
going down in history as the great gods that made us better than God created us himself.
It's all over. In fact, this is what we're going to have to deal with now as we think in these
ASIP meetings that are happening right now, the same exact conversations. Hep B never tested.
Five-day safety trial. Is that enough? No one in medicine, no one in farm or merc, nobody seems to
care. No, that's plenty. Why would you take away a vaccine that's never been tested for safety?
What are the risks? We don't know the risks because you refuse to do any science because
you're so afraid of these numbers as you should be. When people ask me why you in this conversation
because I will tell you as a journalist, this is the biggest story in the world.
This is the biggest fraud that has ever happened. We have evidence they know vaccines
causes autism. It's called hand up polling. We know that they've never done the science,
they're so afraid of it. Would you do it though? What will Donald Trump do? Honestly,
I'm concerned about this because if Robert Kennedy Jr. does do the science and of course
Forma and all of its shills and everyone on TV and everyone that's been a part of this
fraud and this lie will have to hold up that lie because they're so guilty of being a part of this
fraud. But does Donald Trump know that we are talking about trillions of dollars of owed to
everyone that's been injured? And I know I'm using big numbers, 19 trillion. What if only half
those cases are actually caused by the vaccine? And as John polling said, you know, the other
ones, it could be other reasons. Okay, so nine, 10 trillion dollars, we can afford that. That's
only going to wipe out the Vaccinated District Compensation Program folks. There is not a bigger
fraud. There's not a bigger story that's ever happened in our lifetime and that is what's
happening. That's what's beginning to happen at the advisory committee meetings.
But I will say to you this, there are those that could honestly say that what Paul Offit
is saying is true and whether or not vaccines do cause autism, he's trying to protect
the United States of America. And frankly, every nation in the world that's been a part of this
fraud because they're all going to be bankrupted if they get sued for what they've done.
There's an atonement. There's a gnashing of teeth. This is on the get in, folks.
That's what is at stake. So when Paul Offit tells you there's been science done, would you
ever trust science done by someone that is hanging with a noose, that should they
discover what they don't want to find? It is going to destroy them and everything and the nation they
live in. That is the motive. That is the motive for the greatest crime that's ever happened.
And it's why Paul Offit has been perfectly happy to say this to every parent of autism
and everyone that's ever been lined up. F you. You don't exist in my world. I don't care about
you. I will never do the studies because I have a lie to uphold. We have a huge shield coming up.
Obviously, I've just spent a lot of time just now, but I think it's important to know what's
really going on here. To know what's happening. What's at stake? Coming up, I've got Bob Sears.
I'm going to be talking about him, about Physicians Form Form Consent. Just created a
great new document, a book for every doctor to know the truth about vaccines. We also have an expert
coming in. Kerry Bigford is going to talk about how do you talk about this issue over Christmas
with your family? She's got a course in how to do that. That's going to be amazing.
But first, with the news that's happening and what's going out the ASAP committee, it's time for
the Jackson Report. All right, Jeffrey. I had to get that off my chest, man. That has been
you shouldn't see my version yesterday in the war room. It's like screaming and yelling,
and Jen shared his life. But it's like, don't take it out a notch.
Yeah, I'm not cutting any segments down. We've got to talk about what's happening in the news here.
We have another historic week, and we're here reporting live on the front end of this with
our audience worldwide watching as the evolution of science and public health is happening
right now. So I want to talk about the ASAP committee that's also happening as we speak
right now in Atlanta, Georgia at the CDC. And we're going to go into that in a moment. But
moving into this week, into this ASAP committee, hanging over that conversation that they're
having on the hepatitis B vaccine, the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration,
had a memo that was leaked to the media, and it looked like this.
The FDA's vaccine chief says the agency plans to tighten approval standards for COVID vaccines,
citing concerns about potential risks for children. Last week, a senior official sent out a memo
linking the deaths of at least 10 children to the shot. Dr. Vinay Prasad says a review of records
linked 10 children's deaths to the COVID vaccine, but he did not provide data to support that
claim. The memo did not include the children's ages or medical history, did not identify the
vaccine manufacturer, and these findings have not been published in a peer reviewed journal.
So why does Dr. Prasad say that the benefits of vaccinating children are unclear?
There's no science to back up that claim. The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly
recommends COVID shots for children between six months and two years old. While the Infectious
Diseases Society of America recommends vaccine for everyone six months and older.
So 10 deaths is what the CDC is now talking about, and I want to go into this, obviously,
but bring people's attention to historic similarities. And I want to bring this
chart up. This was a study by Peter McCullough and his team showing the drugs and the vaccines
that were recalled and why they were recalled. And you can see there at the top, the polio vaccine,
the cutter incident. This was 1955, cutter laboratories. They found that they were
shipping live polio that was going into children's arms and it killed 10 kids.
They pulled that in less than a year. Wow. Underneath that, the swine flu vaccine, 1976,
less than a year, killed 53 people. They pulled it. And what happened after they pulled that?
Well, they ended, they literally ended the national immunization program,
federal health officials. They just, they put a stop to it because of that.
And so that's where the FDA is, the waters they're treading in now with at least 10
deaths from the COVID vaccine in a group that was not susceptible to COVID, essentially.
That was the smallest risk factor in that group. So I want to unpack this story because
there's a lot of lies out there by our friends, the corporate media. So in September of this
year, you had this headline, Trump officials to link COVID shots to child deaths, alarming
career scientists. And again, from, from the corporate media saying science is not political,
every chance they get, they're beating this drum to make it political.
But I want to go into it says Tracy Beth Ho, one of McCarrie's top deputies,
who was a critic of broad childhood coronavirus vaccination before joining the FDA,
has been one of the officials looking into vaccine safety data, according to five people
familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private
information. So you have some leakers there. And so she, Tracy Beth Ho, by the way, is now
the director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. She's a physician and epidemiologist.
So this isn't some, some off the wall anti-vax Trump official. This is a career
scientist. They have very strong career scientists. So at that montage on the top,
they were attacking this. You saw the corporate media saying, well, well, Vinny Prasad,
he didn't release any type of study. There was no names. Well, he didn't do that because
this was a leaked memo. This was an internal food and drug administration email that was leaked
to the Washington Post. And so let's go into this email.
And that's amazing because they're accusing him, right? Like almost like a fear mongering.
He's putting out this fear on a vaccine that we all know is great. Forget about the fact
that we actually got it all wrong. We told you it was 95% effective, wasn't 95% effective.
Told you one shot and done, two shots and done, seven shots and done, 10 shots and done.
We keep lying about it. I don't know how they have confidence, Jeffrey,
by the way, to stand up and put children at risk. That's what these news agencies are doing
when they're saying this can't possibly be true that 10 children died. But the point is,
he didn't submit this to the press. This was an internal memo that they stole,
that they went out with it. And then they scared the public with it and then said,
oh, by the way, but don't listen to it. Literally creating a problem and alleviating
their own problem at the same exact time. It's such a giant pile of ridiculous.
And Prasad did everything that a normal functioning government official would do,
going through the appropriate chain of command. And also to talk to his team,
to communicate to his team. This is what's happening. This is what we found.
Let's go into this memo that was leaked. And again,
Vinay Prasad is the head of the Center for Biological Evaluation and Research.
And remember our friend, Dr. Peter Marks, who was the previous head,
who hid the data, who listened to the vaccine injured on Zoom calls and said,
I'm sorry, we really can't help you, essentially. So now this is Vinay Prasad.
He's speaking to his team at Sieber. And this is what he says.
I'm writing. This is a heads up. I'm writing to report that OBPV,
that's the Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance.
Career staff have found that at least 10 children have died after and because of receiving COVID-19
vaccination. These deaths are relative to vaccination, likely probable possible attribution
made by staff. That number is certainly an understatement due to the underreporting
and inherent bias in attribution. This safety signal has far reaching implications for
Americans. The US pandemic response and the agency itself, which I wish to discuss here,
goes on. In the summer of 2025, Dr. Hogue began investigating. Now here he is trying to unpack
the lies of the corporate media to his team. Dr. Hogue began investigating various reports of
children who had died after administration of the COVID-19 vaccine. By late summer,
she had concluded that there were in fact deaths. A fact this agency has never publicly
admitted. It goes on. Dr. Hogue organized a small meeting to discuss these deaths with
OVRR. That's the Office of Vaccine Research and Review and again the OBPV, Stakeholders.
So those are the appropriate offices to discuss this. Dr. Hogue went to these CBER sub offices
and said, Office of Vaccine Research, Office of Pharmacovigilance, you need to hear what has
been found. She says this, the slides she presented, emails she sent and distorted first
hand reports were shared with media outlets. Some staff present, a president who leaked
portrayed the incident as Dr. Hogue attempting to create a false fear regarding vaccines.
This is Prasad now. I then ask the Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance,
which he should do, to perform a detailed analysis of deaths voluntarily reported to
the VAERS system. So again, he's asking Dr. Hogue found this. Now Dr. Prasad, as a leader
of that organization said, thank you, Dr. Hogue. I'm going to ask now my team under
me, I have a whole team that can look into this. Now they're going to do an independent study to
see what you find to back this up or to debunk it. He goes on in the full interest of balance.
He asked the team to do this. The team has performed an initial analysis of 96 deaths between
2021-2024 and concluded that no fewer than 10 are related. If anything, this represents
conservative coding with vaccines are excavated rather than indicated in cases of
ambiguity. The real number is higher. This is a profound revelation for the first time the
US FDA will acknowledge that COVID-19 vaccines have killed American children. This is a heads
up to his team. He's saying we are going to announce this. Prepare yourselves. We have the
science. We've talked to the families. We've reached out. And again, from 2021 to 2024,
the previous, I mean, what's not being said there is the previous leaders, Dr. Peter
Marks, no one cared to look, no one cared to call these families. No one cared to do
anything. A new administration had to come in and look back through the data.
Do these parents even know that their kids died of the COVID shot? I don't know,
but hopefully they're being contacted at this point. A lot of people representing this,
by the way, is like an FDA cover-up that they knew these deaths were there.
Actually, my biggest question for Tracy Beth Hogue would be when you called these parents,
when you decided to look through various reports and call all of the reports of
children who had died, how many of them said, oh, we've already spoken to the FDA?
I bet you zero. I bet you she was the first time they called. I mean, that's a guess,
but my guess is no one in our government ever even cared to look into the various system.
For the exact reasons I just explained, because as long as you don't do an
investigation, as long as you don't do any science, you can say to your knowledge,
the vaccine is perfectly safe. This is literally ostrich either head in the sand,
science is being done, and finally, we have an administration that doesn't just take
one scientist's perspective, but runs it through an entire team. The world is changing. Finally,
we're watching science happen. But unfortunately, what are you going to do with mainstream news
that's owned by the pharmaceutical industry? And it works both ways here. And I'm reading
a lot here. I'm reading from, this is a historical document, it's a leaked memo,
but this is how you want your government health agencies communicating. This is how
you want them talking in back channels. So it is great that we are able to read this to the public
and show what is going on, how they're speaking to each other. So I want to go on it, because it
doesn't just talk about 10 deaths, which is huge, which is bombshell, as it should be.
It goes on to talk about the path forward for the Center for Biologics, the CBER Center
that Vinay Prasad is, and in general FDA. And he goes on to say this, I want to
outline the path forward. Our general approach in CBER will be to direct vaccine regulation
towards evidence-based medicine. This means we will take swift action regarding this new safety
concern. We will not be granting market authorization to vaccines and pregnant women based on unproven
surrogate endpoints. And he goes, any prior promises will be null and void. And we will
demand pre-market randomized trials assessing clinical endpoints for most new products.
Pneumonia vaccine makers will have to show their products reduce pneumonia,
at least in the post-marketing setting, and not merely general antibody titers. Immunogenicity
will no longer be used to expand indicated populations. He says we will revise annual
flu vaccine framework, which is an evidence-based catastrophe of low-quality evidence.
Poor surrogate assays and uncertain vaccine effectiveness measured in case control studies
with poor methods. We will reappraise safety and be honest in vaccine labels.
This is what we want in a public health organization, the FDA, the CDC. We want them
talking like this. And now, will all this happen? We don't know. These are his hopes,
his path forward. That has to be put into policy. Staff have to probably be hired to do this,
because this is a whole new road for the FDA. But this is the hopes and dreams of an APRSAID,
his team. And I would assume much of the FDA at this point.
These are the hopes and dreams of ICANN, of you, of me, of Aaron Siri, of Robert Kennedy,
Jr. I mean, I had tears in my eyes this morning when I was sitting listening to the hearings and
hearing people like Mark Blacksell, who I've stood side by side with, when you watched this happening.
Jeffrey, these were statements that were always being made from outside the echo chamber,
outside the castle, outside the walls. It's coming from inside the walls now. Real science,
real questions, real investigations. It's so incredible. No one believed we'd be here,
Jeffrey. It's what I keep thinking all day. No one would have ever believed if we would have
stated this, you know, nine years ago when I was touring with Vaxxed, that we would be here,
that we would be inside the government, that we would have real scientists finally asking real
questions and doing exactly what you said. We're no longer just going to assume safety.
We're no longer going to say, oh, you have antibodies, therefore you should take the
vaccine. Now, what if those antibodies have nothing to do with the circulating strain?
Never again. Flu is going to have to prove it can stop the virus that's in circulation,
or we're not putting it out there. I mean, finally, you know, no more 10 percent effective vaccines
given to people, injuring them, making them sick, killing grandma for no reason whatsoever,
and probably increasing the risk, as we see in so many studies, four times the risk of upper
respiratory illness and infections if you get the flu vaccine. So all of this, finally,
finally, finally, I just feel bad, right? I feel bad for everyone watching mainstream news
that are still living in part of the lie. Don't realize that there's like a $19 trillion incentive
to lie to you. They're missing some of the biggest stories of really the century when it comes to
public health, because this evolution is real. It's happening. And you can see other states
having formed a Western or Eastern vaccine alliance, now Illinois jumping in there with
his governor, that they're sticking to the COVID shot for all children, all infants,
six months or older. So they're ignoring literally almost six years of new science on the COVID shot
now, including deaths and the children. So I want to talk, you mentioned proof. I want to talk about
proof because people watching, again, mainstream corporate media, they're seeing headlines like
this. We're going to go vaccine heavy because this is the conversation in America right now,
as far as public health. Scientists confirm HPV vaccine does prevent cancer.
Another one, HPV vaccine slash cervical cancer risk with minimal side effects,
major review fines. I want to unpack this because when we see these headlines, we think,
wait a minute, we know some of the science here. We know how this vaccine was brought to market.
When we see headlines like this, we have to start questioning this. So in order to really
unpack this study that we're being told is a major study, we have to look at what HPV is.
This is a human papillomavirus. And we go to the National Institutes of Health,
their National Cancer Institute, their own website. I want to read this.
Researchers found that it can take five to 10 years for HPV infected cervical cells to develop
into precancers and about 20 years to develop into cancer. So the research we're being told is
saying that cancer that develops in 20 years, this HPV shot can stop it. It's going to end it.
So let's go to this. This research is from the Cochrane Collaboration. We're told this is
Gold Standard Science. This is an independent research organization and they just look at
the facts. So this is their headline here. This is the human papillom vaccination for prevention
of cervical cancer. They looked at 60 studies. It's a meta-analysis. And you go right into
there, the first couple of paragraphs, you read this in this study. The researchers say
the studies, the 60, were not of sufficient duration for cancers to develop.
Okay. Well, that's not what the headlines I just read said. They said it stops cervical
cancer. But the researchers are, okay, I'll take them from where the word is. So with any research,
as Secretary H. J. S. Kennedy said, we're going to try to eliminate conflicts of interest. Why?
Well, because conflicts of interest skew research results. We know that. It's common sense.
So now let's go into the paper again. This is a Cochrane Collaboration. Let's look at
their conflicts of interest. It says, out of those 60 studies, 44 studies were funded by
vaccine developers at 73%. The GlaxoSmithKline, 25 studies, Merck 18 studies, Sanofi Pasteur,
goes on and on. In 48 trials, that's 80%, authors had conflicts of interest due to being
affiliated with or employed by and or owning stock or holding patents in the vaccine development
or manufacturing company. Okay. Well, there's a whole other side of the conversation. They'll
say conflicts of interest have nothing to do with it. All right. Great. So let's go to
actual results here for cervical cancer. In 15 to 25-year-old females, there was a reduction in CIN-2
plus irrespective of HPV vaccine type. The research is right after six years, moderate certainty.
And a large reduction in CIN-2 plus from vaccine match HPV types after six years. Again,
moderate certainty. So what are they talking about there? CIN plus, CIN-2 plus. This is
cervical intraepithelial neuroplasia. These are abnormal cells. There's a grading system
of these abnormal cells. And I can show you this image here. You have a normal cell,
you have the membrane, and then you have CIN-1, 2, 3. And then after all those abnormal cell
grades, you have invasive cervical cancer forming, 20 years, according to the NIH,
it could take to get those to form. Now, I want to bring people's attention
to the HPV vaccine on trial. This was a book written by three great authors,
2018. Dell, you interviewed them when the book came out. And they wrote about this HPV vaccine,
the safety of it, how it came to market, and really the HPV vaccine industry. And there's an
image from this book looking at these grading systems to give people an idea. So here's this
image. You have a normal cell next in line to the right there. You have HPV infection,
90% clear spontaneously. Only 10% go to the CIN. Okay, so let's go to CIN-1.
5%, only 5% of those now go to CIN-2 or 3. So now go to CIN-2.
So the 10% move on and go past HPV. The rest have cleared. Of the 10% remaining,
95% of them clear it by the time they're in CIN-1. So now, I don't even know how to do that
math, but your tiny percentage is now moving forward. And then of that tiny percentage moving
into CIN-2, go ahead. Yep, we have 50% to 60% spontaneously regressed. The body can't fight
this. Wow. CIN-3. 30% to 50% of those progress in the cervical cancer. And you can see their
0.18% of infections are cervical cancer. And that is from that book. And so CIN-1,
typically most of those go away. CIN-2 and 3, if those are found, it's an outpatient
procedure removal. And there's screening that can be done for this. It's a pap smear. And it's
recommended every several years for women to have. And you go into the numbers on pap smears.
And you can look at this study right here. Each year, more than 50, 50 million pap smears.
And these are just looking for these abnormal cells. They look under a microscope.
Are performed in the United States to screen for cervical cancer. 50 million. Most of the
abnormal cells found during a pap smear are the result of a cervical or vaginal infection
and are not cancerous. Of the 3 million women with abnormal pap tests each year,
less than 1%, 13,240 cases will be diagnosed with cervical cancer. Let's do the math. More
than 50 million pap smears, it says. But let's just say 50 million pap smears. Yeah.
Out of those, 3 million women have abnormal pap smears. And out of those,
only 13,240 have actual cervical cancer. You do the math on that. That's 0.02%.
Go into cervical cancer. Wow. So that's what we're talking about here. But the
Cochrane collaboration, the headlines being produced from that will say,
the shot eliminates cervical cancer, period full stop. And I'm trying to show people here
that there's a lot more to this story and a lot more to that study than we're actually seeing.
And so just to be clear, so I understand this, they've said that we've proven that the
HPV vaccine is reducing the risk of cancer. It's proven it's working, but they never went
to cancer. It was still too short a period of time to do that. So they just said it's
reducing CIN2, which already is now a minimal percentage of people that will even progress
to that point and then progress onwards. 50% to 60% of them, of those will still spontaneously
clear. They don't care about that. They're saying that that's the end point that matters to them.
And therefore, HPV is going to stop cervical cancer. I mean, it's what we keep seeing over
and over and over. It's like three-card Monty, man. Follow the ball. It's a shell game.
Total and complete baloney. And really sad that Cochrane that was once a stand-up
institution that we celebrated is now regressing to clearly another pharmaceutical company.
Unbelievable. Absolutely. And I want to go now to the story of the day. This is the CDC's ASAP
committee, the advisory committee on immunization practices. They're meeting right now. As we speak,
the entire day today is devoted and we'll be voting on the hepatitis B recommendation,
the first shot given to baby's first day of life in this country. And I want to make some
points here that you made right at the top. We have the previous chair, Martin Koldorf.
He has now left. So the chairman of the ASAP previously has now left for an HHS job. So
he's becoming now the chief science officer within the HHS planning and evaluation office.
So that's kind of like the major think tank in HHS. So he's moved on to that senior position.
So now we have Dr. Robert Malone as the vice chair. Dr. Kurt Milhawn,
he came in on a Zoom call. So essentially, Robert Malone, you'll see from the video.
He's facilitating the entire meeting. And I have to say, he seems like he's doing a great job.
So I want to talk about the hepatitis B vaccine was on the docket for last ASAP,
the last ASAP meeting months ago. And this is Robert Malone introing today's ASAP meeting
just this morning to talk about that. Take a listen. Okay. Many of you will recall that in
September, ASAP deferred a vote on proposed changes to the hepatitis B vaccination schedule.
That decision was not about hesitation or reluctance. It was about standards.
Several data elements the committee requested were incomplete. And the evidence did not yet
meet the level of clarity required for a confident evidence-based recommendation.
When gaps in the evidence emerge, the responsible action is not to push forward.
It's to pause, review, ensure that we fully understand what the data can and cannot support
and then formulate independent advice to the CDC director. This is our charter.
So there you are. And the reason we're playing these clips, and again to the audience,
we're watching this in real time, making these clips, shooting these out so we can report
in near real time on this meeting that just happened. This is the most up-to-date broadcast
you're going to hear on this right now. This is ongoing. So he's saying, we tried to vote
on this, and we had incomplete evidence. Our teams that were looking at this, they couldn't,
they don't have the data that we needed to make a vote on this. So the reason I am showing that is
it's not RFK Junior, it's not Trump trying to do this. This is a team of researchers and
scientists at a federal government agency saying, we don't have the data. We want to change
this. We want to evolve this conversation, but we just don't have it. So we have to defer
this vote. So now it brings us to today. So the discussion, which was really great to see publicly,
was back and forth. It was, as they would say, robust discussion. And one of the topics was
about horizontal transmission of Hep B. Now that's not from a parent to a child, a mother to a child
at birth. Horizontal transmission are the IV drug users, the unprotected sex, the exposure to
infected blood. And so I want to bring in this conversation here and see if you can pick
out some of the some of the pieces here. Take a listen. Okay. Yes, it can occur among certain
high risk immigrant communities. But the evidence for horizontal transmission among most U.S.
children is very, very sparse. And really all these years has been based on a fit to seropositivity
data that really wasn't statistically significant. And a final point is that the 16,000 cases per
year predicted by Armstrong at all are not supported by the surveillance data. I'm showing here children
age 0 to 9 before the universal birth dose, which is the vertical red line. There were about 400
acute cases per year reported 400 compared to the 16,000. And keep in mind also that of the 400,
many are probably resulting from perinatal infection. So just a final note on horizontal
transmission in childhood. The informed consent action network, ICANN, asked the CDC through
their lawyers, and I believe one of them is testifying tomorrow here, for documentation
sufficient to to reflect a case of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting. The CDC's
response, a search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request.
It reminds me of the models that were projected during COVID, right? It's what they do. They just
explode these numbers. 16,000 potential infections. Actually when we looked at it was 400. I mean just
a slight miscalculation. This is how they've done all the signs, all the fear porn that they push
out there based on models that aren't anywhere close to the actual conversation that's happening.
And finally, instead of just getting fear porn at ASIP, we are getting both sides. Like
actually that was a bloated number when we actually chopped it down. We're talking about maybe 400
cases this is happening in all of the United States of America. Right. We're knocking out assumptions
and all of the people who helped make ICANN what it was, everyone that donated, you have forced
facts into the highest conversations in public health in this country right now. You've forced
them to accept these facts through the legal action you funded. You heard her say the
legal action of informed consent action network. We forced the CDC to admit this that they don't have
the studies on horizontal transmission. So that's a big hat tip to our audience and I want to go on
now. And people, by the way, they'll say Jeffrey, what do you get from it? I mean do you win money
when you have these cases? Do you win money? No, we don't win anything except we win the
opportunity like moments like this to be at an ASIP meeting and when they try to say oh the
science have been done or the evidence is there or there it is, actually no it doesn't
exist because informed consent action network spent money that nobody thought they would ever
waste on a case like this to prove you're all lying. You're lying. You don't have a single
case of horizontal transmission in a school anywhere in America, which I guarantee you
would have known about. It would have been a headline because it doesn't exist. It's an
imaginary problem and you've made a product making billions of dollars to solve an imaginary
problem. Absolutely. And that's the big conversation. Mothers are tested. We can
figure that out if they have that so they don't give it to their child. There's precaution
that's going to be taken so the horizontal transmission is the big question that I guess
we're giving this shot to every child that comes onto this earth. So it goes on but this whole
ASIP committee was back and forth because we're talking about are the benefits outweighing
the risks? What are the risks of the happy vaccine giving it on the first day of life
to every infant? So these are the conversations that we have. So the question of harm,
the evidence, where is the evidence of harm came up? Take a listen. Okay.
Question is, is there any evidence of harm? There is clearly evidence of benefit. Is there
any evidence of harm to giving the neonatal hepatitis B? My basic answer would be that the
safety evidence is very limited and I wouldn't want to speculate on safety or harm that
the IOM has concluded that we don't know, we have any reason to reject or claim causality
under a wide range of conditions. There is concern for something that is as profound as
a universal immunization of every American infant at the moment of birth to address
a condition that many of them will not be a risk for. The safety evidence should be rock solid.
With all due respect, I don't think that that's the right question and I want to
phrase another relevant question which is, I think if we want to understand the quality of
the evidence, then you need to ask hypothetically, suppose that there was a harm of that rate,
of a certain rate, would we be able to detect it with the level of monitoring and
surveillance that we applied to the issue. And I think that given the data that was presented to
here, very, very low numbers, very low, very short follow-up time and not really comparing
to placebo, the answer is that could be major signals out there that our surveillance and
the way we monitor and measured, I would not have detected them. So I think that the question is
their evidence to harm cannot be untangled from what was actually measured. And I think that
that's something we tend to do not only in this particular question, we tend to do that more
broadly when we think about safety. So the first other question is what do we believe,
given our monitoring system, given what we actually monitored and checked, we would be
able to detect. And I think that the answer is basically nothing.
Thank God for Retz of Levy there. I mean, he makes the point we made on the show over and over again.
The trials for HPV, I mean, hepatitis B vaccine, 154 children with five-day state
review. So if this is a one in a thousand injury, is 154 kids going to pick it up? No.
If it's an injury that only takes a month or maybe even a year to develop, is this going
to capture that? No. So when we're talking about safety, what do we know about the safety?
What will we have ever captured with the way this science has been done? He says basically,
I would say not a goddamn thing. That's what we would find out.
And we've been told, we know this because we've watched all the ACIP committees. We've been
quite a few of them as well, that we've had the most robust safety monitoring system in the world
that's been drilled into our heads. And now we're getting the truth. Finally, we have, again,
we're watching the evolution of public health and the evolution of, I would say, courage to have
these discussions publicly. And what they're saying is, we don't know, because we don't have,
we don't have the robust safety monitoring system that we thought we had to catch these
things. And this is what goes on to the point of the studying you mentioned. Tracy
Beth Hogue was at this meeting as well. And she made a comment regarding the evidence,
the evidence of harm, the safety of the HEPI vaccine. Take a listen to this. All right.
This is Dr. Hogue, now acting director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Over.
Yes. That's right. Thank you, Robert. I just want to add to what
Retta, Dr. Levy just said that it's really important to keep in mind that the U.S. is
an outlier in recommending a universal birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine compared to other
high-income nations. And the data that we used to approve the hepatitis B vaccines,
there's two. Angarix and racombivac vaccines for infants were based on studies that had
very short-term follow-up and no control group. It wasn't like it was a randomized control trial
against another vaccine. No, there was not even a control group. It was just an observational
study. We would never approve a vaccine based on data like those today. So that's important to
keep in mind. And then we have these five randomized control trials that were identified by this
CDC at the last ACIP meeting that we discussed. And these are also, these are short-term randomized
control trials where the hepatitis B vaccine, racombivacs, was given and compared to other
vaccines, so not compared to placebo. So we are working with very low level evidence here,
and we have very limited confidence in what we say when we say these vaccines are safe.
Wow. And so this is, these are the conversations that we're having. And I want to talk about one
last, one last clip from, there's so many clips. I recommend everyone watch this. And tomorrow,
9.30 a.m. Eastern, Aaron Ciri testifies against, not against, but to look at the U.S. vaccine
schedule, the entire channel is scheduled against what other countries are doing to
talk about that, compare and contrast that. But when it comes to this hep B vaccine, we have
really horizontal transmission kind of up in the air from the quote we just talked about. They
said about 400, really not the 16,000 that was projected. And by the way, they make it really
clear, because we can't show every clip, that that 400 sits really directly in an Asian immigration
population, I think as specific as among peoples, I think is how they refer to them, but that
are coming into this country with high hepatitis B rates, living amongst each other, sleeping
in close proximity and eating, that it does not represent at all any other population in this
country. So it was so specific where those numbers are coming from. I just wanted to
make that point and I think it's important. And we're screening pregnant mothers,
probably could be doing a better job of that, that's what they mentioned at the ASIP committee.
So what's happening is instead of trying to look more at these at-risk populations,
the mothers better screening, just like during COVID closing schools, vaccinating infants,
we're putting the burden on babies, first born babies and saying, you know what,
just give it to everybody, give it to every single person, every single infant coming in,
because we're not doing a good job on the other aspects of public health here. So
the babies have the burden. And this is exactly what someone mentioned, thank God,
at this meeting. And now it's in the public record. Take a listen.
Regarding the opportunity to identify infants at risk in obstetrics, our American College of
OBGYN gives us guidance for hepatitis B screening early in pregnancy. And so I find it very concerning
to see the statistics that we have reviewed in our work group anywhere between 84 to 87%
of women being tested, more results being issued before delivery, which is even more
concerning knowing that in 2002, the MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly report
reported that we were very good at testing women at a rate of 96.5%. So between 2002
and now what happened? How did this screening gap widen? And so this speaks to an opportunity for us
to close the gap in prenatal care. And should we be pushing this off to the babies? That is my
concern. The term safety net that is being applied to this program that's being put on the
babies, I mean is it fair, is it incumbent on the babies to save us from this when this
really may be more of an adult problem? We could implement universal screening in pregnancy
rather than asking the babies to kind of close that gap.
Let me put this in terms because she's being really nice about this. How about instead of
giving 99.95% of our babies that do not need this vaccine, a hepatitis B vaccine on day one of life,
they're not planning on sharing heroin needles or sleeping with prostitutes for a very long time,
hopefully never, why instead of putting that burden on our day one old babies? And by the way,
so serious that I get calls all the time, they're calling Child Protective Services on me
because I'm just trying to leave Cedars-Sinai, which is like Alcatraz right now,
because I just don't need this vaccine, I don't want this vaccine. This is how serious this is.
They put the burden to the point where they're threatening to take your child away if you don't
give them a vaccine they don't need. Instead, instead of threatening parents and putting the
lives of infants at risk, how about, here's my idea, how about you are going to lose your
license as a doctor if you don't get the blood test of the mother that is giving birth? Just
that simple. Instead of 88%, here's one thing, how about 100% blood testing, not 100% vaccine
uptake by a bunch of children that will never need it? This is her point. I'll tell you why,
because Merck doesn't make billions of dollars on you making sure that everyone's getting a blood
test. They're making billions of dollars over this vaccine program and this is where you can
figure out where this whole scam is happening, who's been driving ASIP and why they're so
shocked right now, probably upholding this vote because pharma is freaking out. We're about to
lose our stranglehold on a vaccine program that was making us billions that nobody needs.
And that is why we're playing these clips. This isn't Trump, this isn't Kennedy,
this isn't an anti-vax conspiracy theory. When someone hears that they can't unhear these
facts, this is common sense and these are people, these are educated, some of the top
educated people in the country sitting on this independent panel asking questions and
presenting facts that need to be heard by the American public. So let's bring it back up to
current present moment here. The hepatitis B vote was supposed to happen today. They're going to
either keep the universal recommendation and put it in every arm of every infant coming into this
world or they're going to have no recommendation anymore or they're going to do what they did
with the COVID vaccine and say, you talk to your doctor, it's called an individual decision
making process between you and your doctor as medicine probably always should have been.
So that was delayed. That vote now has been delayed. It was deferred. It was voted to be
deferred until tomorrow morning. So we're going to keep an eye on that, follow obviously our
X channel, our Instagram, our Facebook. We're going to be posting up-to-date results on that
vote. That will happen tomorrow morning. So that is the latest on the ASIP committee.
Amazing reporting, Jeffrey. What an amazing moment this is. It was like two different
worlds inside of ASIP there. The old vaccine shills spewing a total lack of science
and real scientific questions that need to be answered for the future of the species in our
children. Great reporting, exciting moment. I'm heated just because of the ridiculousness of
the other perspective right now, but I'll see you next week and I'm sure we'll have a lot
to report on what actually happens in this meeting tomorrow. Take care. See you then.
All right, sound great. Thank you. As if this week wasn't big enough, we've absolutely
transformed the country club of ASIP into a real science organization that's happening this week.
You're watching with your own eyes. You've made that possible with your work with the
informed consent action network. Every one of you that is sponsoring and donating the work
that we've done, those lawsuits that you're now seeing appearing, the results of those lawsuits
are at this ASIP meeting being discussed. You did that. I didn't do that. I simply asked for
your help. We handed it over to Aaron Seary. You funded it so that we could get and we
HHS. We won back the religious exemption for vaccinations in Minnesota. I mean, I mean in
Mississippi. We won back the religious exemption for the university system in California. We're
working on the rest of the, you know, school programs in California. But as you know, we've
been deeply entrenched in West Virginia in one of the most contested cases we have ever seen.
This is proving to be much more difficult than Mississippi. Every time we win, they move
the goalpost. Well, I have breaking news for you just a couple of days ago. We were excited to report
breaking ICANN's legal team secures religious exemptions for West Virginia school children
in a free the five victory. So we dropped it down to free the four. West Virginia is now free
every child. What the decision that was made by the court was not only the cases that were
funded by informed consent action network, you, these children that were fighting for
their religious right to go to school without injecting themselves with products that include
things like chopped up, aborted, fetal DNA, baby parts. Not just for them, but the court
said this is for every child that wants to opt out of the program. You're allowed to go back
to school. I was so excited to be able to come to you today in the middle of the holidays
and say, look what happens when you donate to us. If you think to bring your holiday
giving, look what we can do. Well, within moments of that victory, we started hearing that there
were calls going out from the pharmaceutical industry saying to the counties now, not just the state,
to the counties in the school systems, don't accept it. Don't take it. Don't let kids in.
They were starting to push back. We were thinking, geez, what are we going to do? We're going to
sue, you know, for contempt of court. I mean, what's going on here? What's happening?
And then within moments, the ACLU and all the 20 lawyers we've been up against in this courtroom
didn't matter that we won. They went to the appellate court and says, there's chaos here
in West Virginia. Do something. The appellate court has just ruled a stay. None of the kids
are allowed to go back to school. This is such an unfortunate West Virginia again bans religious
reasons for school vaccine exemptions. The West Virginia Supreme Court has paused a
ruling that allowed parents to use religious beliefs to opt out of required school vaccines
for their children. So we're out of the court. We won. We won this case. We won it in court.
And now it's going to the Supreme Court of West Virginia. And I guess we're going to have to do
this all over again. So what I want to say to you right now is if you think this is over,
this is a great day for celebration, things happening at ASIP that we never believe would
happen. Victories in West Virginia, but it ain't over. They're stalling the vote as we speak.
Pharma is everywhere. And so is Silicon Valley with its tracking systems on your phones. They need
to own you. They need to own your body. And they know if we win in West Virginia once and for all,
this is over, man. If we win an ASIP, if hepatitis B finally moves to share decision making
where you get a choice and now we can sue if that thing injures us, this is all over.
And they know it. We are in the fight of our lives, folks. This is real now. This is big now.
This is the battle for the whole kahuna, the whole tuna. And by the way, not a moment to back away.
We are ready to put our pedal to the metal. I want Aaron to have an army of lawyers around
him as he walks in to fight this monolith we're against. I need your help. We cannot do
this without your help. This is, you know, this is time. It's holiday giving. Will you
please consider what we've done this year? What has happened this year? Transformed ASIP.
We helped put Robert Kennedy Jr. in place. We're the number one news agency discussing all these
issues on COVID, on every single vaccine that's ever hurt you. We've been there first. We've
been telling you the truth, but we're not just reporting it. We are suing. We're bringing
the most important lawsuits in the world. If we fail, we all fail. When you think
about giving a donation to us for the holidays, think about how selfish you actually get to be.
This is not a donation to help a rhinoceros in Africa. This is actually going to benefit you.
It's going to benefit you and the future of your children, your body sovereignty,
whether you want to go to jobs and get on airplanes and walk into schools
wherever you want without being vaccinated. If that matters to you, please make your
holiday giving this year right now. Please think about us at ICANN. Think about Aaron
Siri who's standing right now on the front lines needing your help, your funding,
so that he can finish this case once and for all. You can go to the top of the page,
hit donate to ICANN. We're asking for you to become a recurring donor. $25 a month.
You've only got a couple more weeks. Well, that'll make sense. It's going to go up a
whole dollar next year to $26. So get in while the getting's good. Or if you've done
really well in life, if you've been, you know, made a just a great amount of money in this great
nation, but you believe in God and you believe in the church and you do not believe in having kids
injected with a board of DNA, a product made with the bodies of dead babies. If you want to do
something about that and you want to make a major contribution to make that change,
then please right now just send us a message info at ICANN.org and we will work out a way
that you can donate anyway and any amount that you think matters for this issue. This is the fight
of our time. This is your religious right in the most important place. If you cannot stop evil from
being injected into you and your babies, then you have lost it all. Thank you to everybody
that has made ICANN possible. That has made the high wire possible so we can sit and celebrate
the conversations that are happening inside the walls of government right now as we speak.
Our people are on the inside now. The truth is happening. Science is changing, but they need our
help and they need our courts and they need our wins and that means we need you. All right,
another hero that I met very, very early on before I ever even made facts and facts.
The facts was just an idea. I was beginning to do the research. I just met Andrew Wakefield,
but I was standing protesting SB 277 in California. It was going to take away these exact rights
to forcibly vaccinate every child in California and I was looking at that situation with my
brand new baby who was unvaccinated and I thought this is the end of the world as I know it.
Who's going to speak for me? Who will stand for me? Well, there was one doctor that was
doing that. His name was Bob Sears and if you don't know who he is, watch this. Dr. Bob Sears.
Dr. Bob Sears. Dr. Bob Sears. The most beloved and most hated pediatrician in the world. The
expert who has been on the front lines of pediatric care. A doctor and a firm believer
in vaccine choice. He is the best-selling author of tons of books like The Vaccine Book,
Making an Educated Decision for Your Child. My dad was a pediatrician so I watched him
growing up and he really enjoyed his work so I thought I would want to be a doctor as well.
Back in the 90s, I actually discovered there was one vaccine that was actually pretty dangerous
that they ended up taking off the mark. So I decided to dig into the Georgetown library
and I uncovered so much research about this one vaccine and so it made me realize the medical
community sometimes is capable of covering something up when there's a problem. I kind
of felt like my world was shattered. You know, how can the ivory tower of the CDC and the FDA
let this slip through the cracks? That basically opened my eyes. In my office, Don, it's not so
much about vaccines and autism as parents just don't want to see the baby suffer any sort of
bad vaccine reaction. Parents are afraid that their baby will be one of those statistics.
Probably 99% of doctors in California are now scared to even write any medical excuses from
vaccines for any patients because they're seeing that the medical board is coming down on us.
This bill will scare doctors away from writing medical exemptions for children who need them.
Doctors are afraid of losing their practice and their livelihood over a medical board
investigation. The California Medical Board tried to revoke my license to practice
based on the type of vaccine advice I give in my office. I give them all the pros and cons.
I give them great resources to read and I happily accept them in my office if they
choose to raise their kids without vaccines. Well, it's my honor and pleasure to be
joined right now by my good friend, Dr. Bob Sears. Bob, it's been a while. How are you
doing? Hey, Del, I'm doing awesome out here in California. I'm in the same room right now as
you saw on that clip. That's fantastic and I'm glad that you still have that room. I'm glad
that you're still a doctor. There's been some precarious times for you and I've watched
you have to navigate probably one of the most difficult places to be a pediatrician, at least
good for you, good for the way that you've stood. I just want to say, you know, I worked with your
brother Jim Sears on the doctors for years, so our families in some ways are connected. We go way
back. But to take this moment in, I don't know if you've been watching these ASIP meetings,
but to watch what's happening today from your perspective, when you think about,
when we were standing on the steps outside of the Capitol in Sacramento and
on SB 277, of course, when, you know, Richard Pan was taking away the rights of all children,
and then even worse, SB 276 that later then was going to threaten every doctor as we saw you
testifying for anyone that wanted to write exemption for these vaccine injured children
that needed one, now you're going to be under review. You're under threat.
What does it mean for you watching what's happening at the CDC today?
It makes me so excited, Del, just to see scientists openly discuss real science
and discuss all of the science. And that's the whole key. I especially love that part,
the gentleman, I forget his name, Reddy or Yeti or something.
Levy. He made the point. Yeah. Yeah. When we look at the data we have,
none of the studies are large enough to give us any answers, any good answers on vaccine
risk. And I think that's so awesome to see that, that just that basic idea put out there in the
public. And I also like how none of these doctors are saying anything really against
vaccinating or they're not, you know, speaking out strongly about all the terrible
possible vaccine side effects. And it's, I enjoyed your little, you know, brief
tirade a few minutes ago on the show. It's always fun to hear you. But I mean,
none of the scientists are talking like that. They're just talking straight science.
And that is so refreshing to see. It really is. And it's a very important question. Why
give this to children that don't need it? Why a product for 99.95% of the kids that
don't need it? No one is saying, let's not vaccinate these kids. Let's just test all the
moms. Let's know who's at risk and let's just be focused. I mean, are we not at a place in the
United States of America in a future with AI and technologies that can track my eyeballs
that know where I am anywhere in this world? Is it not possible to make sure that we have
blood tests that we're well aware of the positions that these children are in and
give them care that is specifically designed for them? Isn't that the heart of do no harm,
meaning I'm going to give you something that only, you know, that you need and not something
you don't because of some kid you don't know? Exactly. And, you know, you talk about,
you know, about the potential harm of this vaccine and they brought this up in the meeting.
Well, what is the harm? I mean, you know, what's the harm in giving this vaccine that
can only benefit babies? Well, you and I know that there definitely is potential harm from
happy vaccine. Yeah. And there are serious neurological risks. There are serious auto
immune risks. One straightforward risk, though, that isn't even really that serious is newborn
fever. The number of babies who get fever alone from the happy vaccine, given the day
they're born in the hospital is it's not a small number. And I don't actually have the
actual number. But I know we do have some research that shows one hospital in Israel
looked at this. Yeah. And they showed the year they started vaccinating babies with happy
vaccine as newborns, the number of babies admitted to their intensive care unit with
fevers doubled in the hospital. So when you're a healthy newborn baby born in
the hospital, nothing's wrong with you at all. You get a happy vaccine. You get a
fever that buys you at least three days in the intensive care unit while they treat
you for infection. They do all kinds of tests. And that alone is potential harm
right up front for any baby with, as you and I would say, really no potential
benefit in a low risk population. And crazy. So there is no benefit. Right.
And by the way, we're trying to develop harm where you've refused to do any proper
science, five day safety studies of 147 kids, you know, no sort of capture system or
reporting system that anyone would say that they trust that's totally under
reported. I mean, the whole thing is such a mess. But I would just say, you know,
when I look at this conversation, we're going to get into why we're having
this conversation. But the one thing I would like to see set on the floor of
the advisory committee on immunization practices as the argument is, well,
you know, what is the risk? What is the harm? I don't know the fact that there's
54 percent of our children have chronic disease. If you include obesity in America,
this is the fact that we're the sickest nation in the industrialized world.
The fact that this vaccine we're giving on day one of life, which is an anomaly,
as Tracy Beth Hogue pointed out, isn't being given anywhere else in the world.
And they're not having hepatitis B outbreaks. So we're doing something no
one else is. And by the way, we have the highest day one old baby death rate
in the entire industrialized world. More babies dying on the first day of life.
Can we prove it's hepatitis B? No, because you won't do the science.
But there's some signals there, man. There's some signals we should be worried about.
Yeah. And I love how the doctors of the CDC, what I would like to call maybe
entrenched doctors and researchers have been there a long time.
They're so quick to point out the under reporting of disease.
And they say, okay, yeah, sure, we only have 400 children reportedly infected every year from
hepatitis B. But we're estimating we're missing so many of those, we're going to call it 20,000.
You know, they used to call it 30,000, then they called it 20,000. I think now they're
calling it 16,000. They're so quick to say, hey, there's all this under reported disease
that we're going to escalate in our findings. They're not willing to discuss the
unreported and under reported vaccine reaction. Such a good point.
And I think finally we have a group that is actually willing to look at that.
Well, I think what's critical and why I want to talk to you today,
you're a member of one of the most important groups out there that has been doing work
right alongside Informal Consent Action Network, physicians for informed consent.
This is a body of doctors and scientists that really risked your careers to come together
to really bring evidence-based science to this conversation. But as you're saying,
for those entrenched doctors that just are struggling to understand what's happening here,
that got that, you know, that has been declared by the WHO, only got a half-a-day education
on vaccines while they were in med schools. Is that an, I mean, I made that statement.
Is that somewhat accurate? I mean, would you sort of?
Yes.
That's accurate, right?
Yeah, that's accurate.
It's incredible, man. I mean, every time I say it, I know I've seen the WHO state,
I know it stated that's outrageous that when I'm going to my, you know,
pediatrician, they had a half-a-day education on one of the main things that they do in their
office. But tell me about this book over your shoulder. I'm talking about this one right here,
the silver book, Vaccines and Diseases They Target. This has just been put out by
Physicians Form, Form Consent. I love that it's happening today. This is something we've been
wanting to talk to you about for some time. It's been out for, I think, a couple months now.
But on the day of ASIP, perfect moment. Why this book, what is it, and who's it targeting?
What did you guys work on this book? What's it set out to achieve?
Well, it's been in the works for 10 years now, Del, and some of the doctors and researchers
in Physicians Form, Form Consent started collecting every single research study they could find
on vaccines and the diseases they target. Whether the study is in favor of vaccines or
shows potential vaccine side effects, they just gathered all the data. And this book
actually has 400 studies that look at disease information and vaccine safety. And what they
did is they basically compiled it. I mean, you know how you're talking to people, you're thinking
about vaccines, you're doing research, and you wonder, where is the data? Where is the information?
Where is the research? And you have to go find it. And that's not an easy task. Well, this group
finally put together all the data in one very little book. I keep looking at my book over
here on this side. The back third of the book is all the research studies. And the first two
thirds of the book what I love is just every disease is one page, just like a one page overview
of everything you need to know about the disease. And then every vaccine is one page,
I guess two pages, you know, both sides of the book. It's so simple. It takes the data
that seems very complicated and it simplifies it down to something that even a CDC researcher
could understand probably. And so I feel like this book is for everybody, but it's especially
people who really want to take a really deep dive into the data.
Well, you know, I mean, I want people to sort of look at what he's saying here because it is
this is what makes this so brilliant is when you hear 400 studies, it can be really intimidating.
But I can turn to any page though. I just want to show them. Yeah, I can show you slides,
but it's this simple. It's only a few paragraphs. And it is what is so genius about this, Bob,
because this is the work, right? Anybody, I can bury you in the 20 studies around tetanus
and all that you need to know. But you've been really exceptional at, let's just get,
what are the most important salient points? What are the most important things that we
know about the vaccine? Are there issues? What is it? And then the disease itself, this is the part
we really don't cover a lot. You know, not even at ICANN, we talk a lot about the dangers of the
vaccines. But what were the numbers of the dangers of the virus itself? Because if we're
going to try and do some of risk, revolt, reward, benefit, ratio, dive, how do we do that?
This is the first book that I've ever seen on the left page. I can see what the vaccine
is up to. What is it? Do I have that right? Or is it vice versa? And then on the other page,
I get to see what the disease was all about and really help me make this decision, right?
So it's fantastic that way. Yeah, I think when I talk to patients in the office,
one of the main things they want to know is they tell me, we know there's vaccine side
effects. We know there's risk. I want to know, what's the risk to my baby if I don't vaccinate them?
What is the disease risk? They want numbers. And I usually skip to the end of the story when
I'm talking to them. And I say in my 28 years of being a pediatrician, I've never seen a single case,
a single severe case of a vaccine targeted illness. And so they say, okay, well,
sounds like the risk is pretty low. But what Pick has done with this book,
because they actually give you the exact numbers, because the data is there. They have numbers from
the CDC throughout the 19th century, where the CDC was gathering data on every single case
before vaccines. So they tell us, yeah, how many kids were harmed by diphtheria before vaccines,
tetanus, hepatitis B, measles, everything, how many were harmed before there even was a
vaccine. And, Del, the numbers are staggeringly low. It's amazing how low the numbers of kids who
are harmed by infection before we even had vaccines. And then the page you have right there
kind of speaks to it. You can see the risk compared to the vaccine and then the actual
disease and these tiny little numbers. And that's what pharma has been so brilliant at.
I have to say, even watching Dr. Meisner, some of these guys are just so pro vaccine
that are still, and by the way, I'm glad they're still on the committee, right? I mean,
I want to point that out too. Anyone that says that Robert Kennedy Jr. has stacked this with
anti-vaxxers, you got Dr. Meisner in there. There is a robust debate. Both sides are being
represented. So even though my skin's crawling over some of the, you know, the blindfolds that are
appearing on some of these doctors, they're in there. Like Bobby didn't, he wants a role. It's
what science should be. All sides should be represented. We should be having it out. Sure,
yell, scream, cry. Let's do this. And so finally it's happening. But what pharma has done
so brilliantly through media, it's what I did on the doctors. Me and your brother were really
good at this. Let's just scare the hell out of you and make you personalize a super rare issue.
All I have to do is show you someone covered with a rash. It doesn't matter that one in a
million people are ever going to get this thing. If you see it, you go, oh my God,
I'll do anything to make sure I never get that. Well, you know, 999,000 of you would
never have to do anything. But we can make you all say, well, if you take this product 100%
effective at keeping you from getting covered with this, you know, and that's what they do. And so
we go, we don't hear the one in a million. We just go, I will do anything to make sure I don't
get that. Yes, yeah, exactly. And then they've done a great job. And how awesome is it now
to realize we are now part of a movement where now half of our country or more
now understand that that's probably not true. The farmers have been telling us all these years
may not be true. And something I also wanted to point out that I really love about this book is
that the researchers and the people that wrote this are really good friends of mine. And
they're very honest in this book, and that when they talk about vaccine risk, you look at any
vaccine page and basically, yeah, turn to the next polio vaccine page. I don't know if you have it
there. Basically tells you, they tell you what's the risk of catching polio. Yeah, they also
tell you what's the risk of the polio vaccine. But what they're honest about is they say the
risk of these vaccines, Dell, are largely inconclusive because of the lack of safety research. So they
estimate, say, for example, polio vaccine, probably about 70 people for every 100,000 people in our
population are going to have a severe injury from this vaccine or the DTAP vaccine on the DTAP
page. 70 per 100,000 people. But they're honest. They say our data is inconclusive, though. We're
estimating about 70 per 100,000 are going to be injured by the vaccine. But we don't have
really good research to show you whether or not that's actually true. So they have really good
disease data. But again, the vaccine safety data is lacking. And that was probably the take
home message of this ACIP meeting is that is there just a total lack of safety data.
And now they're faced with a decision about a disease that the ACIP committee has now
realized after much discussion poses very little risk to American children who are not
born into a high risk environment. So the big question, part of what this book is there for
doctors to have next to their pink book, the silver book here, so that they can really have a quick
look at something that they were never educated on in school. But let me ask you the hard question
that I get from the media all the time. I'm sure you've fielded it. Bob, what are you going
to do when polio comes back or when measles comes back because people aren't vaccinating?
Yeah, well, the polio question is very interesting one. And this book covers it very, very well.
The whole key to understanding the polio dilemma is the vaccine we use now doesn't prevent infection
and it doesn't prevent transmission. All it does is gives you some immunity in your bloodstream
that will protect you from neurologic symptoms should you as an individual contract polio
infection. But it does nothing for the public health. It doesn't protect your neighbor or your
friend or your schoolmate. It's just individual protection. So we've managed to keep polio out
of the US for 40 years now using a vaccine that isn't even keeping it out of the US because
it doesn't prevent infection. So we've done it through public health measures. We've done it
through sanitation and hygiene and good health. And right now polio is confined to just a few
impoverished nations in other parts of the world and it's been that way for a very long time.
So I mean, I think that the polio debate I think is very easy to answer and that's why it pisses
me off when I see polio vaccines mandated for school. Right. So really interesting point,
I actually you said that in a way I hadn't thought about it because I am aware that it doesn't stop
infection or transmission. But they'll when you make the statement we haven't had polio for 40 years
like yeah because we're vaccinating. No actually if it doesn't stop transmission and doesn't stop
infection we should be seeing in the sewage systems all across this country. If it can
be spread here there's nothing stopping it spread. There's nothing stopping it coming
from Africa or the Middle East wherever they are having these impoverished nations which also
there's some sense of chemicals and things that they're around that might be lowering their
immune systems that are you know making that risky but it would be here it's just you know
we're being protected from the severity of it but we don't see it here at all it's not here
at all and we're not using a vaccine that is a sterilizing vaccine that kills it dead and
make sure we never get it we should see it here and we don't and so there's not really
a problem such an interesting point and measles you know what do you what do you say about measles
I mean I think we're going to have to grapple with this idea as we move forward you know I want my
kids have the measles when when the media is like you're going to cause measles like great I mean
tell me where I got to get my kids over there I want them to catch the measles I want the
benefits that I know exist when a child has had the measles but our doctor's going to have to
learn how to treat measles because obviously it was a Brady Bunch episode years ago doctors
weren't terrified your father wasn't terrified of dealing with the measles no no I'm sure I'm
sure he wasn't um you know measles is really interesting and I've told people for a long
time you know if if any infection is possibly going to you know make itself known once again
it's it's likely to be measles yeah as we're seeing in the last uh year and a half and and
what's interesting with measles though is the reason why it's coming back
Dell and you know this but I guess maybe I'm telling this to the audience is largely because
our adult population is no longer immune yeah you know back when back when adults caught
real measles they were immune for life yeah but now since we've been vaccinating
since uh what since the early you know 60s yeah so 62 but it got it gets robust gets robust in the
70s yeah so now everyone now is growing up they have vaccine immunity for maybe 10 15 20 years
but then they lose that immunity so the whole herd of adults that we have in the United States
a large part of our herd doesn't have herd immunity for measles and then yes when some
children when the families elect to not vaccinate their children because they have concerns about
the safety of the MMR vaccine we're now going to have some children that don't have vaccine immunity
either so now we're seeing more measles and children but we're seeing it in adults as well
and we've been seeing it every single year going back you know ever since we've had measles we've
as each you know kind of a couple of years go by it's probably going to come in a couple of
your cycles and it'll be low again and then it'll come back again and I think measles is going to
become a an ongoing part of our society now I don't think it's going to make you come back
like like chicken pox and and uh but it's largely because the vaccine wears off and it
doesn't work in everybody so measles is actually a disease that we can't eliminate from our
world the infection is just too smart and the vaccine just doesn't work good enough
so already good points those are points obviously that are in this book so
for anyone that wants to buy this book I can't recommend enough it's so simple so easy
you can just turn right to the page of whatever vaccine or whatever disease you're curious
about where we find this book I guess we have it up here yeah probably I mean you get
ordered on on amazon anywhere anywhere people sell books and probably everyone get on amazon
you know leave reviews and that's always helps you know helps sales I love tracking vaccine
book sales on amazon I love I love looking it's been great to see Aaron's series book there as
well and it's fun and my book usually hovers around you know number five or six on the on
the vaccine list so I'd love to see that the silver book hit number one yeah you know vaccines
and the diseases they target because I think it touches disease information probably better than
any other book I agree as well as the vaccine information it's really I think that is really
the stellar part the exciting part about this book and what hasn't really been done certainly
not this simply and clearly so here's my recommendation sure definitely buy one for
yourself you want one of these it's easy you got a friend over you can look through it
but I would make this the Christmas gift to every doctor that you go to just go ahead
bring it to your pediatrician wrapped up say this should go alongside your pink book
would really help you understand what's going on there don't worry about it it's from me
Merry Christmas love you you know and and that'll help you make sure that your doctor is better
educated Bob you're a hero man you've been on the front lines I'm so glad to see
you've navigated it you've you've caught slings and arrows from all sides of this to
precarious space to be in you know I know the you know the people that have said he still
gives vaccines is an evil person and I remember I interviewed you a few years ago and and you
said something that has always stuck with me Dell there are parents in in California that are
trying to spread them out that are trying to do whatever they can to make this as safe
for their kids they don't have a choice if I'm not here they really don't have a choice
I'm working with people wherever they're at I'm so glad you're there I'm so glad the position
you've held it's been critical and important and I know babies are healthier and are living and alive
and maybe we'll go on to be great scientists that can do better science because you were there
to make sure they survived so thank you for that work well thank you Dell and I just want to
say I appreciate your friendship Dell you know you kind of said at the beginning of the
show you and I met a long time ago and and uh it's been great to to know you over these years
and to see your journey as well and feel your passion and nobody's more passionate than you
Dell so I appreciate your friendship I'm glad that that you're out there and and yeah it's
fun to see what the ACIP is is going to do with this it looks like they're talking about
making a the happy vaccine under the shared decision-making category the individual decision
making category it looks like they're probably not going to just take it off the whole schedule
right but they're going to change it into something where the doctor will then kind of
individually have this conversation patient to patient which I think is where most of this
should be I've said it from the beginning I should all be there I think it should all be
there I you know we're smart people we should be able to be educated you're you know the
nonprofit you're part of physicians for informed consent my nonprofit informed consent action
network informed consent is not about erasing vaccines from the planet it's not about erasing
anything from the plant what it's saying is inform me and what is my risk if there's 400
kids that have a problem with this of the millions being born then I don't think this is
a problem I need to worry about I know I don't have hepatitis B I've been informed I recognize
my baby has zero risk and based on the information I'm going to make a choice but if I'm hepatitis
B positive for whatever reason got a bad blood transfusion you name it I should be able to have
a kid I should have a product available to me my doctor should be able to have an honest
conversation with me and have a product that is there and available that is the world that
I think Robert Kennedy Jr. is working towards it may not be the eradication of the vaccine
program as some people would dream but that has never been what Bobby Kennedy has promised
it's never been what you promised by the statement informed consent we stand by informed
consent all we want is your right to choose and you've been a big part of that it's what I believe
and I pray I pray that you're right that we're going to finally see the first vaccine really
since COVID but this is the one that is not protected by prep which is going to you know
set a lot of other things in action we're going to finally see real choice in a free country
return to the people all right Bob amen absolutely take care everyone go out get yourself
vaccines and the disease they target Bob thank you for taking the time today I look forward to
catching up with you soon yeah you too all right oh man so many great heroes that have made
today possible that are out there so many great groups coming together but we need your help
as I've said before we're the ones that are in the courtrooms you know there's a lot of writing
we you know department's like god I wish we'd have written that book we've been talking about doing it
they did it because this is for informed consent have written a book that you should really have
in your arsenal along with Aaron series book vaccines amen which lays out the whole story
all around the court cases but we can win folks and we have to win in West Virginia
we cannot let up I always I don't know if you watch MMA fighting but I do on occasion when
I'm flipping through channels and grabs your attention but man you can watch someone that
just have someone almost look like they're dead across on them and all of a sudden this haymaker
comes out and knocks the guy that was winning out we can't afford to look the other way we can't
afford to let up we've got to continue the ground and pound it's happening we can win this we've got
to knock Goliath out and we're the only ones in the room right now I can see only ones in
the room in the courtrooms that are about to make that happen fund that please make that
happen and one of the best ways you can do it is buy a brick on our campus so you can come and
visit you can actually put a piece of cement on our property that will stand through the test of time
and be here as a testament to we were here our generation made the difference we fought for
truth we stood for truth and we brought a brick on the terrace this is our favorite brick of
the week delivered by someone that was touched when she came to visit her own brick this
is my daughter it's brick this is sarah middle name stevie sarah degnazio brave warrior love mom
exo i've been in this journey for 31 years my daughter's 33 she was injured from her 18 month
dpt shot she was completely normal got the shot and eight days later had a terrible screaming
episode was never the same my family was involved in the second only vaccine litigation case in
canada in 1995 we sued the pediatrician and cannot laboratories vaccine damage hasn't just
occurred since COVID-19 experimental gene therapy it's been going on since the advent of these vaccines
so with ax came out it took me two years before i could sit down and watch it because i've lived
it like i'm still living with her vaccine injury my my daughter doesn't she's nonverbal she's so
beautiful but i'm her voice now so i say for a girl who doesn't talk she has a lot to say she's
helped so many people lots of people didn't vaccinate because of what happened to sarah
when vax came out i was blown away because finally um the moms that were speaking out and
i always say i'm never f with a mom because i'm in it for over 30 years and i'm just getting
going and it's because of shows like the high wire it's an important message to get out and
when del came out about the brick i just knew i had to get a brick for my sarah and i knew when i
bought it actually had tears in my eyes because i'm like one day i'm going to be here in austin
texas and i'm i'm going to see her brick so for me to see it like it's a miracle so i'm very
happy for you guys for sending this campaign we have so many of you have purchased bricks it's
amazing but you don't want to miss this opportunity everyone that missed the last time when we put
it in the walkway here uh was reaching out how do i get in this is your moment it's it's also a
great christmas gift for someone you love you can send them a picture hey look uh this brick is
now at i can you should go check it out um also look if you want another way that you can
contribute and you know get something out of it how about a christmas gift uh go to our store
right now and we have all sorts of things that you can buy for christmas and we have a special
christmas gift for everyone that buys over 75 dollars worth of stuff at the highway dot shop
we're going to give you a gift bag that has valued over a hundred dollars of extra stuff for extra
gifts and i would say this you know that that person in your family you're a little afraid of
having the conversation with you know if you're back during christmas you haven't been
getting along very well you definitely can't talk about that issue and you don't know what
am i going to get them for christmas how about a high wire shirt how about a high wire hat how about
a high wire mug that would do the job be a lot of fun anyway these are great gifts from shirts to
hats to faraday bags to protect you know your loved ones if they're using cell phones great
stocking stuff or also a great conversation piece and if you go there right now and spend
more than 75 dollars do it now you only have enough time to really make christmas you're
going to get over a hundred dollars worth of free stuff sent to you additional a bag full of all sorts
of christmas gifts for you or those that you love so this is a great opportunity for you a great
opportunity for us to celebrate the holidays and continue to fund this incredible work that we're
doing this is an amazing show today because we have the advisory committee and immunization
practices where we're watching finally science being discussed as bob sears just celebrated
we're celebrating a book that everybody the silver book that you can buy that doctors can buy
that really simplifies this conversation but whether you've bought that book whether you're
watching these meetings or you're watching the high wire the big question is how am i going to
have that conversation at the christmas table or the hanukkah table we're all going home for
the holidays but you don't want to show up with this shirt not vaccinated and ready to talk
politics uh you know i don't think i don't think that that's giving i don't think that was the way
to do it but you know nice try anyway you know what i mean this is these are sensitive topics
but it's the most important thing we're going to do right now because we have a vote that's coming
up we have things we have a you know an electoral season coming that will decide how much robert
kenney jr is going to be able to do how far down the road are we going to get we're only
going to get there if we keep enrolling more and more people that's why i want everyone sharing
an inconvenient study just go there get in the study dot com uh share the film but how are you
going to talk to your friends and loved ones well i'm joined now by carrie bigford that that is
exactly what you are doing you've got a program yes to help people talk about this
somewhat complicated issue it's not somewhat complicated it's very complicated and we absolutely
have to talk about it because we won't succeed if we can't have this conversation and fear is one
of the biggest barriers yeah i know that you've been moving a long time just like me have you ever
had one of your well-intentioned thoughtful conversations go unexpectedly sideways with someone
never well no but i know a lot of people that have absolutely of course never we've all right
you know especially when you're starting out when i first was you know traveling with vaxed
every once in a while i get myself into a position where i you know brought up a point
that then gets used against me the way i hadn't imagined you don't do that twice yep but it'd be
great if someone had like walked that road and had said you know what here's the mistake i've
made you don't want to make that mistake well i failed forward great and through lots of years
of bad outreach i developed excellent outreach okay and you my background is mental health so
one of the reasons why those conversations can go sideways on a difficult polarizing
emotionally driven topic like medical liberty it's actually biological you know humans have a
two-story brain okay we have an upstairs brain which is slow deliberative logical it is the
excellent upstairs outreach partner brain for us and then we have a downstairs brain which is
fast instinctive and a little bit always running amok based on our feelings okay and the fun
thing about the emotional brain is moving faster than the the far faster and even more fun
the emotional brain i think the zealot brain i'm using no most people are actually downstairs
brain dominant which is part of the problem yeah and so we come in trying to bring with logic
and the only way to get upstairs there's no external staircase the only way to access someone's
slow deliberative logical good outreach partner for us upstairs brain is through the staircase
downstairs so having an awareness of what's happening in your partner and how that communication
works neurologically can help you frame so rather than trying to come in first with hard logic
and facts which won't work i've watched i've said that my own way which is go ahead and just bury
someone in science and you will get nowhere they're gonna you'll get nowhere you just watch
the door close absolutely right yeah so what we do in our approach is we actually go downstairs
up okay so we focus on establishing safety and trust first we have a like four basic
steps i mean there's a lot of tips and tricks that we have in our program to help you with
communicate but basically we've just done four main steps it is prepare yourself to do the work
and when you're preparing yourself to do the work you are coming up with some idea of what
you're going to inform with and you want that something to be not nuanced yeah objective
reality so not your opinions belief choices ideas whatever right and you also want to make
sure that you are coming from a place that is centered enough where you are no longer vulnerable
to your partner's emotional wins right you need to be able to be centered enough to stay upstairs
in your upstairs brain and not go downstairs and fight okay yeah so first step is you prepare
yourself do the work it's a really good point right because that's where i think we get off
right we start out we go home it's been a big raging fight yep not going to talk to my sister
again for another six months yeah and you know you're kicking yourself why didn't get emotional
i was the one that had the upper hand i had the information yes it was that closed mindedness
that was i was running against and then i got emotional and the thing just went absolutely
once people get upset with one another right rational thinking goes out the window right
i mean emotional miscommunication and emotional feelings are the main thing that derail
communication yeah all across the board all cultures all humans everywhere it's emotions
that derail communication yeah so being able to have some way to get yourself regulated emotionally
so that you can stay centered enough to be on task and on topic and mainly not vulnerable to your
partner's emotional wins is a really big deal and also being able to replace your judgment with
curiosity right yeah being able to identify your partner's position and empathize with it
and empathy is not agreement empathy is understanding your partner's position it's not agreement
and so after you have prepared yourself because it's a real thing you're doing that you need to
prepare for or you will go in flames and get an emotional reaction it's designed for that we're
designed for that we are designed for that we are designed to be downstairs we're dominant we are
designed to have that wild card irrational nature of humans right and we see that everywhere
right i experiences medical liberty all the time yeah and so after you're prepared yourself and
you're centered and you're ready to go and you have some idea of what non-nuance objective reality
fact you're going to share when that point comes along then you connect with your partner
and connection is really the step that you spend the most time on and you never never
informed before you connect you have to connect and manage that downstairs brain
and establish trust and safety first because you have to be invited upstairs you got to remember
you're entering someone's downstairs ground floor level yeah you have to be invited upstairs
you don't just show up upstairs you're invited upstairs and you're invited upstairs by establishing
trust safety and connection through connection work okay yeah absolutely um we have lots and
lots so so tell me so do you have a course i can take how do is it like how does work
because i look i think this is really super important again i agree something i wish i'd
had the time to develop some teaching i wish i had me 25 years ago but you've done it and so
where do people go how do they connect with this because look we've got you know three weeks right
now to go get ourselves prepared for what i think is is going to be oh here we go uh i guess it's
up right there texas for vaccine choice but oh i can click on the promo code so there you can
click on the promo code but is there a website go to texasforvaccinechoice.com okay texasforvaccinechoice.com
and you can find it there under train with team tfvc okay so you'll be information if you're in
texas you can volunteer for us and take the class for free if you're out of texas you can buy a
ticket it comes with this handy dandy workbook that has all kinds of exercises that walk you
through and help you internalize and apply the information but going back to connect
another piece i really want your audience to understand was really not my idea but it's
one of the lenses that we use to help with our outreach work and it's called a 738 55 percent rule
okay it was founded in the 70s by a UCLA psychology professor albert mehavrian okay and it's
very important and very true and what it says is it's not what you say it's how you sound
and what you look like when you say it right only seven percent of your partner's perceived
meaning of you actually comes from the word spoken i spent sad literal years trying to find
perfect magical words and i mean advocates all the time that are obsessing about perfect magical
words but i could find the perfect words well you know what the perfect words get you seven
percent of the communication puzzle that's it interesting 38 percent however comes from your
tone of voice alone so rather than taking all that energy trying to find perfect words that
don't exist and don't get you very far focus on developing an awareness of how you sound to
your partner do i sound aggressive do i sound approachable do i sound calm right do i sound
condescending do i absolutely do i sound judgmental right all of those things develop an
awareness of your sound and then 55 percent 55 percent more than half comes from your body language
and facial expressions alone am i closed off to you am i turned in your direction do i seem welcoming
and approachable because those two things your tone of voice and your body language provide the
contextual cues that give the meaning to the words to your partner i use very clear and direct
language and all of my interactions and it is my voice tone and my body language that conveys
my love and care for you and there is nothing i mean nothing more powerful and magical than you
and your ability to connect with the person in front of you so connection is a very important
step that should not be missed or rushed and during that connection step you're looking for
three things in your discovery process with your partner what my partner's position is
why that position makes sense to them and what they need to shift into a different space
okay yeah you discover that and when you discover that and you've gained trust and
established safety you've your prize for connecting well is gaining the influence to
inform your partner and when you inform definitely choose something not nuanced don't
go in the weeds okay yeah you're asking your partner to elicit a worldview shift right
barring trauma as most people in medical liberty came here through trauma but barring trauma
there is a lot of resistance to that worldview shift and the dominant worldview is that vaccines
are what safe and effective yeah safe and effective right and to pierce that right
is a big ask for someone so don't just be surprised by resistance but expect it
and help your partner shift by giving them things that are not nuanced that are objective
reality and easily verifiable so that they can push back and openly resist that reality
and be proven wrong right that helps your partner shift so much and while you're doing that
make sure that you're staying regulated you're staying open to them be mindful of your body
language and your voice tone and then after you've informed your partner and they're marinating
in it the last step is allow right I meet advocates that struggle with allowing yeah all
the time and I struggled greatly too I was coming from a fear-based place I did not
want those people to be harmed I was frightened that they would be harmed and I got too attached to
their outcome but the truth is just like you and I know we are not at the decision-making table
for anyone else but ourselves not and I will I'll say this I've said it before the odds are
you're not going to see that shift in that that sitting yep right this is like a you're
planting this is a television series you're not an episode 10 it's going to get 10 to get there
what you want is for them to tune back in absolutely want them to have this conversation
with you you know what I really appreciate that conversation yesterday yep I'd like to I wanted
to follow up with a couple more questions that's what you're trying to hope that you hear you
want them to you know assimilate and internalize what you shared and be willing to continue
their relationship in the future so that you can have more opportunities to help them shift
because again you're eliciting a worldview shift in your partner which is a very tall
order for humans to do yeah and it's important to recognize that there's no two minutes that's
going to shift anyone unless they were about to shift anyway yeah right yeah which you don't
know when you like talking to random people is one of my absolute favorite activities I mean it
may sound a little odd but I love it I love talking to people that I don't know and getting to see
how far I can get with them and where they are on this spectrum of understanding because
regardless of your individual choices you want medical liberty laws in your life you do not want
bureaucratic government people to decide what happens to your body ever this is the most important
issue it even freedom if you care about what this country represents if you want it to last for your
children and the generations to come I do think this is the tip of the spear I think you make a
good point I would also say what's great they should take this course right now you can go
we are having a high wire specific class okay on December 9th so Tuesday December 9th you can do that
qr code there's a promo code to take 20 off you'll get long class with me that's live where you can
ask all the questions that you want you'll also get a workbook mailed to you so that you can
have tons and tons and tons of information to help you internalize and apply those tenants
because again I want you to be successful we must be successful or we're not going to succeed we will
lose our liberty we will lose our liberty and we have to get the hearts and minds we have to have
this conversation with the people that we love and the people that we don't know that we love yet
right I just had this image I know like I'm one of the world's worst dog trainers we have like
these feral dogs in our house but if you've ever had a dog like that right yeah that gets
outside of the yard and they're running towards the road and you and virtually like get over here
you clap and then they look and then now is the game and then you yell and now they start going more
and more and eventually you just like I found like I just dropped down on my back and like just
lay there and I have to act like I don't care if you run that traffic and just see if you'll come
to me because all the attention's just driving them away it's a lot of what this game is with
someone you love you have to just you know approach in a way where you're not pushing
them away humans have a natural inborn defense mechanism against it being controlled
it's called reactance okay and it's a real thing and part of allowing is what I call the paradox
of outreach which is when you as the advocate can let go of your need to control their choice
because that's what you're doing when you're to attach to their choice that's your need to work
through when you can let go of your need to control their choice that is the exact moment
when you gain the type of influence that truly can help them shift that choice people can feel
when you're not attached my own personal growth marker of my success as an advocate has been the
enhanced ease with which I can allow I am not attached anymore to anyone else's choice but mine
and because of that I shift people faster and more effectively than I ever did when I clung
to my need to have their choice be what I needed it to be and that's hard to hear sometimes right
well you know what let's get into your personal story right after the show and off absolutely I
want to hear how that got you there yeah take advantage of this texas for vaccine choice you
can click on the QR code let's bring it up one more time this is really important this I mean
you should really take this on I want to do better over the holidays it's time man we've
got the momentum at our back the winds are back the science is with us go in be happy look there's
no reason to get defensive we're in the offensive position it's really easy to get nice and friendly
right now but start enrolling people right start using honey to catch those bees and not vinegar
you know we were hoping today that somehow we would break from this show and go to this
incredible vote on hepatitis b and watch history being made I pray when hepatitis b is removed
from recommendation for all children that is now being delayed because apparently even though
every one of the news reported that vote was happening today some doctors didn't think they
were prepared all they were prepared to do was bitch this is one of them let me begin by saying
that I take strong positions against each of the three presentations that have been made
many statements that I don't agree with that it's hard to be succinct but let me begin
with Dr. Cynthia Neveson first of all I think you conflated
serology at that is antibodies with protection against infection but I don't think there has been a
single case of hepatitis b that has occurred in a person who was otherwise healthy or a neonate
who was otherwise healthy who received the recommended schedule this is a this disease
has gone down in the United States thanks to the effectiveness of our current immunization program
the next point your opinion in your opinion is that fair in my opinion well okay these are facts
Robert well there's Dr. Cody Meisner who is you know and I pointed out
look I'm glad he's there proving Robert Kennedy Jr. didn't get her approval that believed in pharma and
didn't care that this vaccine only had a five-day safety trial we need those types in there too
but what kind of science does he talk about do you know how rare this issue is do you know
how rare hepatitis b is do you know how hard it'd be determined if vaccinating everybody on
the planet that didn't need this was actually making a difference at all he calls those facts
they all call things facts just like Tony Fauci said it was a fact that six foot distancing
would make a difference it was science and if you question him you question the science
except when they were under oath just like Catherine Edwards suddenly all that science
disappears you realize there is none but despite the fact even though Cody showed up today
he had a whole dossier that had been sent to him saying today we're going to discuss it
at the end we're going to vote apparently he was the one saying I don't think we're ready to
vote this is the moment that we've missed while we're doing the show you could put it up once
again so I mean it's it would be much easier if we could have a hard copy of this and think
about it a little bit I would like to make a motion that we have an opportunity to look
at a hard copy of the votes and hopefully defer until tomorrow if that's possible
do we have a second uh on that motion I second okay that second that motion
this is Dr. Hibbel and I second that motion
well there you have it I can't imagine what's going to happen tonight I mean are the lobbies of
the pharmaceutical industry going to reach out to the individuals on this committee maybe are
they going to reach out to the establishments where they were at the hospitals the clinics
so it's going to be pressure there what are they what does Cody really think is going to
happen overnight as you think we're just going to go home and read and that's going to make a
difference I doubt that that is all that's taking place but then again that's my opinion
that's my perspective I guess they need some moment some way to regroup and figure out
can we pressure these people because I think they feel like the writing's on the wall they
thought they were going to win this vote there was no problem we're going to keep
vaccinating 99.95 percent of the babies that never needed this vaccine and continue to make
billions of dollars off of a product that was totally unnecessary I guess they want one more
shot at it they need another night's sleep some more pillow talk if you will we are up against
close-minded individuals we're up against a religion not science we are fighting against
billionaires and frankly trillionaires this industry is the most powerful in the world
we have one in West Virginia and it didn't matter they've driven to another court and
they're going to keep pushing in everywhere and they want us to walk away they want us to
throw up our hands and give up they wanted the same thing in COVID just roll over get the damn
vaccine get your vaccine passport or you're never getting on a bus again and we said no
no I'm not doing it I'm standing up we're standing up for real right now we're standing
up inside of government Robert Kennedy Jr. standing up Dr. Robert Rolone is running real
science where everyone is allowed to the table we're having these conversations for the first
time we're standing in courtrooms for you 90 courtrooms we're in right now with cases
with ICANN all across this country and the most important that have ever been fought
especially West Virginia right now and a case in New York that we believe will go to the
Supreme Court you can do something you can tell your friends you can learn how to talk to
your friends super important but do not take this moment lightly we are not going to get
another chance at this we are not going to find ourselves in this position for a very
very long time unless we win unless we take this opportunity to win this battle
and then win this war this is a war for our children this is a war for our species
this is our war for sovereignty and most importantly is the war for freedom
do not take it lightly be responsible act accordingly and do everything you can right now
to make sure that when you have that last moment in your life when you're lying on your death bed I
assure you it will not be about whether you meet your maker and God tells you how you've done
if your children are not free because somehow you shirked your duty you just thought
Del Bigtree's got this handled or Aaron Siri can do it without me or Robert Malone's on this
well if you think that's going to alleviate your guilt in that moment I think you're wrong
wouldn't be better on the last days of our lives to look at our children
and say you're welcome if we are free because we cared we did what was right
that's what's happening today be a part of it I'll see you next week on the High Wire