The Charlie Kirk Show - Three Doctors Take On Bill Gates, Big Pharma and Destroy the COVID Fear Narrative

All Episodes

Previous Next

Plain Text

Feb. 12, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show

01:54:12

Three Doctors Take On Bill Gates, Big Pharma and Destroy the COVID Fear Narrative

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
Unbelievable Conversation with Three Doctors 00:02:08
	Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
	Unbelievable episode with three phenomenal doctors.
	We talk about Bill Gates, we talk about the vaccine, we talk about everything you could possibly imagine.
	Super interesting, candid, really honest take.
	Dr. Flavio Catagiani from Brazil, Dr. Pierre Corey, and Dr. Ryan Cole.
	You guys are going to love this conversation.
	Two action items.
	Text this episode to your friends.
	If you have a friend that's a skeptic, a friend that's been burned by the vaccine, a friend that complains, or maybe a friend that just loves Anthony Fauci, text this episode to them right now.
	Get the word out.
	The only way we're going to get the word out is when you spread the message one-on-one, person to person.
	Turningpointusa, TPUSA.com.
	Do you want to support us?
	It's CharlieKirk.com/slash support.
	No advertisers.
	Zero advertisers episode.
	Thanks to you guys.
	Enjoy.
	Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
	Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
	I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
	Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
	I want to thank Charlie.
	He's an incredible guy.
	His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.
	Turning point USA.
	We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
	That's why we are here.
	Welcome to this episode of the Charlie Kirk Show, backed by Popular Demand, our white coat summit, where we take your questions.
	We just have an unfiltered conversation about everything you're not supposed to talk about: medical tyranny, vaccines, individual autonomy, hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin.
	And we have an amazing panel.
	I will start with someone who's been on our show before, Dr. Pierre Corey.
	Welcome back.
	Charlie, good to be here.
	Dr. Ryan Cole, I've been reading your writings and seeing your speeches for quite some time.
	Honor to have you.
	Great to be here.
	And Dr. Flavio.
	Yeah.
	And you could tell us how to pronounce your last name.
	Yeah, Cade Jani.
	It's an honor, truly.
	And I look forward to talking with you about many things.
	And you're from Brazil, is that right?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Terrific.
	Well, welcome.
	I'm so thrilled.
	So, Dr. Corey, I'll start with you.
	You know, you were on our program about a month ago.
	We were talking about a lot of different things.
Science Changed and New Things Known 00:09:06
	And it seems as if this topic has changed the way the media has changed the way they talk about this topic.
	And Dr. Wen went on CNN and said the science has changed.
	Has the science changed, Dr. Corey?
	Science was always there, Charlie.
	I mean, I don't know what they're doing.
	I mean, what specifically do you think has changed in the media?
	So that I could answer.
	Because from where I sit, I'm not, you know, I'm seeing a little bit around the mask.
	So I guess the masks thing is probably the most that's changed.
	Yeah, I suppose just you have like Nevada lifting their indoor mask mandate, right?
	You have certain areas that are backing off a little bit on vaccine mandates, but there definitely is a de-emphasis of media hysteria of the last two weeks, right?
	Maybe you're maybe you see it differently.
	And I'm not seeing I'm running fast.
	No, that's okay.
	I just, and I'm a media guy, right?
	So I kind of look at what they're focusing on and not.
	And when Dr. Wen goes on TV, she says, you know, science has changed.
	You know, there was a time for lockdowns, and now we know new things.
	And I'll give you another example that I think is really important: Fauci's been kind of MIA for the last couple of weeks.
	They've kind of just kind of put him out to pasture.
	You notice he's not doing those daily news hits.
	Maybe he's bad for ratings.
	Do you have any thoughts on this, Dr. Cole?
	I do, actually.
	The science hasn't changed.
	The science has been there all along.
	Their willingness to admit they were wrong because I think America is waking up, the world is waking up, the narrative cracked.
	When Omicron started burning through, people were getting, and I don't call them vaccine breakthroughs.
	I call them failures.
	The vaccine was a failure all along because it was never preventing really Delta and/or Omicron.
	So they had no choice but to roll back their thoughts and say, you know what?
	If history is going to smile on us at all, we better at least start shifting what we're telling to the people, what we're reporting to say, okay, lockdowns didn't work.
	The Johns Hopkins study.
	Well, or if you look at, you know, say, for example, you know, on brownstone.org, Paul Alexander has 400 articles that showed how anything and everything we did didn't stop the virus.
	So they're starting to see, admit to the data.
	They're starting to look at the data and go, okay.
	But Ryan, I don't know that they're admitting to it because I did see when the way she words it, it's almost like, you know, we're talking about like admitting they're wrong.
	It's not really that they're admitting they're wrong.
	It's they're saying like they were going to do this the whole time.
	Like now it's the time.
	Like we were waiting.
	That's part of the plan.
	It's part of the plan.
	Yeah, yeah.
	That's how I, that's how I heard her.
	I didn't hear any admission of that like mask are actually not working.
	It was just like, you know, it's time now to relax the restrictions.
	The next challenge.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And, you know, when you bring up when, I stuck together.
	No, I agree.
	And she's been given such a disproportionate platform for being wrong about everything.
	How do you see it, Dr. Flavio?
	Oh, goodness.
	First of all, I think the story gets harder and harder to admit everything that has been going on, actually.
	So it's never been about science.
	So forget the word science for the last two years.
	Okay.
	So it's just something that they named as science.
	Never forget that.
	Okay.
	So they're going to try to shape the history.
	Okay.
	So this is important.
	And it's not only an action that occurs in the U.S. Interestingly, the stronger a country is in order to be a purchaser of vaccines and high-cost drugs, the stronger is the war.
	So I can see that in Brazil, for example, we have the largest single purchaser, which is the national health system.
	So the war there is very strong as well.
	And you see a very orchestrated action between different, for example, 90% of the doctors who are trying to belittle us or are trying to suppress the discussion.
	Everything that tries to suppress the discussion is not actual science, first of all.
	Action science is the opposite.
	They're directly or indirectly sponsored by any of these or more than one of these pharmacies.
	Yes.
	And the pharmaceutical companies.
	And you made the great point that, you know, we're almost a pharma-controlled state at this point.
	I mean, that's, you know, would Flavio, and the thing is, we're not unique, right?
	So Dr. Caradani just said the biggest single purchaser of pharmaceutical products, vaccines in the world is Brazil, right?
	It's a large country.
	They have a national health system.
	They're the singlest one.
	So they're probably one of the biggest pharma states because it totally controls the health systems, the doctors.
	And so, you know, as a colleague, Flavi and I, we've been working together.
	He's one of our main clinical advisors in the FLCC.
	When we share our journeys through COVID, they're remarkably similar.
	I mean, the same hit pieces, the same attacks, the same ostracism, the same all of it.
	And it's the same denial of science, the same attempts at suppressing, distorting the science, especially around ivermectin and even all the other early treatment drugs.
	So in Brazil, there's a fact that's happening because of this pharma-controlled state, it is silently changing from presidential to parliamental.
	So what happened is our president tried to control the influence of the big pharma.
	What happened is the Supreme Court of Justice prohibited him to decide for the country.
	And similarly, the Senate and the upper and the lower houses, they started to make investigations over the president's actions by not buying the vaccines right away.
	They were offered with Terrible contract from Pfizer because he did not sign right away.
	He was persecuted.
	And I'm altogether.
	I'm among the 78 people that were formally accused of crime against humanity, and our names are in IA right now because they were not able to control.
	So, Dr. Cole, some would say that things are getting better around the world in terms of lower virus rates.
	Omicron might have had something to do with that.
	We played around with this idea of it being maybe a white hat kind of creation.
	I think that's an interesting thing to talk about.
	We did a pretty good job, I think, last time.
	But I want to ask: do you think we're out of the woods?
	Can life return to normal?
	Or do you think there's another wrinkle left?
	I think they're going to.
	Desperation is the last gasp of tyrants.
	The emergency is over.
	End of story.
	The virus is endemic.
	It goes back and forth between humans, animal species.
	You can never eradicate a virus that has multiple hosts ever.
	We're lucky in the sense that it mutated into a very innocuous form.
	It's a blessing to humanity.
	It's much milder.
	This virus will be with us forever.
	But if we look at the common cold coronaviruses that have been around for a long time, they probably started out more aggressively.
	All viruses eventually want to coexist and obtain benevolent mutations.
	So whether this was white hat, whether it was manipulated, the thing to keep in mind is anybody can make a virus anymore.
	You can make a virus in your garage with a CRISPR, sadly.
	And so whatever laboratories have bioweapons programs or research programs into gain of function, there are a lot of things that could happen in humanity.
	I don't want people to be afraid.
	I would rather people say, look, then let's continue to stop this from happening around the world.
	I think we're out of the woods with this virus.
	I mean, Omicron itself is more of a SARS, you know, COVID-22, not COVID-19.
	It's completely a different virus.
	This is why the vaccines have failed.
	It doesn't cover this.
	I think we're heading in the right direction.
	The virus will be with us.
	We always still have to keep that in mind.
	You're just starting a new fight.
	New fight is just.
	I want to ask you about that in a second, Dr. Corey.
	You know, Ryan's talking about the science of the virus and how it's going to go into the endemic.
	But, you know, I'm so interested, you know, I want to talk about the positive note, not yet about the U.S., but when you look at the increasing numbers of countries who are like, you know, when did like mask light roll back?
	You know, like, you don't have to mask when you shower.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Like, you know, you know, everyone's in the streets cheering, you know.
	But no, when you look at the number of countries that are full-on dropping vaccine passports, which essentially say no more mandates.
	Yes.
	You know, and so they're dropping mandates, they're dropping masks, they're dropping social distancing, they're going back to like normal life.
	Now, when that comes over to U.S. shores is not clear, right?
	There are still places that are mandating vaccines.
	I have someone I know close to my family who's a second-year radiology resident.
	And we're in February right now.
	He's a young man.
	He's healthy.
	Omicron is waning.
	And he's been told he has to leave his training program within one week if he does not get the vaccine.
	And never mind that that shot is more risk than benefit now.
	Yeah, beyond, I mean, we all know the science.
Dropping Vaccine Passports Globally 00:15:53
	There's no science behind it.
	Yeah.
	I want to ask about that, right?
	So you guys are three doctors.
	You know, you're really well respected.
	And to say that, and if I publish that on YouTube, I would get disinformation dings.
	Oh, of course.
	Right.
	And I know that from a communication standpoint.
	And we really played around with this last time, Dr. Corey, and I was really satisfied with your answers, at least from my perspective.
	But I'd love both your opinion.
	If the science is so conclusive, then why is it the people representing science just do the exact opposite, right?
	And that's where a lot of like normal suburban moms, they're like, there's no way there could be no science behind it, but you're saying that there is.
	If you want to know what's going on, follow the money.
	If you want to know the truth, look at who's being silenced.
	Immunology, virology, pathology.
	This is my background.
	This is what I study.
	This is what I do.
	And I listen to...
	I look at my colleagues that are just bought into the narrative.
	A lie is a limited idea entertained.
	And they have these limited ideas and they entertain them.
	And then the media puts forth that lie.
	You're allowed to have these limited ideas and that's all you can entertain.
	That's what a lie is.
	So I literally look at what's going on as a societal lie.
	And it is so easy psychologically to manipulate scientists with follow the money.
	Look at Brazil.
	Farm a bot.
	Look at our big journals.
	Farm a bot, like Dr. Corey talks about.
	We are in a horrible manipulation situation where true, you know, Galileo was right.
	It's Room in the Tower.
	So many.
	Copernicus was right before him.
	Yeah.
	So so many scientists over the years.
	Heliocentric theory of medicine.
	It's not that we weren't right.
	It's just that it was counter narrative to what the bigger entities wanted to accomplish.
	I suppose the counter argument is like, okay, that was like scholasticism with the Catholic Church.
	And now this is like scientists that are supposed to.
	Yeah, they're supposed to be like steeped in the method.
	This is instead of Deus Machina, this is Deus Vaccina.
	But I guess it's just for someone who isn't a doctor, I look, and this is something that, you know, we talked about last time, but I want to just dive into this because it's so interesting.
	We're in quote-unquote modernity, right?
	Where we have Twitter and we can have FaceTime audio, FaceTime calls with our family members in Sydney when they're locked down, and we're supposed to be advancing, right?
	That's the promise of the technological elite, right?
	That somehow we're marching towards some sort of perfection, which we obviously know is a bunch of lies, right?
	We're going backwards.
	Yeah, no, of course.
	It's a total regression trend.
	But at least to kind of most people, they think there's no way that the scientists would just put aside the scientific method and buy into something that is purely profit or pathological focused.
	So medical doctors are being trained to be replaced by apps.
	It's very easy.
	So dive into that.
	So you're not allowed to do anything outside the flowchart, okay?
	The obligatory flowchart.
	That became obligatory.
	It didn't used to be.
	It used to be doctors.
	Now you cannot evaluate the patient and prescribe according to the patient's peculiarities and the clinical aspects and the severity.
	You cannot have your own medical judgment anymore.
	You're not allowed.
	So it's easy.
	Just in a couple of years, we're going to all be replaced by apps.
	That's dogma, though, isn't it?
	I mean, that's not...
	This is Dr. Amerling's article.
	One of our colleagues, he was the former president of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons.
	There's a fantastic article out there talking about evidence-based medicine.
	So it's this EVM movement where it's everything is a cookbook and a recipe, And it takes away the individuality of the patient in the doctor-patient relationship.
	And to Flavio's point, Dr. Flavio is absolutely right.
	It's here's your algorithm, here is your protocol, and it negates the fact that there are 7 billion different people.
	Formulaic.
	They're trying to make it formulaic.
	Formulaic.
	So you can just have you walk into a robot box at one of the big pharmacies and it's like put in your symptoms.
	Here is your drug.
	That is all you get.
	And this is very convenient because the pathophysiology behind the COVID and COVID vaccines is so complex and so unique for each person that this evidence is the excessive use, the abuse of the wrong principles of the evidence-based medicine would be very convenient to preclude us from finding correlations with the upcoming risks that we're going to see in the next couple of years.
	But I mean, if it's evidence-based medicine and you have a country like Israel that is definitely a modern country, not a third world country, and they just announced their fourth booster and their rates go up even further.
	And I don't want to dwell on this too much, but for just a normal person, I look at that and I say there's no way you can't be bought or corrupt or believing something that is just quite honestly mystical.
	I mean, it's like at war with the Enlightenment, right?
	It's not data.
	It's not science.
	There's some other force pushing it, right?
	And so we've talked about that in terms of the pharmaceutical products, or specifically with ivermectin and the pushing of these other products.
	You know, when you look at the, you know, I've said, you know, last time we were on, I talked about, just look at the history of the pharmaceutical industry.
	If you look at the history of the vaccine industry, I mean, they've been at this game a long time.
	I mean, when, you know, there's charts showing these rapidly declining rates of a number of diseases that we began a vaccination.
	All of those declines were on a particular slope well before the vaccine.
	Correct.
	When the vaccine entered, it did not alter the slope.
	It did not alter the slope.
	It went down.
	So it basically showed that many of the childhood vaccines that we're using, it's not from the vaccines.
	It's from good health, sanitation, sterilization, different wars.
	And so we've been actually convinced that vaccines have this overwhelming role in protecting health.
	And it's way, way overstated.
	And the vaccine industry has inserted a massive schedule of vaccines.
	And so, I mean, I don't want to go too much into the history, but you have to understand the power and how, you know, and I was having a conversation actually with Del Bigtree yesterday, and he made this really interesting point.
	If you're a pharmaceutical company, would you rather develop a drug for people who get sick with the disease, or would you rather develop a vaccine for everybody without the disease, right?
	Which is the bigger market?
	And so this vaccine industry is as rapacious and as relentless as those that develop the products.
	And they just don't stop.
	And they have these mechanisms.
	So when you ask about how Israel could be embarking on a fourth booster dose, when the data has been showing it's been failing, the most vaccinated country in the world off the charts.
	And now we're seeing, I think, pretty strong signals of antibody-dependent enhancements because you're seeing deaths rise now to a great extent, right?
	So those vaccines are now actually showing, and we've always known that the toxicity actually outweighed the efficacy.
	But now you're seeing not only toxicity from the vaccine, you're seeing it's causing worsening outcomes from the disease.
	And so when it's terrifying to think that, like I said, that knowing this, knowing that we're using, especially now, the absurdity of using a Wuhan strain vaccine against Omicron when it has negative efficacy against it, and this resident who's about to lose his training spot.
	I don't even, waking up every day and you see these things so grossly and absurdly divorced from any notion of the science or the data.
	Yeah, there's so many.
	I mean, it makes big tobacco look like angels.
	At least they curbed.
	They curb fair.
	Well, at least they curbed obesity, right?
	Everyone was smoking fat.
	Smoking is perhaps a protective factor for COVID-19.
	Yeah.
	Is that right?
	Well, nicotine is, and that's what's interesting.
	Nicotine, yeah.
	But at least I'm totally open-minded.
	You could have said French from several people.
	There was a French study on these showing this.
	And I think it was retracted for obvious reasons.
	But our study on live remoteing show the same.
	No, I believe it.
	And I mean, outside of the carcinogenins in smoking, it actually could have a lot of health benefits, such as not having the most fattest generation or country ever.
	Okay, so, but you brought up a point that really moved me last time we talked about how you said this was a trend happening in science before COVID.
	You tried to convince people of high-dose vitamin C. You couldn't shake people out of it.
	They didn't want to even talk about it.
	Dr. Cole, in your experience, do you think that COVID revealed a scientific community that was already kind of in this dogmatic position?
	Very much so.
	Very much so, because we, in medicine, we don't focus on what you're just bringing up.
	What about metabolic health?
	What about your vitamin D levels?
	I mean, I'm known vitamin D, vitamin D. Everybody hears me say that.
	Now all the studies are vindicating what I said, you know, way early in the pandemic.
	And they're like, oh, gosh, look, if you're not obese and your vitamin D levels are normal, your chances of succumbing to COVID or having severe COVID are almost zero.
	Oh, they recommended it now for COVID?
	There's some fantastic papers that have finally, they haven't recommended it.
	They still won't recommend it, but all the data and the science, to your point.
	And anything that is cheap and effective, like these guys have been focusing on, that you can do and manage your own health.
	A doctor's goal should always be to put him or herself out of practice.
	If you're doing your job right as a healer, then all your patients are well enough.
	They don't need a doctor.
	Yeah, rarely.
	This is where those of us that are in the political space, this makes a lot more sense than people that aren't, because we see this all the time, right?
	We see this in the war machine, right?
	I mean, they just can't help themselves and want to go to invade another country, right?
	They're not in the business of peace.
	I mean, peace is awful for Lockheed Martin, North of Brown.
	It's the same incentive structure, right?
	We have this really horrible concept that we have a health care system.
	We don't.
	We have a sick care system.
	I completely agree with that.
	We should be focusing on health and wellness.
	What has been the public health message?
	We have lost trust.
	We have no transparency in public health.
	And you look at all the pulpits in any country, in any state, in our nation.
	Where were the public health officials saying, here's what you can do for health and wellness?
	Missing.
	Missing in action.
	Absent.
	I have 3,000 patients treated, no deaths.
	3,000 patients treated, no deaths.
	Yeah.
	You personally.
	Personally.
	Yeah.
	And for hospitalizations only.
	But I have a bias.
	My patients, part of these patients were mine already before COVID-19, and they were well supplemented with vitamins.
	And then we have the same examples with other doctors in Brazil.
	All their patients never died.
	All of them well supplemented.
	Just one of the many coincidences.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And how countries that vaccinated more had a tougher time with that.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Did you, so, you know, on that, you know, I think we talked about it last time.
	I don't want to repeat it, but, you know, you brought it up, you know, this cookbook medicine, this obsession with guidelines and this move to standardization in medicine, right?
	Turning patients into cars on a factory assembly line.
	Literally, that's what I've likened to.
	And I was already in lots of pushback before COVID when my chiefs were starting to speak the language of standardization.
	They constantly were asking me to standardize the practices of the doctors in the ICU that I was running.
	And I didn't understand why.
	I mean, there's, you know, there's going to be a variety on how doctors treat some and there's normal distribution.
	Some are going to be high-functioning, some are going to be low.
	And I don't know that standardizing to the mean is the best.
	Can actually take away from some of the best doctors.
	I don't know that you can raise the lower, but this standardization is so inappropriate.
	And then we talked about it, it's hyper-accelerated to this that shocked me.
	Like the actions being taken in COVID.
	So suddenly these COVID therapeutics committees appeared and were constructed in every hospital.
	I was on one when COVID broke out.
	I was actually one of the leading clinicians on the COVID therapy committee.
	And we came up with our first protocol back in March 2020.
	We had some suggested medicines to be considered.
	Some doctors use them, some didn't.
	But since then, it's solidified into just like these regimented stuff from the NIH.
	And then they started removing options from formularies.
	So ivermectin is the most common.
	I don't know if that happened to you in the hospitals in Brazil.
	They literally will not fill ivermectin in the hospitals.
	And then did you follow the testimony that Ron Johnson's the other week and what Paul Marrick talked about, right?
	So in Paul's, now that was a little bit more of a personal in vendetta against Paul.
	It was really against us, the FLCC and our protocols, but they literally removed every single medicine that he'd been using effectively in our protocols.
	And he was left with, I mean, he doesn't use remdesivir.
	That's the one thing.
	He would never let a patient get remdesivir, but all he had was steroids.
	And every single one of his patients died.
	Coincidentally, when they removed these mad patients, these chip ones from their protocols in hospitals, it started the hospitalizations.
	Wow.
	It started worsening the hospitalization?
	Exactly.
	So when you get an ER and you do not get a prescription with some of these medications, very early in the beginning to May 2020, they used to prescribe some of these drugs.
	Their hospitalization rate was way below.
	Suddenly, coincidentally, when they stopped prescribing these medications, maybe because hospitals were too empty.
	So, Dr. Cole, I want to ask you, and that's amazing, by the way.
	Is it as simple as follow the money?
	Are there other components at play here, just like the cowardice of people to challenge big institutions?
	I think that's part of it.
	I mean, nobody wants to lose a job.
	Because we've had consolidation of a healthcare system since Obamacare, there aren't as many independents.
	And so you can't practice independently anymore.
	And to Dr. Corey's point, now you have these big systems protocols and you have administrators and politicians practicing medicine without a license.
	You have doctors, you know, in our age cohort with kids in college or the younger ones that come out of med school with too much student debt.
	It's phenomenal how many colleagues have reached out to all of us and said, you guys are right.
	I wish I could speak up.
	But they don't have the, they want to speak up.
	So I'm not going to criticize all my colleagues.
	There are some that are horrible, but there's so many in there that are like, I'm stuck in a system.
	I want to do what you guys are doing.
	I can't.
	So there are some that prescribe in the back of the paper, in the ER.
	So, you know, the other things besides, you know, so what are the other forces besides money?
	Because I've thought about it, because I have seen a lot of stuff happening that's not, it's not pharma paying someone off to do something.
	That's right.
	There's behaviors going on that, so like, so for instance, one of them, the inability to admit you're wrong, right?
	That's one thing that I'm seeing now.
	Like the propagation of these policies, it's not pharma pushing them, right?
	They've long divorced from the science, but and people, so that combined with people like to make rules.
	I've noticed people really like to make rules and they like to enforce rules.
	Right.
	And hospitals are full of rules.
	They can't make enough rules.
	And so I see this constant rulemaking, rule enforcing, and then add in a dash of what I think is a psychology of the vaccinated and those who've been propagating those policies, which is I think there's some amount of denial, remorse, regret, unease.
	Those who have succumbed to vaccination, who've volunteered to get the vaccine, or actually no one's volunteered.
	Everyone's going to coerced.
Hospital Data Shows Vaccinated Dying More 00:14:49
	They might have made a mistake.
	And I think to admit that mistake, they're unable to, because I think they would have to admit to themselves that they did something bad to themselves.
	And so for them, it's almost like they double down in making sure everyone else.
	They did it.
	It's a coping issue.
	And that's a better way of summarizing it.
	Absolutely.
	It's a psychology of coping, and that's adding fuel to the source.
	And that's not pharma money.
	That's just like other stuff that's called human psychology.
	Because doctors tend to, I mean, in the profession, there's ego a lot because you worked a lot of years to achieve what you've achieved.
	And MD to some of them means minor deity instead of make a difference.
	And so that's the problem.
	It is hard to say, gosh, I was wrong.
	But some of the best doctors are the ones that are open-minded.
	Look at what he's accomplished with all his research studies.
	Look at how many lives he's saved.
	And to say, gosh, I'm going to look at it.
	If it works, cool.
	If it doesn't, I'm humble enough to say, gosh, that didn't work.
	I will shift gears.
	And we don't see that.
	That's the real science.
	The real scientist admits and changed when data comes out.
	I did not believe in undertreatments in the beginning.
	So we started an observational study.
	Data was so overwhelmingly for the benefits for treatments that I changed my mind.
	But because of the data, unbiased data though.
	So we need to remember.
	So for being here, you need to have three points.
	Integrity, a little bit of intelligence, and braveness.
	Without any of these three, you're not able to be sitting here and talking to you right now.
	Yeah, otherwise you're just, I mean, you're, like you said, a glorified chart operator, right?
	I mean, that's based, like, I'm just going to kind of put you along, you know, if this, then that.
	If that, then this.
	But I know personally, and I'm not a doctor, but the people that have come to me for advice, because they live in Massachusetts, they can't find a doctor that will prescribe them stuff.
	Like, what do I do?
	I say, okay, well, Dr. Cole and Dr. Corey say, you know, melatonin and a vitamin D booster shot, maybe baby aspirin, get your hands on some prednisone, azithromycin, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine probably can't hurt.
	And they're like, oh, yeah, now I'm better.
	I mean, it's like, it's at some point, you have to have prudence as a doctor, right?
	Yeah, that's so what you, I'd like what you just said, because one story that I forget to tell, especially when I started spewing in the ivermectin data, is, you know, when I finished my review paper and I was so overwhelmed with the positivity from in vitro, and vivo, animal, case studies, reports, all of that, right?
	I actually hadn't treated a patient yet.
	And I was so overwhelmed with data.
	And my first patient I ever treated, it was a woman who had COVID and she was still having fevers and a resting heart rate of about 110, 120, almost two weeks into her illness and reached out, got her doctor actually to prescribe the ivermectin.
	And she told me she felt very flush that night.
	And the morning she woke up and her heart rate was 80 and she had no more fevers.
	Now, was that the night that she was going to get better anyway, Charlie?
	Or it might have had some, but you see this.
	I only have 500 stories like that.
	And that's where it's like, it's really hard to talk about this.
	And they say my first patient, I could tell that it had a profound clinical.
	They say it's a psychological placebo.
	They said that we'll recover anyway, but the speed of recovery makes a difference.
	Yeah, so someone came to me, some science person who was.
	And you're not, the reason why I told the story is you're not a doctor.
	You don't have to be a doctor.
	No, I see that.
	It's also just like it's very simple Aristotelian logic, right?
	Which is like, what is the end I want?
	And then what are the things that are in front of me that I have to analyze and process to get to the end that I want?
	It's a teleological question, right?
	Like, know what you want, which is someone not to die.
	Yeah.
	Not to try to not get sued or whatever, right?
	Like, so I observe, I make the hypothesis, I do the experiment.
	I confirm or deny and repeat.
	So you've been doing experiments, Charlie.
	Yeah, like I haven't prescribed anything, but I am proud to say, and I will own this, that people that were not doing well, thanks to all of your guys' advice and your network have saved lives.
	And I was a communicator and a connector to that stuff.
	I have people coming.
	They're like, Charlie, you're going to get in trouble for this.
	I'm like, if I get in trouble for connecting people with ivermectin, like put me in front of a jury.
	Yes, connecting them with the information that incredible doctors have put out.
	And it saved their life.
	Today, the most precise way to evaluate whether a drug works or not for COVID is whether it is being attacked.
	Yes.
	If it's under attack, it's effective.
	Yeah.
	I believe that.
	Unfortunately, it's not convincing to everybody because they think the opposite.
	Some people.
	I think that's a closing window.
	So I want to ask you about something that I went on Tucker Carlson's show to talk about.
	It really caught my eye, and we haven't discussed this at length.
	I don't think we talked about this at all.
	Maybe we did.
	You know, we did talk about this a little bit, but now it's become a bigger story, which is Sam Davidson, who's the CEO of an insurance company in Indiana, $100 billion insurance company.
	I wrote this piece and it kind of went viral.
	I wasn't the first one to cover it, but I got it kind of into some of the main bloodstream.
	Tucker and I did a segment on it.
	It got smeared in every possible direction.
	And just for everyone listening, it's that between ages 18 to 64, he and his actuaries in the life insurance industry are saying they have seen a 40% increase in death, and it's not because of COVID.
	I went on Tucker's program and I said, look, it could be deaths of isolation, suicide, alcoholism, drug addiction.
	We also decided to do a mass inoculation strategy.
	We don't know if that had anything.
	The fact I just said that, I had the Pfizer artillery after me this morning.
	Wait, Charlie, I don't know if you saw.
	So there's an investigative journalist who's done a lot of work around early treatment in Ivermectin.
	Her name is Mary Beth Pfeiffer.
	She wrote, she actually, after that news piece came out, where the interview with the CEO of a life insurance company saying that they've a 10% rise in that age group's mortality would be historic.
	And 40% is catastrophic.
	And they're literally paying out claims to a degree they've never had that increase.
	But here's the thing: Mary Beth Pfeiffer wrote to that CEO, to the company, for follow-up questions and data.
	They answered within an hour, which is really strange.
	So we're used to data opaqueness, right?
	Everyone's burying misleading, distorted data.
	And they were like, here you go.
	And you know what?
	They sent her.
	They sent her a CDC graph.
	I don't know if we talked about this, but the graph showed the mortality rate in that age group from 2019, which was flat.
	It was just consistent throughout the year.
	2020, there was a little bump and then it flattened.
	And then 2021 started flat.
	And exactly right around the end of quarter one, it started on this 30% rise and it's continuing to work.
	So when you say, right, because I've seen articles, I saw some people, you know, they gave about 18 different reasons why those deaths are occurring, right?
	And like you said, isolation, drug abuse, you could say all of that.
	But did drug abuse and isolation start at the end of quarter one of 2021?
	I mean, you look at that and it's chilling.
	There's only one thing that rolled out at the end of the first quarter of 21 and started to hit significant amounts of the population.
	And so you're literally, it's very hard to argue that that's not a toxic and fatal effect of the vaccines.
	And we know, we work with researchers.
	Steve Kurtz vaccine safety.
	Of epidemiologist analysts who have been calculating for months what the deaths associated with vaccines are.
	And they've been saying, and I don't know where we're up to now.
	I mean, when I was reading the papers a couple of months ago, it was 150 to 200,000, right?
	And these are young people, 18 to 64.
	And when I get a call from a small town and a family saying, our nine-year-old got the shot, our nine-year-old is now dead.
	Nine-year-olds don't die.
	In my same town, a 22-year-old healthy wrestler just died.
	You know, anecdotal, sure, correlation is not causation is what you'll hear.
	But as a pathologist, when I get families saying, will you please look at this autopsy tissue from my loved one?
	And when you see the age range of these individuals, you just go, especially when the mandates hit quarter three, quarter four with that insurance data, that's when that big uptake hits.
	So, but however, we're going to have a huge barrier.
	So the way the analysis of the data and science is being formatted, is being formatted to avoid any sort of demonstration of causation.
	So associations will never be causation.
	They're going to blame on anything but the vaccines.
	How would they do the data to show that?
	Oh, they could explain by anything.
	Just different explanations.
	They could just...
	No, no, I know, but if they were to do it honestly, how would they present it?
	Like, do you see what I'm saying?
	Like, oh, coexistent phenomenals, for example.
	It's the memes I was just showing you.
	Would the CDC then publish these many people who died were also vaccinated?
	Like, would that be a helpful data point?
	Yeah, but, for example, do you have some data in Brazil?
	The hospitals are releasing the data from 90% are fully vaccinated from people who are dying currently.
	And there's one data coming from each hospital alone and a completely different data when it comes all together.
	So data is being fabricated.
	Is that factored with age too, though?
	Because some people say, well, of course, the more vaccinated people are dying because they're all older.
	Not at all.
	Not in Brazil.
	I hear all this.
	The hospital level data is actually showing where we're seeing from some of the more transparent countries, more of the people dying in the hospital are vaccinated.
	But the aggregate data from the federal government is where it's obscuring that signal.
	Exactly.
	But if you look at like Dr. Pontasados out of Colombia that did the all-cause mortality study, and then was Neil Fenton out of the UK, you start looking at their data and go, well, gosh, the all-cause mortality is now higher.
	And then you get the propaganda from like BBC, breathing too many times can cause a heart attack.
	Cold weather causes a heart attack.
	Climate change causes a heart attack.
	And they're burying it in obscurity, trying to give you all these red herrings to not live.
	What I like, right?
	So all of this data chicanery and really just outright fraud, right?
	You know, the Department of Defense thing that's gone on, right?
	They're literally manipulating and hiding and distorting data to hide the truth, right?
	Because they need to vaccinate.
	But what I like about that life insurance story is follow the money.
	Who's now putting really accurate data?
	It's the guys losing money.
	Well, there's a deeper point to this, though.
	If what he is saying is true, and I believe it is, and if you guys believe it's true, you do realize insurance bonds are like way more stable than like treasuries.
	People buy insurance bonds all the time as safe havens.
	And so if insurance companies skew, I mean, you're talking about an economic collapse.
	And I'm not trying to scare people, but insurance bonds are super reliable.
	That's why they're talking right now.
	I mean, that's why these guys are coming out.
	They see that, I mean, you can't have that all-cause mortality of 18 to 60 years old continue to rise.
	They're paying out not only life insurance claims to a degree they never have historically.
	And that company's been around.
	100 billion.
	Yeah.
	Disability claims are skyrocketing.
	Explain why suddenly we're having an epidemic with disability.
	Because of the post-traumatic stress from the paper, two steps back.
	Yes.
	And simple questions that remained unanswered, like, why don't we have access to the database data sets?
	Why is this type of discussion being actively suppressed?
	Yes.
	So it's very simple to understand.
	Of course, there's been data hidden and will keep hidden in the next couple of years.
	We need to get prepared for what's about to come.
	We don't know.
	What do you think is about to come?
	A variety of diseases that used to be rare.
	It's not going to be so.
	Do you think caused by the vaccine?
	I cannot say that, but I can hypothesize through the extensive pathophysiology and changes in immunity.
	We're already seeing some, for example, I am seeing an epidemic of herpes ulster in my herpes.
	Hyperzoster.
	Shingles.
	Shingles.
	Shingles herpes.
	Yes, okay.
	And also the zoster.
	How do you call it herpesoster?
	We're seeing that in the states.
	Shingles?
	The shingles.
	We call it shingles.
	And people that are used to never had it before.
	You're also seeing like complicated upper tract infection caused by bacteria and hard to treat.
	Upper respiratory.
	Upper tract.
	Yeah.
	So you're seeing pneumonia being caused by bacteria that used to be seen only in immunocompromised patients.
	It's already being seen by now.
	And so Dr. Cole, when I even weigh in on this topic with our platform, again, I don't care.
	These people can find a life.
	I mean, the slander is impressive of what they're able to pull off, right?
	And there's like, it's a non-starter.
	Is this just another one of those things that we kind of talked about earlier where follow the money, you know?
	Never ascribe to malice that which can be described by ignorance or ascribed to ignorance.
	And so these people are ignorant.
	They don't know the science.
	My job is to explain what he's seeing.
	As a pathologist, the mechanisms, this shingles, this zoster, this immune suppression, fantastic papers on this, why it's happening.
	Paper out of Stanford, how long that spike is persisting in the human body now, in the lymph nodes, 60 days.
	They advertise it as you get a shot, it breaks down, you get a little protein, and it's gone.
	Nonsense.
	It's persisting a long time.
	It is suppressing the immune system.
	I see it in the laboratory.
	I see it in the data.
	And what happens when you suppress these little pattern receptors, these toll-like receptors?
	You can't keep viruses in check anymore.
	These bacteria Flavio is describing, you can't keep those in check.
	And we don't know for how long that immune system is suppressed.
	What else can't you keep in check, Ryan?
	Cancers.
	You can't keep cancers in check.
	Wildfire cancers.
	Certainly, I have three or four patients already with diagnosed acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, not caused by HIV, of course.
	All vaccine, all after vaccines.
	So they have absolutely low levels of lymphocytes, CD4, CDH, different types of population, subpopulations of lymphocytes.
	And they used to have normal levels because some of them have their levels prior to COVID.
	So let me ask you, can non-vaccinated people be damaged by other vaccinated people?
	Like there is a theory out there of shedding.
Shedding Theory and Hormonal Perturbances 00:08:50
	And again, I know very little about this.
	There was a good paper last week studying this.
	And there's just one subtle little line in.
	I can send you the paper.
	But it talks about how the cells involute and that spike comes off of them.
	And it talks about how it sloughs and sheds them.
	And it was a vaccine study.
	And the question is, the dose makes the poison in life.
	If I drink too much water, I'll die.
	So we're all constantly exposed to all sorts of pathogens all day long.
	So if you get a little spike, you've already had COVID, you're going to get a sniffle for a day, your body's going to clear it.
	But if you get a massive dose of it, that's a different story.
	And if you get COVID and recover, the amount of virus that you make and spike that you make is far less than those who are getting the shots and persistently making it in their body.
	And that was the Stanford study as well.
	And you just look at it and go, gosh, we're doing something synthetic with something we've never done on humanity before.
	We're accidentally calling it a vaccine, even though it doesn't prevent acquisition, transmission, disease, or death, and causes increased all-cause mortality.
	And we're calling that a vaccine.
	And we've acquiesced to that term.
	It's crazy.
	The shedding thing.
	So the other pieces, right?
	So there's that little mention that introduces the possibility that you could shed.
	No one's ever answered to me why in that original Pfizer study, page 67.
	Do you know about page 67, Charlie?
	Tell me about it.
	In page 67, they actually had an exclusion criteria to enter the trial is that you couldn't be, I think, your partner couldn't have been vaccinated.
	They literally didn't want to be in the same room.
	You couldn't make the same contact as someone vaccinated.
	So it basically was a clause which suggested that they had a concern about shedding.
	So that's two.
	I have now talked to, so then the third point I want to make is this.
	Probably the one of the most common side effects of the vaccines in women, right, is disturbances in menstruation.
	I hear it all the time.
	But for both vaccinated and unvaccinated.
	Well, so hold on, that's where I'm going, right?
	So off the charts, right?
	We know from the military data.
	And by the way, I'm just going to have to stop here and say I find it absolutely abhorrent that we have 120 academic medical centers in this country.
	You have 120 chairs of obstetrics, gynecology departments amongst those 120 academic medical centers who work for 120 deans.
	And I call this the silence of the deans.
	You're telling me that legions of obstetricians and gynecologists in this country aren't seeing their practices ravaged by these vaccines.
	Where are they?
	Why aren't they at this table?
	Why isn't there an OBGYN race?
	Maybe.
	But I think it's just, it's what Flavi was saying is just a lack of courage.
	But my point is this: I have had encounters now with quite a few people who've come to me with clear connection.
	Now, again, these are just anecdotes.
	These are clinical anecdotes.
	That's why I wanted to put out the theoretical reason, right?
	You're giving us some of the pathophysiology, but I'm seeing on the clinical level women who were not vaccinated went to an appointment to, like, I think one went to an acupuncturist who had recently vaccinated.
	And she told me, this is a number of women.
	Both of them said the reason why they were making this association is because their menstrual cycles had been so regular for so long.
	They said you could set a clock to it.
	Never really missed a day, never late, never nothing.
	And then both of them, not only either became amenorrheaic or irregular or heavy periods, or like they even talked about breast swelling, and they were convinced it was because of a close exposure to a vaccinated person.
	Yeah, and it could also be women sometimes get, they court without knowing it.
	The pheromone.
	That's right.
	They get on the same cycle.
	After 25 years of the same cycle, that's the counter argument they make.
	I'm just putting that out there.
	And we know in the sweat in Wuhan, they did a subway study in the sweat.
	You know, those infected were shedding spike protein in the sweat.
	So we know the spike can shed.
	There are vaccines that are self-spreading that we've used in animal populations, rabbit populations, trying to control fertility.
	So we have self-spreading vaccines.
	It's a thing already.
	I hope we were absolutely wrong, but this is the real scientific discussion.
	So what I'm impressed is the lack of studies on the endocrinological side of the COVID as a notch.
	Endocrinological side, right?
	There's no endocrinological side of the impacts, right?
	Yeah, exactly.
	So like hormonal perturbances.
	I am seeing my clinical practice every single day.
	And coincidentally, some do happen after the COVID itself, but some only happens after a vaccine.
	So it is happening a lot.
	And of course, I cannot mention causality, but it's the clinical observation.
	It was one of the bases that built the medical history.
	So we cannot avoid them.
	And this is, you know, going back to Dr. Corey's point about this Department of Defense data and the fraud and the cover-up, and heads are going to roll and people are going to...
	You got to explain what that is.
	Okay, so DME D-Med.
	So the Defense Military Epidemiology Database, one of the tightest databases in the world.
	You know, everybody complains about VARES is sketchy.
	You know, anyone can report to VARES, though you can go to prison for making a false VARES report.
	But D-Med, that's done by the physicians.
	And the Department of Defense wants to know, is there a bad signal any day to the troops?
	Is there a poison?
	Is there something in the mechanical hydraulic fluid causing an injury?
	Illness rampaging.
	Illness rampaging food.
	Everything.
	So wherever they are in the world, they want to have troop readiness.
	So this epidemiologic database, it's an epidemiology database that's updated every week or two.
	It's been updated now for six years once the codes change and the computer systems change.
	So it's either fraudulent one way or another.
	Here's the problem.
	And this was in Senator Johnson's hearing.
	Huge uptick.
	Cancers, pulmonary ambulance, heart attacks, infertility, testicular cancer.
	You name it.
	Anxiety, depression, suicide.
	Skyrocketing.
	And these were several whistleblowers that came forth with the data.
	They downloaded it.
	They have videos of what the database was.
	Here's the download.
	Well, what happened?
	And everything is up above your five years.
	Summer averages.
	2,500% higher.
	Yeah, and this is a healthy young population.
	This is the military.
	So to have this trickle five years and then boom with so many different conditions.
	Well, what happened last week?
	The system froze.
	And then all the data this next week changed.
	Oh, gosh, it's actually lower in some of these and similar.
	So either somebody is guilty of not keeping the database up for five years, and or they just changed it all.
	But this is a smoking felony gun.
	Well, here's the thing.
	So you have this absurd statistical anomaly, sort of like we were just talking about in life insurance data, right?
	So in a big Department of Defense database, you have a legion of illnesses and lots of cancers that are skyrocketing in the military.
	And suddenly this whistleblowers come out, and then the Department of Defense says, oh, yeah, it's a little glitch there.
	We didn't, the prior year's numbers are falsely low and they take offline.
	And so here's the thing, though.
	Here's the thing.
	I'm going to use a good analogy.
	So when I discovered that, when I knew this was a lab leak virus, is when someone finally told me that the fish market where the first case came out of was 300 yards from the actual only lab doing gain of function research on coronavirus.
	I was like, oh, that's done.
	It's from the lab.
	But here's this one.
	The whistleblowers come out, and then the following week, they say, oh, we just discovered this anomaly where these were falsely low.
	And so we're going to fix that now.
	So thank you, whistleblowers.
	And now they pull it offline, and now they admit that they found it.
	So they didn't notice these discrepancies before.
	They knew them.
	They just weren't talking about it.
	No one was coming out and saying they could see it in the data.
	And again, when we talk about all this data suppression, right, it comes back down to inconvenient science, right?
	So this is data inconvenient to the interests of this obsessive policy driven by the vaccination industry.
	And so they will bury, suppress, and distort any inconvenient data that's going to go against their narrative and against their goals.
	And the thing that's just shocking is how successful they've been at it.
Whistleblowers Admit Falsely Low Data 00:16:04
	I mean, you literally have most of this country, and I hope that's changing.
	I think your listeners, and we go on podcasts, I was on Dell Big Trees.
	He's got a big, big audience.
	I think those numbers who are waking up and realizing that they've been lied to are increasing.
	But I still say massive portions of this country still believe what they're hearing from the television stations and on the radio, and they're still hearing nonsense.
	They're still hearing mistruths and blatant lies and misrepresentations of the data.
	Yes.
	And you've talked about the Trusted News Initiative on your program before.
	You know what?
	Sort of.
	And go ahead.
	Okay.
	We've danced around with it a little bit.
	2019, BBC, AP, CBC Canada, India, European News Service, Microsoft, Facebook, LinkedIn.
	Agents France-Prés.
	That's my favorite for Gates.
	If you look at all these, you know, if you look up TNI, and it was for election integrity that they got together and said, you know, for election integrity around the world and the U.S., whatever, we're going to get together and make sure that only the truth is going to be reported.
	Well, when they finished whatever happened in 2019, they said, okay, well, gosh, we are going to make sure that nothing is spoken against vaccines and nothing is spoken against what the CDC or WHO has said.
	So for the last almost two years, you have had collusion, almost a RICO-like violation, mob-like behavior of the media saying, we will report on this and this.
	Look it up.
	It's out there.
	They said, hey, look, we did it.
	We formed our coalition.
	We are the Trusted News Initiative.
	You will hear what we say.
	It's the Ministry of Truth from 1984.
	Yes.
	Well, it's very similar to Operation Mockingbird, which was never disassembled, by the way.
	Very much so.
	Which was revealed by the Church and Pike Committee from the American Intelligence Agency.
	And it's globally.
	The other observation, I was working on a talk the other day, and I have this new lecture that I've been giving over the last couple of weeks.
	Ryan's heard it.
	It's called the Disinformation Campaign Against Ivermectin.
	And it's just, it's not about the data on our maintenance.
	It's just about the disinformation.
	All of the attempts and tactics and the captured journals and researchers and all of that.
	And throughout, Bill Gates keeps showing up.
	You know, two clicks from any action.
	Two clicks from every action, you find Bill Gates.
	You find him funding the medical journals.
	And one of the things, one of the slides is I have a slide showing the hundreds of millions of dollars he gives to media companies.
	$392 million last year.
	And I thought to myself, I said, now this is interesting.
	A global philanthropist whose main interest is in vaccinating essentially the world and making that pretty much the sole intervention of global public health.
	Purportedly, that seems attractive to people.
	And that's, you know, he's a real, you know, he contributes to humanity in that regard.
	Why does he need to give hundreds of millions to media companies?
	How is someone who's devoted to public health, why are they giving hundreds of millions to media?
	Is it because media companies are losing money and they're hemorrhaging?
	He wants to make them viable?
	That's not true.
	Well, and I will say the thing about Bill Gates that's really brilliant.
	He's different than Klaus Schwab, who looks like Belfour from a James Bond.
	And different than Soros, who just looks like Palpatine from Star Wars.
	Gates, as kind of just like a figure, is affable and kind of clumsy.
	You know what I mean?
	He's like, oh, he's so smart.
	Yeah, he forgets to tie his shoes, right?
	Like, come on, that guy couldn't be behind anything Machiavellian, right?
	He's just a coder that didn't go to college and he's super rich and he must have my best interest at heart.
	And it's well known and it's well documented.
	After Gates almost got in a lot of trouble with the United States government back in the 90s and 2000 of automatically instoring Internet Explorer in our computers, he hired a publicist for tens of millions of dollars and he redid his entire image because he was a villain in the 90s.
	You guys remember?
	Like greedy and super aggressive Bill Gates is coming into the DOJ and telling people how to do things.
	And next thing you know, all of a sudden it's like, no, actually, he's kind of like, he's still a teenager at heart.
	And he rides his bike, you know, around Bellevue.
	And next thing you know, he's kind of like orchestrating the public health policy of the entire industrialized world.
	Don't trust his medical degree for some reason.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I mean, oh, wait, his medical degree.
	Oh, he doesn't have one.
	And you know, the other thing, the other thing is so, maybe part of that image change, you know, is he rebranded himself as a philanthropist because he's anything but, right?
	So that's exactly.
	Tess Laurie said this really powerfully almost a year ago.
	She said, you know, how does a philanthropist gain wealth in a global how is a public health philanthropist gain wealth in a global pandemic?
	We'd have to go back to isn't philanthropy when you give away money?
	Yeah, but if you look at philanthropy literally means love of people.
	Let's go back to the girl.
	Is that true?
	Okay.
	Philanthropy doesn't come, it's not shown.
	So what is worse is that all these people behind the scene are bulletproof for whatever happens in the future because they did it everything in a way that the contracts, the links, they will be bulletproof.
	So that's another point.
	So nobody will be blamed for what will happen.
	I want to kind of chew on this Bill Gates thing because I think it's really interesting.
	And he's impacted our life big time.
	He had a close relationship with Anthony Fauci.
	We know that.
	And Epstein.
	Another question.
	And Jeffrey Epstein, but he was only on the plane to try to get Epstein to change his internet browser.
	Oh, yes.
	Yeah.
	Oh, that's right.
	He went down to the island to make sure they were using Microsoft Cloud.
	Very completely.
	Because, you know, that those camera systems for all the underage girls.
	No way could AWS be doing that.
	It would be a real bad violation of Microsoft shareholder agreements.
	So, does he think he's doing good?
	I don't know what exactly.
	No, come on.
	I mean, but when he says, you know, look, vaccines are a great investment.
	That's a 20-to-one ROI in a talk a couple years ago.
	And then you look at everything that he's invested in that makes money.
	And then he buys the media's good graces.
	No.
	He's a representative of the vaccine industry.
	He represents their interests.
	So he increases their market throughout the world.
	He has perverted and corrupted literally public health systems throughout Africa.
	So he owns the WHO.
	Can you talk about that?
	Yeah.
	So from Bobby Kennedy's book, he details it really well.
	Is that he gives so much money to the vaccine arm of public health ministries in Africa?
	It's like Senegal, for example.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's so much about the vaccine.
	So he gives it all magnetic.
	Congo.
	Senegal uses hydroxychloroquine.
	I picked the country out of Miller.
	Côte d'Doire, okay?
	Yeah, there you go.
	The Ivory Coast.
	I don't know.
	So, so, you know, he corrupts, like, he basically, you know, the standard, like the epidemiologists and the public health officials down there, they recognize for Africa that critical things for public health is like water sanitation, food, just nutrition and water, maybe some basic medicines.
	Those are like the foundation of preserving some amount of public health.
	And all of a sudden, all these vaccines and vaccine money comes in.
	And what happened, there's these absurd examples where the pay for a vaccination nurse to promote vaccines and give vaccines is double to triple what the other public health nurses get.
	So he's literally upsetting and disturbing the balance.
	And there are these poor, well-meaning public health officials who are saying like everybody's dying because all the money is going to vaccines and they don't have enough for those standard much more positive.
	So that's just on a micro level.
	That was well described.
	But the money that he gives, so then the other thing that he does, and he did this in this pandemic, so he's essentially a representative of vaccination industry, well invested in almost all the vaccine companies.
	Personally.
	And or his fund, whatever.
	Which how you can have a foundation that also is in your, I don't understand that.
	I mean, I know nonprofit law like really well and like separation of things.
	It's how it's so interconnected.
	Oh, yeah.
	And it's only showing you a lot of the same thing.
	You're saying that you're disturbed, Charlie, by someone who has a huge foundation with hundreds of billions of dollars and is vested in pharmaceutical companies.
	And then privately, you're also invested in pharmaceuticals.
	And this furthers the global demand and market and uptake of vaccines.
	And then you also, is that a problem?
	I can't imagine that he's trying to push it just for the benevolence of the world, right?
	No transparency theories can compete with reality, right?
	So just one example of the whole, if you think there's not a plan out there, why didn't they study the medications in 2020, these medications that came out, like Pox Lovid and Monopirovir?
	Why weren't they studied before?
	They needed the vaccines before because you couldn't have any treatments as an alternative for an EUA.
	Exactly.
	I disagree slightly because that's if they played by the rules, Flavio.
	They make the rules.
	So like they can have that.
	You can have that in a little clause.
	No, yeah, exactly.
	And I used to believe that too, is that they were actually trying to actually, you know, work their way around a rule when they write the rules.
	They could just make up a new rule.
	So but the other thing, you know, going back to Gates.
	For example, yeah, they changed the definition of vaccine.
	Yeah, exactly.
	But the other thing about Gates is that apparently his personal philosophy and one of the central tenets of what he does for the vaccine industry is he ensures that their intellectual property is protected.
	So if you remember going back to the early part when the vaccines first started to roll out, right?
	There was a worldwide clamor for these vaccines.
	And all of these low-income countries wanted the recipe.
	To license.
	This is what we all thought, like, hey, we got a solution here.
	We can get this thing done with vaccines, right?
	And I was one of them.
	I was hopeful at the beginning that we had a safe vaccine that could get it done.
	So the entire world wanted this.
	And guess who fought, right?
	This is well documented.
	Guess who fought that Kumbaya, you know, like, hey, let's just share the recipe and all the countries can start making the vaccines and everyone get vaccinated.
	Is that how it worked out?
	Nope.
	And he was the main proponent arguing at the WHO, arguing against this through Gavi, through the alliance.
	And so when you talk about some of his behaviors around here, I mean, they are really disturbing.
	They're downright terrifying.
	And I think he is, you know, when we talk about all the stuff that's going on, the investments in the media, the investments in the international agency, the control over the vaccine, the vaccine coalitions and his protection against the intellectual property.
	I mean, this does not sound benign.
	This does not sound like someone whose interests are public health.
	I don't know if you guys have access here in the US, but another argument you can use is you have a good vaccine, regardless of their political regimen in Cuba.
	They have the Soberona Q that works at least as well as the other vaccines, at least their official data.
	For COVID or COVID, yeah.
	They have international observations and nothing to do with Cuba regimen, okay?
	Different.
	But the point is that even with the great data they have.
	I mean, they do have some good data.
	They're not able to convince the World Health Organization to include them as vaccines.
	And they have more data than other vaccines that are out there.
	They're not even recognized as the WHO doesn't recognize that vaccine.
	So this is a separate vaccine Cuba developed?
	Yes.
	And nobody knows about it.
	And actually, it's the only country.
	Is it mRNA based?
	No, no.
	No, no.
	It's an activated virus.
	So they tried five types, and they had issues in the production.
	And now they started, when they achieved 60% of the population vaccinated, the number of cases just dropped almost to zero.
	I completely against their regimen, okay?
	You mean their regime?
	The regime.
	I'm sorry.
	Sorry, English.
	You know, I understand.
	No, no, it's okay.
	Yeah, yeah.
	The Castros are evil.
	But is this the same case with this data?
	Or is this?
	No, no, it's different.
	Russia is put NIC.
	And not even Russians are using it.
	Okay.
	So I'm supposed to believe that Cuba that can't even make a car, they made a vaccine that works.
	Like I've defined that really well.
	Or they have access.
	Or like the Iranians gave it to them or something.
	I mean, like.
	Here's my problem with.
	And again, you know, I'm a domestic terrorist, according to DHS now for speaking science.
	Yeah, can we talk about this?
	Yeah, we need to talk about this.
	Yeah, thank you.
	But the problem is in the coronavirus family, here's me being a geeky nerdy pathologist, virologist, immunologist.
	Coronaviruses mutate constantly.
	We've heard variant, variant, variant, variant.
	So we make a vaccine.
	We saw how maybe it helped at first and then became ineffective.
	And then ineffective.
	Ineffect, we're playing whack-a-mole with a vaccine and a virus that will always mutate ahead of it.
	So this is where we're blessed with Omicron because now it's more benign, technically.
	You look at HIV as a virus.
	For 40 years, they've been trying to make a vaccine against HIV.
	It also has a spike protein, different one, but why isn't there a vaccine for that?
	Because it mutates.
	There are certain families of viruses.
	You may have some effect at first, but when they mutate, you have made an immune response and an antibody to Dr. Corey's point and the data showing that now if you've got the shots, you get COVID at a higher rate, especially like the Denmark data, the Israel data.
	Alberta.
	There is wisdom in science that says there are certain things that are prudent and there are certain things that are imprudent.
	And what we did from day one, if we look at the history of coronavirus vaccinology, SARS-CoV-1 MERS, et cetera, why don't we have a vaccine to the common colds, all the different families?
	Because they always mutate.
	We made a mistake.
	The chief immunologist of Israel a week or two ago said, okay, mistakes were made.
	Passports are a bad idea.
	The vaccines aren't working.
	But did that make mainstream news around the world?
	No, he got maligned for saying it.
	And he's their chief immunologist vaccinologist.
	I think that's a really remarkable event, right?
	That you had the chief immunologist in the country of Israel.
	Yeah, Pfizer finally admits that it is a complete failure.
	And this vaccine discussion, you know, as disturbing as it is, you know, Ryan brings up the point.
	He brought up the point that I thought about when they rolled out the vaccines.
	I was like, really?
	We're going to vaccinate a coronavirus?
	That's number one.
	Look how full circle we came.
	So the entire premise was on shaky science, right?
	And then to go even more full circle, when you look at the prior coronavirus vaccines, do you know how and why they failed and were most disturbing?
	From antibody-dependent enhancement.
	The people who are getting vaccinated.
	I'm trying to translate that.
	That means that people get their ability to fight future viruses, their whole immune system gets weaker.
	If they get vaccinated first, if they get vaccinated first, it's a very complex immune phenomenon.
	And if you ask him, he's going to go a half hour and he's going to lose weight.
	Well, I'm just trying to translate it to those of us that.
	Basically, what happens is when you develop the antibodies to the vaccine and then later get the illness, there's this very complex interplay between the immune system and the antibody.
	It actually triggers this robust, overwhelming response, and you actually die at a higher rate if you've received the vaccines before you get the illness.
Antibody Dependent Enhancement Explained 00:14:22
	Okay.
	I'm seeing this anecdote.
	And so when I say coming full circle, one of the reasons why that immunologist said, you know, cried mercy, you know, enough.
	We got to stop here is I believe that's occurring in Israel.
	And so that fear and that faulty premise just from the get-go, going after a coronavirus vaccine, going after a coronavirus with a vaccine and the risk associated and the history of the failures with ADE, guess where we are now?
	Two years later.
	And when you're looking at Israel, those deaths are rocketing.
	And so, and with Omicron, right?
	Let's be clear here.
	The deaths are rocketing.
	This is a kitten compared to a tiger, a virus.
	This isn't Delta that's killing them.
	You're getting a milder virus that's killing people.
	So in Brazil, you're having, like, we had the most lethal variant called B1 or Gamma.
	And right now, we have this Omicron going on, and we have almost a third of the number of deaths that we used to have a year ago.
	So it's weird that now that we have the fully vaccinated population, Brazil's almost fully vaccinated.
	Really?
	Flavio, though, his listeners, Charlie, has to understand.
	I don't know if you know, because he's been living and breathing it.
	The gamma variant in Brazil was a super variant as far as death.
	Why did it come?
	I like his theory.
	Yeah, because it was too little, too aggressive, it did not spread.
	Just like it's less contagious than Delta, first point.
	But it's much more violent and much more violent.
	But more violent and more deadly.
	Is that strain phased itself out?
	Exactly.
	Just like Ebola virus.
	Does it have a life cycle left?
	No, it's eradicated.
	But it's easy.
	Any other virus competing with gamma won't, just like what happened with Delta.
	So Delta for us was a relief in the number of deaths.
	But right now in Omicron, we're unexpectedly seeing a rise in the number of deaths in an almost fully vaccinated population.
	You're seeing a third of gamma, which was one of the most deadly.
	You guys were seeing untreated, I think, was 50% mortality.
	Exactly.
	Right?
	Untreated was 50% mortality.
	That's it.
	And, you know, and that's the thing.
	This is probably the time because I want to say a couple of things about Dr. Katagiani and how we came across him and his work.
	Yeah, that's true.
	He has just this incredible CV of in COVID.
	Not only, and I like how he started out by saying he didn't actually think these repurposed early treatment drugs worked.
	He looked at the data, he did an observational trial.
	It's a really, really cool trial, and it's astounding what he found.
	It was just this dramatic response.
	Anyone who got early treatment did really, really well.
	Anyone who didn't did really, really poorly.
	And he knew that from early on.
	And then he started doing research missions in the Amazonas during Gamma, and he started building a protocol.
	It's very funny because when we started to talk, our protocols were different but the same.
	They were combination therapies.
	We were using different, trying to go after the same pathophysiological medicinisms.
	But one of his great contributions was the identification of sort of the contribution of sex hormones to outcomes.
	So testosterone, particularly the androgens.
	It was noticed from early on in like, I think, April of 2020, there's a report.
	I can't remember what country, but they noticed for it was in Spain, right?
	Yeah, they noticed that almost all the men on the ventilators in ISU were all bald.
	And bald is angiogenic alopecia.
	It's a higher, those are generally men with higher levels of the more active form of testosterone.
	So they noticed this odd pattern that everyone on the vents dying was bald.
	And so Dr. Katagiani and his group has numbers of papers and trials showing that if you manipulate the level of testosterone and you block it, it led to much greater outcomes.
	And that was kind of like his trick to beat Gamma.
	And Gamma was killing everybody.
	And he started using very, very powerful androgen blockers.
	And he did this testosterone block.
	Testosterone blocks.
	Short term therapy.
	Short term.
	Short term therapy.
	Short term.
	And so never heard that.
	His trial, though, so the day that his trial got, and I didn't know his, I just knew, you know, I had known of him because I knew he was a researcher on ivermectin.
	And I was working with Andrew Hill.
	Andrew Hill talked about you.
	So I knew of you through those circles.
	But then, you know, we heard about this drug called proxalutamide, which is this really potent drug that controls prostate cancer.
	You know, one of the treatments for prostate cancer is hormone suppression, right?
	Yes.
	Testosterone drives.
	So it's a very powerful one.
	And Dr. Katagiani went to the company and said he would trial it.
	And what I really like when you talk about integrity, intelligence, and bravery, from the beginning, Dr. Katagiani, when he did that research for that company, this is a novel agent, high potency.
	Obviously, the company would love to have it be effective in COVID and make big time money.
	He made an agreement that they would have to sell it for cheap if he found efficacy.
	I have this paper.
	There are such ethical men left, right?
	And the paper is astounding.
	It's in the Gamma Varin Bozilla double-blind multicenter placebo-controlled randomized control trial, large.
	And they showed that in the control group, it was 49% mortality.
	And that was even with some treatments in the control group.
	And then you got it down, they got it down to about 11%.
	This is against GAM with a very powerful term.
	And they couldn't say that we did it artificially because the mortality rate in the states where we conducted the trial during that period was above 50% or in hospital mortality.
	Wow.
	Yeah.
	And that is an incredible mortality.
	Above 50% mortality.
	And did you hear about this in the world media, how successful this trial was?
	No.
	No.
	I mean, there's a coincidence there.
	There's the same drug class calls enzalodomide because the drug, the therapy would cost $11.
	And the same drug class calls enzalodomide that Pfizer has would cost like $5,000 only.
	Competitive competitor.
	And there's another point.
	Pfizer cannot use it for COVID.
	They can only use it.
	It's for a company called Australis.
	And Pfizer can only use it for prostate cancer.
	So they tried to undermine the drug.
	So they faked a trial in Sweden that we discovered.
	Our letter to the editor was accepted to publish.
	They faked it data.
	They faked a trial in order to destroy the therapy.
	This is what they did.
	And it's, you know, when.
	There's a lot of different factors.
	Just another question.
	When we were at war with the Axis powers, there was an urgency where if anyone had a good idea to make something new or deadly, like present it.
	And there were a lot of entrepreneurs that were like pitching stuff to the U.S. government, right?
	So when we had this kind of national fabric social contract back in 1941 and 42, where it's like, yeah, I can convert my, you know, I don't know, my sewing factory to go make uniforms.
	Or, you know, I think this could be really effective.
	And there was almost, there was such an open-mindedness by the U.S. government in the 1940s, like we don't want to get invaded by Japan or bombed by the Nazis.
	You would think, and I just, it reminded me, because I've done a lot of study about that period of time in the business sector and how they were immediately on board to fight the Axis.
	It's the opposite.
	You would think that when you have a bunch of people dying, you'd be open-minded to every possible treatment.
	You'd go out.
	You'd be like, oh, yeah, that could help us storm the beach and that could help us, you know, and that's where you get innovations.
	But instead, it's been the exact opposite, right?
	And to your historical analogy, Patton would say, look, if everybody's thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking alike.
	That's right.
	He wanted people coming with alternate ideas.
	How are you going to win the campaign?
	How are you going to get through this battle?
	Could you imagine Pfizer running the World War II implementation?
	So the delusional issue is only though.
	And the Pfizer is actively searching tomorrow and we'll present some data on how Pfizer is actively attacking those who are treating their plans.
	I'm a very skeptical person.
	So for me to say this, I'm extremely aware of that.
	You mean like using black using black propaganda and stuff like that?
	It's more complex.
	The number of ways they used in order to destroy what is threatening there is huge.
	So I want to talk about that.
	On your point, you're just bringing back memories of my former self.
	Earlier on the pandemic, I literally, I was like, you know, when I talk about when I finished my review paper on ivermectin and I posted on a preprint streamer, I was like literally trembling because I really thought we could end the pandemic with this drug.
	And I envisioned like a Marshall process.
	Like the government just coming in, you know, mass producing, co-opting factories, you know, my dreams of, you know, every cupboard having ivermectin, and, you know, like, that's where I was.
	You mean like they did in Utah Pardee?
	And now I'm Utah Pardash.
	Or there was a province in Brazil that did a mass ivermectin campaign.
	His study.
	That was his study.
	That was your study.
	Okay, well, we're all together then.
	But there are some other stories in Brazil, in some cities, like in the Amazon during this outbreak.
	I have to say, it's a very cool story.
	Tell the story.
	So we were conducting the study this Amazon.
	So all the cities were over.
	The Amazon.
	Yeah, the Amazon.
	There's a state called Amazona, which is right in the middle of the Amazon rainforest.
	It's not where I live.
	And does anyone live there?
	Or people live there?
	In the middle of the Amazon?
	Yeah, we do.
	They're not terrorism.
	I drink a lot of tonic.
	Oh, my goodness.
	We did my mosquitoes for 20 seconds.
	Yeah, by the way, we used hydroxychloroquine prophylaxically for many years to go on.
	I'm sure.
	Everyone was familiarized with your breast diseases.
	I mean, yeah, anyway.
	So what terrifies me is that we are familiarized with tropical diseases and the spreading use of hydroxychloroquine, for example.
	Now it became dangerous.
	Well, anyway, so we were there and every city we were going and during gamma, this is during gamma.
	There was this gamma highly lethal.
	By the way, if the U.S. had gamma inside here, they calculated that it would have right by now more than 1.5 million deaths.
	Okay?
	I will show this tomorrow.
	But it still could come or no, that's probably out of the cards.
	No, no, it's out of the cards because it's too strong.
	So it's burned out.
	We went to all the cities were like having dozens of deaths per day.
	And then we arrived to the city.
	And then the health secretary from the city with the city mayor followed us.
	And then we went to the hospital and there was nobody at the hospital.
	And the city was in the middle of the.
	And then I said, goodness, what is happening here?
	Is that everybody dead or nobody's coming here?
	And then she called me.
	And then after the visit, I said, okay, we cannot conduct the trial here.
	We actually, in the beginning, we submitted the city as being part of the trial.
	But then, in the end, I said to her, look, we cannot conduct the trial because this situation is either too good or too bad.
	And she said, can I talk to you in particular?
	I said, yeah, of course.
	Please don't judge me with what I'm going to tell you now, but we distributed ivermectin through the city.
	And what city was this?
	It's called Corey.
	I think we covered this one, didn't we, Connor?
	Yeah, we covered your study at length.
	But this isn't this is a story.
	No, this is just a story.
	No, this is the same thing.
	But the data on the Amazon.
	Yeah, but the data in the graph is clear.
	I think I showed it once.
	Yeah.
	So, but the thing is, but just another huge question.
	He's traveling throughout during Gamma, massive lethalities, hospitals overwhelmed, running out of oxygen, everyone dying.
	And he comes to this one city.
	He's going through, they're recruiting people into trials.
	And in this one study, the hospitals are quiet.
	They're not very full.
	And he can't figure out why everywhere around in the Amazon is absolutely death and destruction.
	And the health minister later, you know, she was embarrassed because she thought they would judge him, you know, the big city doctors.
	And she tells them that we've been distributing ivermectin to the city's residents for weeks.
	I totally believe it.
	And it's a good segue to another couple topics I do want to cover, including the domestic terrorist thing, which is very interesting.
	Great to meet you to me.
	Yeah, thanks.
	I've been on that list for a while.
	So, I mean, welcome to the program here, right?
	So, that's one part of it.
	I want to kind of get into it, but like, I think this is a good segue to something they're trying to push right now: the Pfizer pill.
	So, they stand to make $57 billion off of this.
	Somehow, now all of a sudden, having a pill in your pocket is a good idea, even though ivermectin and all this other stuff.
	What's wrong with it?
	Paxlobin, it's a protease inhibitor, but in order to make it work, you have to turn off another protease inhibitor.
	What does that mean?
	So, when the virus replicates, you make this long string of proteins, and in order to reassemble it into a virus, you have to clip it in a bunch of places.
	That's a little enzyme, it's like a little scissor.
	But if you can block the scissor, then the virus can't be clipped and reassemble itself.
	So, that's the concept.
	Ironically, ivermectin is a phenomenal protease inhibitor, but it also has 19 other mechanisms.
	If you have a protease inhibitor, it's a one-trick pony.
	Viruses will mutate around it.
	So, they combined it with an HIV med in order to make it work.
	That HIV medicine has a black box warning, can cause liver damage, can cause organ failure, can cause toxicity.
	So, they have this magical protease inhibitor from the trash heap of scientific history.
	These are old drugs, recycled up.
	You just change one little chemical, now you've got a new task, now you can make billions.
	It's worse than that, yeah.
	What's even worse as a clinician?
	I use you know, as an ICU doctor, I mean, I use dozens, if not 100 drugs in my career.
	I cannot recall a drug with this degree and number of side effects and drug interactions.
	It plays well with almost no drug.
	This is an absurdity.
	This is like I, my wife works still at the university that I used to be the chief at, and um, she told me that one of their protocols is if you're going to use Paxlova, you got to stop all the other meds.
	This drug runs with scissors and does not play with LOLs.
	It runs with scissors, can't play with other children.
	I mean, just can we just finish on Paxlovin?
	Because I will tell you, I will never prescribe that to anyone anymore.
	Yeah, and anyone who does has to be reckless.
Timing of Ivermectin PR Campaign 00:03:12
	I'm glad we said that because they're trying to use that as this next phase to try to make a bunch of money.
	A lot of doctors are going to prescribe it.
	But here's to the point: if it works as well as they say, statistically, then they have to end the vaccines yesterday.
	That's a great point, right?
	Because if you look at the EUA that says if there's a drug that works for COVID, then the vaccines cannot be.
	But Pfizer's not dumb, they've been doing this for 100 years.
	They're going to bait and switch it.
	Just as a reminder, they called me too good to be true when I showed this data reducing by 77% and the mortality rates.
	Eric DuPaul from Science called me like that and he blocked me right away without any right away on social media right after they published this Holznest news story.
	And now it comes with something with 89% reduction mortality rate and he says nothing.
	It's very weird what is happening.
	Yeah.
	So that ties into something.
	Pfizer Pill, we know they don't play by the rules because they write the rules into what was, in my opinion, something that was one of the most slanderous black propaganda campaigns I've ever seen, which was the hit on Joe Rogan.
	Yeah.
	And so Joe Rogan is a guy that likes to smoke weed, talk with his friends about aliens, and have a bunch of comedians on.
	Well, a lot of intellectuals and a lot of stuff.
	So of course, and I'm not, I'm actually a Joe Rogan fan.
	I'm sure you are, yeah.
	But I am saying that it's hardly, you know, 60 minutes.
	However, he did have a reach that was so unbelievable.
	Had Dr. Malone on, had Dr. McCullough on, moved the Overton window so successfully, right?
	And they start with these kind of COVID misinformation labels that you have to go talk to your doctor, blah, And then they go into this whole thing with the N-word and all that.
	What are your thoughts on just kind of the Rogan smear?
	So can I say one thing?
	So the smear and the way they did it, I want to bring back to everything's about the timing, right?
	So we talked about the timing of them taking the defense database offline to fix this anomaly, right?
	I talk about the timing of that PR campaign against Ivermectin, right?
	It just so happened to occur on a week when there was a skyrocketing in the number of prescriptions of ivermectin.
	Let's talk about what happened to Joe.
	What's the timing there?
	You know, like Brett Weinstein had a tweet the other week where he said, you know, looks like, you know, they pulled this out.
	You know, this footage has been around forever.
	Of course.
	This was a.
	So this came out because what Brett was saying is Joe was over the target.
	You know, he's getting too close, getting too big.
	And this is the, this is just, this is the same thing.
	I think that's exactly right.
	And I think that as Joe started to speak out about this, did the unexpected video about Ivermectin back in September, started to dance in this, all of a sudden, a opposition file was created on Joe.
	And everyone knew he said these things before.
	And by the way, he didn't even say it.
	He was quoting other people saying it.
	Who cares, right?
	He's a comedian and all that.
	It's completely irrelevant.
	But they say instead, like, now we're going to resurrect this and get everyone really mad again to try to either discredit him or put him in his place.
	Kind of as a warning shot.
	Stay off our, you know.
Medical Exemptions in Uncertain Times 00:04:20
	Yeah, this is the problem: there is no dialogue left in our nation.
	If this were truly a pandemic, we would be sitting here with four people thinking differently.
	We would be having dialogue.
	We would come up with solutions.
	It would be like Grand Rounds of Old, where we're talking about anything and everything.
	Everybody can be right or wrong.
	And someone from the top of the tower would be here.
	Not us outcasts.
	No, not the outcasts, not the ragtag futures.
	And that's the thing is that, you know, I have said to my team, and we have tried, I want any one of these people on my show, and I'm just going to ask them questions.
	And they can argue from authority, and I'll just dismiss that.
	I just want some answers to some questions.
	Sure.
	They will refuse.
	They won't come.
	Yeah, we've invited them.
	We've invited them.
	I mean, Steve Kirsch won't stop doing this.
	You know what Steve Kirsch is?
	We're having on the show in a couple days.
	So, Steve, if you've seen Steve, Steve has offered one in $2 million on a weekly basis to almost anyone in government and academia to come out and debate and share data and discuss data on the vaccines.
	And he can't get anyone to take a million dollars.
	He just wants them to show up.
	That goes to show that they consider pride to be more valuable than money.
	It's an interesting thing.
	Because in this nation, they don't know how to say it on this planet.
	That's true.
	You said in this nation, I said in this country.
	In the planet, yeah.
	It's the same everywhere.
	And so that's an interesting point from Brazil, which is Brazil has its own problems.
	You have a global perspective.
	I will say, though, despite our shortcomings, America still has a little bit more of a kind of freedom perspective on this, thanks to states' rights and others.
	Do you agree with that?
	Or do you think it's just as bad?
	Like, no difference, Brazil, America, they're all the same.
	Yeah, for medical doctors, we had a little advantage because in Brazil.
	Yeah, because the president of the Brazilian board of medical doctors was very strong maintaining our autonomy in prescription.
	In the most he said, as he said, such under uncertain times and uncertain data, we cannot shape exactly what doctors will prescribe because this is a time where things are most uncertain.
	How can we be so certain about things when science is so uncertain?
	So, this safety profile that is sold for the vaccines, who's gonna say that in such a so certain way when you have lack of data in the long term.
	So, the certainties that all this certain that is anything but reliable.
	So, that's for this reason, he allowed doctors to provide their patients reports whether when they cannot be vaccinated, drugs that they need it, regardless.
	So, for this autonomy, so you have a lot of exemptions in Brazil, like that's a thing you can get medical exemptions, medical freedom to give the exemptions because we don't know the actual exemptions.
	So, so people can be free from co-worker vaccines fairly easily because here's the problem now.
	It's fighting because here it's been impossible, but it's a nerve fight, I know.
	It's of course because the pharma would never allow that without fighting back.
	Can I bring up an ironic point with Joe Rogan?
	So, Merck's Molnu Pirivir, which is worse than placebo, is actually made.
	I mean, it's mutagenic, but it was made against an alpha virus, and it was made for Eastern equine encephalitis, which is a virus that affects horses.
	Molnu Pirivir.
	It's a horse drug.
	It's an actual horse drug.
	It's literally a horse drug.
	It literally is a horse drug.
	So, I just, the irony with Joe Rogan, you don't hear that there.
	Because of Brazil, if you remove the data from Brazil in the trial, you have no efficacy at all.
	So, Molnu Pirivir in all the countries that they studied, it was only effective in GAMA, only showed efficacy in one time in one country, which is Brazil and Gamma, and everywhere else it failed.
	And then, you know, and Molnu Pirvir, which is approved by the FDA, even India, which is a very corrupt country, pharma, you know, all through there, they canceled their order of Molnu Piravir.
	Just like the WHO, oddly, somehow, I guess Gilead didn't give as much money as Bill Gates, but the WHO does not recommend remdesivir since November of 2020.
Molnupiravir Is Actually a Horse Drug 00:02:29
	But here it's the standard of care, right?
	Is it still?
	It was still the standard of care.
	And hospitals can be a very good idea.
	You go to a hospital.
	You go to a hospital, you get rentesvir.
	20% bonus.
	You can use remdesivir here.
	Yeah.
	20% bonus to the hospital bill.
	I know people that went to the hospital that were doing okay and took a turn for a worse.
	Oh, yeah.
	But I also know people that didn't go to the hospital and actually were able to turn the corner very effectively.
	So I want to get to the domestic terrorist thing.
	And then there's a couple of other smaller things I'm just kind of curious about.
	And I want to close with kind of just where we are from a population standpoint perspective on this stuff, which I think is the business you guys are all in, right?
	And I want to close on that because I actually think it's some optimism there.
	But domestic terrorists, I mean, so now you're like Timothy McVeigh or something.
	So, you know, I think I overused the word absurdity and obscenity, but they're not enough.
	They're not enough.
	They're not strong enough to describe the times that we're in.
	So I read this domestic, this memo from domestic Security, yeah.
	And they're literally, they're literally linking free speech with terrorism.
	So, someone exercising their First Amendment rights in this space, and they were a little vague on the space.
	They do mention COVID.
	I don't know that they mentioned vaccine specifically.
	They didn't mention it.
	COVID-19 misinformation.
	We did a whole show on it.
	We could pull it up, Connor.
	I think we could put it up.
	It's, I think, deliberately vague, right?
	They don't call it vaccine.
	It's very opaque.
	It's very cryptic almost.
	When I read it, I feel like my government, you know, I'm just a guy, a physician who's literally trying to do what I've volunteered to devote my life to, which is the care of patients, to learn to be the best doctor I can, and to teach, you know, being a doctor is a teacher.
	And I've devoted my life to teaching medicine.
	Now I don't have a position in an academic institution, but I try to teach lay people now.
	I try to share that knowledge.
	And to wake up one morning and to find out that they're essentially calling me a domestic terrorist as a teacher for trying to.
	I went to bed as a teacher, and I woke up a domestic terrorist.
	So do you have any other words besides absurdity and obscenities?
	Corruption.
	Yeah, it's dangerous.
	It's corruption.
	It's falsity.
	Atrocity.
	And it's atrocious.
	I hate to say this, but for those of us that have really studied, like Alexander Solshenit, said, it's predictable.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
Accused of Being Domestic Terrorist 00:04:06
	And that's the deeper point.
	And I was shocked by it, I'll be honest.
	But in America.
	Yeah, and it's not the country I grew up in.
	And that's why I'm interested, Dr. Corey, if I could just follow up on one thing, which is, you know, I don't want to politicize this, but you were on maybe the other side or whatever.
	But it's just like, I just want you to talk a little bit about the last two years of how, you know, you look at things differently because of all this in institutions.
	I'm just really curious about this.
	So, I mean, you know, maybe I've mentioned before, right?
	But, you know, I'm a New York City liberal traditionally, right?
	And I still have some beliefs in some of the liberal structures of government and a little bit about tax fairness and things like that.
	I think we might actually agree with that.
	Yeah, I'm sure we probably do.
	But when you go to the parties, you know, the Democratic Party just started getting too crazy.
	And what happened in COVID is they, I mean, they've propagated so much of these injurious policies.
	And I found myself that because of my opinions, now science is not politics.
	It shouldn't be political.
	But because the right is, I think, more naturally inclined to question government and to question, especially big government, if you were in a position when you started questioning the policies being conducted by the government, you were getting things correct.
	And, you know, the right kept getting things correct.
	And because our contrarian opinions, which are database and scientifically driven, were against the government, suddenly I found that most of our closest allies were on the right.
	So people now think I'm a Republican or whatever it is.
	Oh, and I'm not saying that at all.
	No, but political ideology.
	No, yeah, of course.
	Of course it does.
	But that's where, you know, so that's one transformation is, and I'm going to tell you a couple of interesting things.
	So there was a time, probably two years ago, when I was like a Bible-thumping New York, like a New York, you know, the New York Times was my Bible.
	Okay.
	You read backwards on the Torah?
	Yeah, exactly.
	You know, I did the whole thing every day.
	That's how you started the opinion, and you went backwards.
	I'm embarrassed to admit it, Charlie.
	But that's where I was, right?
	I literally believed there was a truth.
	And there was a time where I did two years ago.
	Maybe a little bit more, no, more than two years ago.
	I did not think I could be in a room with a Republican.
	That's how, that's how bad I was.
	All right, let's cut off of that for a second.
	I think that's really interesting.
	And so, so, and then I had a line I told a friend.
	I told a friend of mine this line the other night, and she really loved it.
	I've repeated it since.
	I said, you know, I used to hate Republicans like liberals hate the unvaccinated.
	Literally, it's very true.
	But hold on, let me just finish a more positive.
	And so one of those trans, because you asked me about transformations, right?
	So I had that kind of ideology, you know, and now I now have two years of this beautiful and wide network of people largely from the right side of the political spectrum, conservatives, but all different stripes and types, credible, intelligent, insightful, you know, lovely people.
	I have just, you know, from a guy who didn't think I could be in the same room as a Republican to now having like this massive network of friends.
	And then, and the other thing is like my old friends, my phone, it doesn't ring very often.
	And so like, that's been a transformation for me.
	But I have like a new family.
	And, you know, I don't think we believe we agree on everything politically for sure.
	We don't.
	But it doesn't matter.
	Yeah, it doesn't matter.
	But then you realize that.
	So it's been an enlightenment to me in making connections with people and finding out that I can make connections and it doesn't have to be on a political agreement basis.
	You know, you can just be friends with humans and they're intelligent and all that.
	And so it's been a real, that's been one of the big transformations.
	And then the other is that like, I don't know if it's the right word, but I just feel like a broken doctor because, or I feel like medicine's broken and I don't know where I am anymore.
Feeling Like a Broken Doctor Today 00:04:13
	Like because of all that disinformation stuff, like I just, I can't even read a medical journal anymore.
	I can't read a newspaper anymore.
	And like I don't know who to trust, what to believe.
	And, you know, the only people I trust are like experts at sniffing out data, analyzing data, and they analyze and conclude, and they don't have any conflicts of interest.
	I cannot listen to anyone with a conflict of interest because they just can't be trusted.
	And I'm sure there are trustworthy people, definitely are trustworthy people working all through academia.
	But it's just that the journal, what appears in journals is what they allow to appear in journals.
	And I'm just, I don't know what to do anymore.
	This is a major change that needs to happen.
	We need to highlight the conflict of interest in the journals.
	So nowadays, I trust more in preprint than published papers, actually.
	Yeah, the preprints.
	Oh, preprints.
	Oh, yeah.
	Preprints are definitely more so.
	Yeah, that's a good thing.
	The only point is those who complain about preprints, the only thing they do is they are admitting that they're not able to read an article because they want the things ready.
	So when you have the preprint, the only difference is that you need to analyze the paper.
	Yeah, it's, you know, to Dr. Corey's point, and in most of my thinking, most of life is nuanced.
	This virus isn't red, blue, purple.
	It's not political.
	To your point, it's humanitarian.
	And, you know, I wore the uniform.
	I vowed to protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
	To watch our government now become the foreign, the enemy's domestic.
	And they call you a domestic.
	And they call me.
	I mean, but this is the Orwellian aspect of it.
	Our goal is to make Orwell fiction again because it is not.
	And to have them flip the script on us when all we are doing is sharing data.
	They don't define their MDM, misinformation, disinformation, malinformation.
	They don't define it.
	That's all part of their communist Marxist plan.
	That's how you manipulate words.
	It is the news speak, et cetera.
	We watch it.
	And all he has done, all I have done, all he has done is try to save lives.
	And they're coming after us for saving lives and honoring that word doctor, which means teacher.
	All we want to do is teach.
	Dr. Constantine.
	I remember I am being accused of humanity.
	He's on the list.
	On the list.
	Brazilian lives.
	What is it?
	International Court of What?
	International Court of Human Rights.
	But Bolsonaro doesn't believe that about you, does he?
	No, not Bolsonaro.
	I was going to say.
	No, no.
	But exactly.
	I tell him that's the case.
	No, exactly because he does not believe that everybody did the opposite against him.
	Forgot it.
	So being accused of crime against humanity in the same document, in the same documents where I prove that I saved lives.
	So they joined together.
	Are they trying you in The Hague?
	Yeah.
	And see, this is what's happening to all of us.
	It's like the insurance companies are coming after.
	So I've lost 30% on my business because of my unprofessional behavior for saving lives like him.
	I lost it.
	Yeah.
	So we're losing insurance contracts.
	They're going after our licenses and boards.
	And we're all losing money in the middle of the year.
	500,000 patients in my career.
	Not a single patient complained against me in my entire career.
	500,000 patients I've diagnosed.
	All these complaints are political and targeted, and there's money behind them.
	There's entities behind them.
	He is a humanitarian that should be on the list for a Nobel Prize.
	He is a humanitarian that should be on the list for a Nobel Prize.
	I agree.
	And instead, we are public enemy, number one, for caring about our fellow human beings, no matter what your color, your height, your weight, your race, your ethnicity, your religion, whatever.
	We are about to manage it.
	What is the message they convey when they accuse somebody, someone, for saving lives as a crime against humanity?
	What is the message it comes from?
	Is that similar to someone who's exercising their First Amendment rights as a domestic terrorist?
	Exactly.
	So fear.
	They want you to be afraid.
	They do.
	And you guys are a threat.
Fear Tactics and Waking Up People 00:09:15
	I mean, look, your work on vitamin D was prolific.
	And I made the argument that if we had a robust vitamin D regimen, look at all the things that we could have prevented, right?
	School closures, mask mandates, vaccine mandates, you know, learning curves that went down, alcoholism, suicide, fentanyl overdoses, drug overdoses, rise in crime.
	All of it probably could have gone back if we had a vitamin D regimen.
	I don't think that's an oversimplification.
	From everything you've published, and I see vitamin D levels over 50, you know, you got a really good shot.
	Never did a public health thing.
	In Brazil.
	Don't mind my 3,000 patients that are treated the same thing.
	Not was a single person above 50 that had any complication.
	Yeah, and so, but despite all of that and how you guys are labeled and you lose business and all of this, there are millions, tens of millions of people that are with you.
	They might not know your name, many do, but they're with what you're fighting for.
	And that's kind of where I want to close this conversation, which is we have the truckers in Canada that are doing everything they possibly can.
	And I just love seeing the left not to politicize it all of a sudden be like against labor.
	Like, really, that's interesting.
	I thought that was like the whole shit, right?
	Like workers do every night, unless you're a trucker.
	Charlie, do you, do you, can we just have a stop for a little bit of a laugh?
	How the CBC covered the country?
	No, which is the Canadian Broadcast Corporation.
	Right?
	Canadian, you know, remember how they covered it?
	That it was a protest against icy and dangerous roads in New York.
	Yeah, that's right.
	That's right.
	I mean, I use absurdity and obscenity.
	I mean, inanity.
	It is so funny.
	Well, this is happening in France.
	There's a trucker convoy that looks like it's happening in America.
	Can you talk about it?
	I can talk about this.
	Let's talk about it.
	I was with the organizers just a couple days ago.
	I'm not going to say where, but in a distant place putting together the plans.
	The People's Convoy is coming.
	We're going to start in California at Coachella.
	We're going to have a great concert.
	There's going to be doctors.
	There's going to be presentations.
	There's going to be musicians.
	And the truckers are going to start there.
	And they're going to roll thunder across America.
	March 4th.
	Northern California.
	So, March 4th is the trucker rolling in.
	March 5th is the big day.
	March 6th, they're rolling.
	You expect big numbers?
	Oh, thousands.
	Oh, and I think they're going to grow.
	They're going to pick it up as they go.
	Well, and that's the thing: is that if the Canadians can do it, you drive through Kansas, you're going to have a couple thousand, tens of thousands already.
	That's what I'm saying.
	Once you hit the heartland, that thing's going to grow with huge.
	These are freedom-loving all walks of life, just like we were talking about.
	Americans, salt of the earth.
	They feed us, they're all peaceful Americans.
	Peaceful, peaceful.
	And I'm going to do a whole show on this Monday: I'm going to do a huge warning for federal government infiltration, provoking hate groups trying to get.
	You know what I'm saying?
	They want to make it happen.
	The left is going to pay a bunch of people in masks over Confederate flags.
	You have to be ready for this.
	You guys know it, but they're going to try to discredit that at the gate.
	Of course, that's operational.
	That's called Cointelpro, for all of you that know the CIA.
	The CIA files.
	But I'm optimistic in one sense, and I love your guys's take.
	I think people generally are starting to wake up.
	They're getting sick of the mandate, sick of this sort of thing.
	All of a sudden, when I say ivermectin in like a polite society, I don't get thrown out of the room.
	You know what I mean?
	Where people are kind of a little bit more open-minded about it.
	The vitamin D conversation is definitely one that finally people are like, oh, yeah, that kind of makes sense.
	Like, okay.
	And you kind of see the rise of the citizen there.
	Canada is a great example.
	You're starting to see some mandates start to fall apart.
	Not enough yet.
	And I think more actually going to fall.
	Australia is a police state.
	New Zealand is still a police state.
	But I'll start with you, Dr. Corey.
	Are you optimistic?
	Yeah, because come on, look at, you know, you just mentioned those regions in Canada, but look at the countries, right?
	The European countries, they're increasing the number of days.
	They're dropping not only masks, but everything, vaccine passports and mandates.
	And so those numbers, it's got to keep rolling.
	Now, the police states that are just really fortified, I mean, I don't know when they're going to fall, but I mean, you know, there is that domino effect.
	I really believe that's going to happen here.
	And because the truth is coming out.
	You know, the truth is coming.
	And I think that critical mass of people, you know, I didn't know that I was starting a grassroots movement.
	I know we wanted to.
	We knew that science was broken.
	In some ways, it's later than I would have liked.
	I would have liked to see this happen in July of last year.
	But in some ways, it's better because the argument is so bulletproof.
	It's like they've reached July last year.
	I think that there would have been a little bit of like, oh, come on, like two years of this.
	It's such a bulletproof argument.
	And so, what's your opinion on that?
	I'm optimistic as well.
	I'm not content with just, oh, lower the mandates and give us this and that back.
	I'm a constitutional American.
	I love our Constitution.
	I defended it, and I will to my dying breath.
	And hopefully that's not anytime soon.
	I'm not Epstein-esque suicidal.
	So, but no, no, to that point, I'm optimistic that we are on the tail end of COVID.
	It's endemic.
	The science is bearing that out.
	We know how to treat it from these brilliant gentlemen we've known all along.
	So we can still treat it in its endemic levels.
	We need to end the emergency powers and go back to our pure and supreme constitutional Bill of Rights.
	In all the countries in Brazil.
	All the countries we need to go back to.
	There is no emergency.
	And you can be on the right side of history or the wrong side of history.
	And I'm saying our political powers, our entities, this DHS junk is the wrong side of history.
	And I say, join us no matter what stripe you are.
	We are freedom-loving people of the world.
	I'm optimistic that we're done.
	Since we spoke, I am way more optimistic.
	I really am.
	I'm seeing it happen.
	I'm seeing, you know, for example, at Turning Point USA, we're a constitutional organization.
	We're a conservative organization.
	But that's besides the point.
	What I'm going to say.
	We have 50 high schools in the servers of Chicago of our chapters that are walking out against mask mandates.
	Good.
	And you're starting to see the school boards really start to tremble.
	And you know the area well.
	You're from Madison.
	You know it well.
	And when that ground starts to shake a little bit, I'm talking about Stevenson High School.
	I'm talking about VITAR.
	I'm talking about LaSalle.
	I'm talking about all of a sudden all these suburban schools in Chicago where these kids are walking out 300 at a time.
	Good.
	And totally.
	Can you have a thought on the mask mandate thing, by the way?
	Because that's like a thing with students.
	Can you just give a little word to parents that are fighting against this, how right they are?
	Do you know what I'm saying?
	I just think it's a really important thing.
	I'm 100% right.
	Again, go to brownstone.org, 150 studies showing the inefficacy of masks.
	They never have worked.
	Countries that have used them have made their rates go up instead of down.
	You've had higher infection rates where they've been more enforced.
	You know, mosquito through a chain link fence, hand of sand through a chain link fence.
	You've heard all the analogies.
	Even the CDC finally came out and said, okay, yeah, cloth masks and surgical masks don't work.
	They're peddling back everything they've been lying about.
	So it's finally like, okay, they don't work.
	If you're sick, stay home.
	Duh.
	Public health message.
	It's like, why muzzle the children?
	I mean, basically, what it says is you're not allowed to speak.
	And it's communist.
	That's what they do.
	That's a great point.
	They do in Europe in China.
	They make you a non-identity non-entity by covering up.
	They don't want your smile.
	They will.
	It's an NPC, which is a video game term.
	It's a non-player character.
	That's exactly right.
	I actually haven't connected it.
	I've danced around that.
	It's such a smart point, which is that, yeah, they want you to feel physically you don't have First Amendment rights.
	Like you do not have the ability to speak.
	It's a muzzle.
	No, the only thing I hate worse than wearing a mask, those stupid masks, is being told to wear a mask.
	That has to stop, too.
	Every time we travel everywhere and go, I'm being confused.
	I'm freedom-loving people.
	Keep my mask.
	To your point, it's being told.
	You know, if something scientific and works and we're allowed to see all the data and have informed consent, then I think people are going to look at it and say, I'll do that.
	But if you tell me I have to do it, forget about it.
	Yeah.
	We had an outbreak of H3NT, the influenza.
	The outbreak completely all season in Brazil.
	Probably because we had mask mandates to now.
	And the lack of exposure to pathogens in the long term may cause more harm than benefit.
	So we had a very weird outbreak last December.
	After the mask mandate.
	Yeah, with more symptoms than COVID, actually.
	Wow.
	Of the flu.
	Wow.
	Interesting.
	All right.
	Let's go around the horn.
	How can people support and follow you?
	And then give some action items of what the citizen can do.
	Yeah.
	So first of all, so I have to always remember: you know, Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, FLCCC.net, we're an organization that develops the most effective treatment protocols for all phases of COVID.
	And let's be clear: prevention, early treatment, hospital treatment, but most importantly, because we're going to see an epidemic of this, but long-haul COVID and post-vaccine injury.
	We have protocols for all of that.
	In the post-COVID era.
	Yeah, just started the post-COVID era.
	It's going to be an epidemic.
Post COVID Era Support Actions 00:05:19
	And so that's one thing.
	The other thing is, you know, my new mission in life is, you know, I have a substack that I write on.
	It's piercorey.substack.com.
	And I am detailing every element and every action in this disinformation campaign by the pharmaceutical industry here at Cybermech.
	And I think it's important that the public be aware of what's happened, how they operate, and that this stuff has to stop.
	And so if you're interested, go to my sub stack, follow it.
	And then what folks can do, again, on the health front, I would, you know, maybe I'll just go full circle.
	You know, go to our protocols to give yourself agency for this illness to maintain health, protect health, particularly in COVID.
	And then in the bigger picture, I got to tell you, I really think when you see the efficacy of the convoy, I mean, Ryan and I were talking about, I mean, a convoy is almost indefensible.
	You can't defend yourself against a convoy of thousands of truckers.
	I want people to come out with the flags.
	I want them to come out.
	No, we Americans have to do it bigger than shit.
	Of course.
	Oh, no, no, that's what I want to see.
	I want to see the kickoff to be used.
	I love it.
	I mean, Washington was amazing.
	I will never forget that day in my life.
	It was a beautiful, beautiful day.
	I think this is going to be way bigger.
	This is going to be way bigger.
	And I just want America to come out and let's end this thing.
	I must say one thing.
	From an outside perspective, it seems like the U.S. is one step for losing its heterogeneity in the world.
	I think this is a unique opportunity to show the power of the country.
	Yeah, and the leadership.
	Exactly.
	Let's take it back.
	That's such a beautiful perspective.
	It really is.
	I think another important thing you're going to see is those of us who've been oppressed, you're going to see a lot of us running for office.
	We're going to step into these things and never allow this to happen again.
	Well, do you think that there could be a form of justice done with this?
	I mean, you can talk about Nuremberg or all this stuff, but.
	I think that the overreach and the depravity that we've spent a lot of this panel discussing, right?
	I think that overreach, especially like when I talk about my sub-site, they've laid bare their methods, their rapaciousness.
	It's obscene.
	And I think it's now apparent.
	You know, you're going to have, if you're talking really, Charlie, about the amount of people waking up and getting wise to this stuff, I think almost like Napoleon's foray into Russia, they've overextended themselves, and now we can catch them.
	And my hopes are that not only Ryan runs, but other like-minded people run.
	But there's also a lot of people in government right now who realize how broken that system is.
	I mean, Ron Johnson's a leader on this.
	He's amazing on this issue.
	He's your senator now.
	Yeah.
	And, you know, the work that Ron wants to do, if that party goes back in power, my new party, no, it's not my new part.
	I have tons of complaints with the Republican Party too.
	No, no, but that party's the only party that entertains.
	I will tell you, on this particular issue, I align really strongly with Ron.
	I think his work has been singular on this.
	And I really hope that we can somehow figure out a way to rewrite, restructure the way those agencies work.
	And this is a pie-in-the-sky thing, but to somehow remove or mitigate this incredibly violent influence of the pharmaceutical industry.
	I totally, I think that's really smart.
	And I mean, look, it comes back to a betrayal of Article I where Congress totally abdicated its role to oversee these regulatory agencies.
	And they just didn't do their job.
	It takes oversight.
	It takes checks and balances.
	They should be having to hold funding hostage every year.
	Come on, FDA, you got to come in.
	Tell us what you're doing with this money.
	Instead, it's blank check after blank check and continuing resolutions.
	Good point.
	And I think that's smart.
	But we support the truckers.
	We support the people that have been oppressed.
	We continue to speak out with no fear.
	And come what may, we are going to win.
	I agree.
	I think the higher frequency is going to win here.
	And I think it's global and it's worldwide.
	And you guys have been on such the leading charge.
	Do you have any way that people can support you?
	RCOLMD.com.
	That's the letter R, Ryan, RCOLMD.com.
	You know, some people have been helping me with my legal battles to try to get my insurance contracts back and fight against the board.
	So I appreciate that.
	And then my sub stack will be coming out on Monday as well.
	So oh, I only have social media.
	You don't have social media?
	No, I do.
	It's only social media.
	I don't have a website.
	I have one for my clinic.
	He's part of the FLCCC.
	So you support him, you support us.
	Well, I want to thank you guys for what you're doing for Liberty.
	And I think you bring up an important point, which is I think medical freedom, medical tyranny, the betrayal of our Constitution is the number one issue this year.
	It is.
	And it's the issue that impacts all these other issues.
	They want us to talk about all this other Ukrainian borders or whatever stupid stuff.
	It's like, you know what?
	No, the whole civilization is hinging on whether or not we get this medical freedom, individual sovereignty, constitutional issue right.
	It all hinges on it.
	So I just want to thank you guys so much.
	And I don't know what's going to come next.
	People ask me all the time.
	I do believe in the next couple of years, they're going to try to do another virus scare, which is why I think fixes and justice need to happen, right?
	Fixes and justice.
	We need a church and pike committee to get to the bottom of all this.
	I'll tell you.
	But yeah, you guys have been phenomenal.
	Thank you so much.
	Thank you, Charlie.
	You bet.
	Appreciate it.
	Thank you so much.
	Thank you.

Chapters

00:00:00 Unbelievable Conversation with Three Doctors
00:02:09 Science Changed and New Things Known
00:11:15 Dropping Vaccine Passports Globally
00:27:08 Hospital Data Shows Vaccinated Dying More
00:41:58 Shedding Theory and Hormonal Perturbances
00:50:48 Whistleblowers Admit Falsely Low Data
01:06:53 Antibody Dependent Enhancement Explained
01:21:16 Timing of Ivermectin PR Campaign
01:24:28 Medical Exemptions in Uncertain Times
01:28:48 Molnupiravir Is Actually a Horse Drug
01:31:17 Accused of Being Domestic Terrorist
01:35:24 Feeling Like a Broken Doctor Today
01:39:37 Fear Tactics and Waking Up People
01:48:52 Post COVID Era Support Actions