RFK’s Make America Healthy Again Advisor on Health, Toxins, and Diet ft. Calley Means
Why are half of American kids obese? Why is America wracked with chronic diseases? Where did the food pyramid actually come from? And if you're a parent on a budget, how can you feed your kids without poisoning them? Charlie talks to Calley Means about America's slow-motion health disaster, and the role played by Big Tobacco, Big Pharma, Big Ag, and Big Government in making America simultaneously one of the richest yet least healthy countries on the planet.Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Email us as always freedom at charliekirk.com and check out their book Good Energy that is good energy.
Get involved with Training Point USA at tpusa.com.
That is tpusa.com.
Start a high school or college chapter today at tpusa.com.
Become a member today.
Members.charliekirk.com.
Buckle up everybody.
Here we go.
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.
Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of The Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals.
Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegoldinvestments.com.
That is noblegoldinvestments.com.
It's where I buy all of my gold.
Go to noblegoldinvestments.com.
I'm super excited for this hour and thrilled.
I didn't know that you lived here in Arizona.
Yes, sir.
I've been following you for quite some time, and then I could not listen to the podcast episode quick enough when you went on Talker, which was objectively one of the most entertaining and insightful episodes, podcasts I've ever heard.
Thank you.
Thank you.
It's an important message.
It is, and so it is Dr. Casey Means, who went on Tucker Carlson with your sister.
I'm Callie.
I'm sorry, I get you guys.
No, it happens all the time.
So you're Callie.
I was looking at the book title.
You're Callie, Casey.
I'm sure it happens a lot.
It happens a lot.
I mean, no offense that way.
So Callie Means is with us.
Casey is your sister.
You guys co-authored the book.
Is that fair to say?
Yeah.
There's so much to talk about here.
RFK, USDA, nutrition, food, vaccines.
Why don't you introduce yourself first?
Yeah, the quick life story is I grew up in Washington, D.C., wanted to be on campaigns, was on some Republican campaigns, and I never really found myself a lobbyist, which everyone does after campaigns.
So I'm working with people across the aisle for food and pharma.
And with food companies, I helped Coke pay off the NAACP to say that taking Coke off food stamps is racist.
We paid conservative think tanks to say it was against freedom to deny children government-funded coke.
And then with pharma, learned the foundational incentive that the healthcare industry in this country, just as a statement of economic fact, makes money when people are sick.
And capitalism is the greatest invention in human history, but this isn't capitalism.
We have complete takeover where there's five lobbyists in pharma for every single member of Congress.
And just fundamentally, right now, healthcare is the largest and fastest growing industry in the country.
That's not right.
It's not AI.
It's not tech.
It's healthcare.
And putting the pieces together, getting out of that, becoming an entrepreneur, being influenced by my sister who is top of her class at Stanford Med School.
She's an incredible person.
Top of her class at Stanford Med School, was rising up the ranks, NIH researcher, head and neck surgeon, and she realized 12 years into training that she looked down at a patient and she did not understand why they were sick.
That 90% of her course load at Stanford Medical School was on pharmacology because pharma pays 50% of Stanford Med School's budget.
That she did not take one class on nutrition.
and actually realize why patients are sick.
And she was told that serious medicine is a scalpel and a drug prescription pad after
people get sick.
And then tracing to my putting the pieces together with my political experience with
Casey with seeing my mom abruptly die from pancreatic cancer after decades of missed
warning signs.
We kind of put it together and right after my mom's death, they're like, this is the
biggest issue in the world.
We're debating trivia.
I think it really to me ties to this key political dynamic in our country, which is fueling Donald Trump, which is fueling RFK, which is fueling populist uprisings throughout the world.
But people can't quite put their finger on it, but something is against us right now.
There are dark incentives against us, and what we are trying to say, and truly, we decided to devote our lives to this right after our mom died in 2021.
We're like, we need to get this message out, and we need to start talking about it.
I think it's a way to channel actually this frustration people are feeling that can't quite put their finger on, and the way to channel Corruption, and the way to channel these forces that we all feel are against us, it's just, it's a great case study to look at our healthcare system, where, again, a pharma company makes money when a kid gets sick.
There is nothing better than a kid being obese.
No, no, no, but then, therefore, do they want people to get sick?
So let's get out of the conspiracies.
No, I'm not.
I'm just saying, wouldn't it be logical, if you make money when someone is sick, at the very least, are they indifferent to people getting sick?
As a statement of economic fact, our largest institution, which pharma is a big part of healthcare, wants people to get sick.
Let's take a child.
Let's take a child who has slightly high cholesterol.
Statin prescriptions have doubled in the past five years among high schoolers.
Kids are on statins?
It's like candy!
But cholesterol is not a bad thing inherently.
Exactly.
So instead of explaining that, and instead of the medical system trying to get that kid off of this treadmill of pharmaceuticals, we're prescribing statins We're prescribing metformin, which has doubled in the past five years among high schoolers, and then antidepressants.
You talk to any parent with high school kids, they're prescribed like candy.
Benzos.
Benzos.
Xanax.
100%.
And now the American Academy of Pediatrics, which is paid for by pharma, is saying ozempic should be the first-line defense for 12-year-olds.
And they're doing studies on 6-year-olds.
So if you're a parent with a high schooler and your kid's a little bit distracted, it's Adderall, of course.
If your kid has slightly high cholesterol, it's statin.
High blood sugar, metformin.
Now if they're a little bit overweight, ozempic.
So the spiritual problem of this, where the healthcare system, which has bought off the academic research, which has bought off the politicians, which has bought off the levers of trust, they're saying it's just like COVID.
You're anti-science unless you give that kid Ozempic, unless you give that kid a statin.
And what's happening is absolute devastation among kids.
I mean, 50% of teens are overweight or obese.
It's 3% childhood obesity rate in Japan.
20% of teens have fatty liver disease.
40% of kids qualify as having a mental health disorder.
This is all new, right?
This is all just... How new?
When did it start to change?
This, you look at the graphs, it all started around 1990.
And, you know, just digging into the corruption, in 1990, the two largest food companies in the world were cigarette companies.
So, as the Surgeon General pushed the cigarette companies to, you know, pushed against cigarettes, they used their cash piles in the 1980s to buy food companies.
And Philip Morris and R.J.
Reynolds created the ultra-processed food industry.
It all traces to, actually, 1990.
And they lobbied for the food pyramid.
So, the food pyramid was created by the cigarette companies.
The two largest— Well, hilariously, cigarettes kept us skinny.
Exactly.
It would be healthier if the cigarette companies went back to making cigarettes.
Ironically, we were a healthier country when we were smoking.
That's just factually true.
You look at cancer rates, they've gone up orders of magnitude since the 1985 because
cigarette companies shifted their scientists to food.
That's what happened when they bought the food companies.
They shifted all their scientists.
From one addictive substance to another.
To another that they can sell to kids and everyone eats.
So that ushered in, in the 1990s, the percentage with the food pyramid, which was an ultra-processed
food marketing document, our diet flowed to ultra-processed food.
And my point is not to lecture anyone, not to lecture anyone what to eat or what to feed
their children, but to educate and tell people, as RFK is saying, this is corporate capture.
The USDA should not be paid for by the food industry to tell kids that we should be eating
ultra-processed food and that's safe when they contain demonstrably harmful ingredients.
That's corruption of science.
It's corruption of the free market.
And I think that's what we're starting to tap into.
Well, no, I mean, it would be like Marlboro donating to the American Lung Association.
Yeah, it'd be like Anheuser-Busch donating to Alcoholics Anonymous.
It makes no sense, yeah.
Which, I don't know if they do or not.
So, is there any evidence that the cigarette companies going into food, that they had the intent to go into something addictive?
Oh, this is something I talk about a lot.
They bought the rationale of buying food companies.
Again, just to set the context, Philip Morris and R.J.
Reynolds, now it's like Google and Microsoft, they were top 10 most valuable companies in the world in the 1980s, the biggest cash piles of any company in human history.
So this is a documented shareholder education.
We are going to buy food companies, and we're going to use our scientists strategically to make food more palatable and make it more addictive.
And then they were also going to use their lobbying power to buy off the USDA and the FDA.
So the toxic stew that our children exist in right now, where the USDA to this day says a diet 92% and ultra-processed food can be healthy for kids, they recommend added sugar to two-year-olds.
I don't have any lecture to any parent what to feed their kids, but the USDA should not be recommending sugar to your two-year-olds.
Where did the food pyramid come from?
It was a lobbying instrument from the cigarette industry about food companies.
They very strategically paid the Sugar Research Council at Harvard to create research saying sugar doesn't cause obesity, and that carbs were really important, and that animal-based fats were vilified.
This is research from Harvard.
Everyone can look it up.
The Sugar Research Council.
They then use this research, and this is what I saw working for these industries.
You pay off the Harvard researchers.
It's like PR.
It's like buying PR.
They're coin-operated.
Then you take those studies saying sugar doesn't cause obesity, and you slam that on the table of the regulators.
The regulators are also paid by the food companies.
So it creates, through a very strategic effort of using the Harvard research to influence the USDA, it creates the food pyramid, which said animal-based fats are bad, which said carbs are the center, sugar is the center.
And Americans listen to medical authorities.
We shifted our diet, 20% of our diet, to carbs in the next 10 years.
So by the... and every parent who fed their kids this crap thought they were doing the
right thing, you know, because they were listening to the science.
So that's how it works.
It's co-option of our institutions.
There's so many questions I have.
The book is Good Energy.
It's terrific.
And I have questions about, are American carbohydrates the same as European carbohydrates?
Because there's this idea that the way that we farm is different than Europe, so then even if a carb-heavy diet in Europe actually might be more beneficial than here.
So many questions here.
So, Callie, some people say the food pyramid came from Sweden or something like that.
Is that correct?
No, the U.S.
ties based on corrupt incentives pushed on by industry, ties their guidelines, and they force Europe
and any country we do deals with on science to adhere to their standards.
We drive everything.
Is there something to be said, again, we're gonna bounce all over the place here,
so you gotta entertain me with this, that the carbohydrates in Europe are different than here?
For example, so many times people say, I traveled to Italy, I can have the pasta,
I feel fine afterwards.
Is there any merit to that argument?
There's a lot of merit.
So fundamentally, there's two levels here.
The first is that ultra processed food is weaponized for us to eat more, so calorie consumption's gone way up
because this food hijacks our biology very purposely and makes us wanna eat more
when you can't really overeat steak.
So that's, we're eating more.
The second thing, a byproduct of food companies just, it makes sense, wants to make food cheaper and more addictive.
We've gone to industrial farming and really through corruption have blown past a lot of the standards any other country has.
So we spray our crops with glyphosate.
This is a huge, huge problem.
This is being totally phased out of Europe and the rest of the world.
And these ultra-processed grains that are sprayed with chemicals that are known neurotoxins, that are then processed in a way that takes the fiber off, so they're basically just hidden sugar.
You know, by the time it gets into our bodies through this packaged food, it's indistinguishable.
And you know, in France, I don't want to give France any credit whatsoever, but they have real standards around their food and their crops are not sprayed with these toxic chemicals.
So, so I think you're going to continue to see our grains and the stuff we spread on them.
It's doing terrible things to our cells just because it's hidden sugar, but it's also disrupting our microbiome, which is something we should be really paying attention to.
Oh, of course.
Our guts are destroyed right now, and we're not getting the prebiotics or the probiotics necessary to culture the billions of dollars, billions of healthy bacteria needed in our stomach.
So, let me just pause.
So, we spray with glyphosate here in America still, which is a pesticide?
It's a pesticide, and as Casey talked about this so eloquently at Tucker, it's a pesticide that comes largely from China.
And it's actually being phased out of Chinese food.
It's being phased out of Europe food.
Why do we do that?
What is their argument?
If you had a pro-glyphosate guy here, what would he say?
They would say that it is absolutely existential that food is as cheap as possible.
And what the food industry does is, after World War II, we had to feed the world and we invented processed food.
We invented ways to make cheap grains, make it shelf-stable, and ship it all over the world.
Yes.
we move from a regenerative situation where food was born together, you didn't need pesticides
because it was natural, the animals provided natural pesticides, to where we have long
rows of crops.
Yes.
What's happened is they've...
This is a soil issue, right?
Yeah, they've taken this, I think, good intentions from post-World War II to make food as cheap
as possible, and actually there's an unintended consequence where our soil is now, they say
it has 40 seasons left, it's being totally depleted.
A tomato, organic in America today, has 70% less nutrients than it did 50 years ago.
So our food is being, because we're not growing it naturally, as they do, frankly, in Europe,
it's being depleted of nutrients.
And because we have them all lined up so that they can be cropped efficiently, we have to
spray them with these herbicides, which literally is to kill what's on it, and that goes into
our guts.
So this is not the free market.
The agencies co-opting the government to have no oversight of this and have our kids' microbiomes absolutely out of control is not the free market.
That's my big point.
It's actually government capture.
For sure.
How does Europe then grow their food?
Yeah, I mean, the foundational premise we talk about in the book is that we really should be looking at what people ate 10,000 years ago, what we're evolutionarily made to eat, and eat that.
Fundamentally, if you're raising grains the way they have been normally made, you know, without a ton of pesticides on them, that's a good thing.
In Europe, the meat is generally grass-fed and how it's been used to grow, not in a factory.
The grains are not poisoned.
So, Callie, then, the pro-glyphosate crew would say cost.
So how much more expensive would it be to do non-pesticide, non-glyphosate mass farming at industrial scale that would then give us more nutrients and also allow the soil to naturally regenerate?
Because that's the problem, right?
You have to cycle, is that correct?
You have to allow... If you don't do pesticides and kill all of the worms and all of the... I have a very lame understanding here.
I'm not an expert.
How much more expensive would a celery be than what it is now?
So I want to back up from the cost, and this is what RFK and President Trump are talking about more.
The American experiment will end, the chief reason is because we've got fat, sick, depressed, infertile because of our food.
And that is leading to astronomical health care costs.
So if you look at the graph, we're spending per capita two to three times more than European countries on health care costs.
So any person that came down to see what's happening to American civilization would say we're poisoning ourselves just foundationally.
And this is not political, right?
We are poisoning ourselves.
We are feeding kids processed toxic crap, and that is leading to trillions of dollars of downstream health impacts.
So, interestingly, again, I hate to give Europe credit, but Europe, they have a two times per capita lower health care cost, but spend a little bit more on food.
So, I would urge everyone to see our regenerative farming budget as part of our health care budget.
If we're going to have the money, we should fund it.
It's nothing short of a moral blind spot.
No, I'm right there with you.
That we don't see these things connected.
So, how much more expense?
10%, 15%, 20%?
Well, you'd have to have a shift over, but actually regenerative farming now produces higher crop output per acre.
Higher yield.
Higher yield per acre.
Let me tell you the other part that makes this difficult.
Farmers don't want to do this.
I talk to farmers, they say, we're never going back to regenerative.
Pesticides are the best thing ever.
And they have a lot of power in this country.
And I think if you talk to farmers, a lot of them are behind what's happening with Robert Kennedy and President Trump.
I actually think if you push farmers on other angles, they're not too happy with the USDA agriculture incentives.
I think farmers do have to play by the incentives.
We subsidize ultra-processed food ingredients, corn, soy, wheat, these core kind of ultra-processed food crops with 95% of agriculture subsidies.
We've totally rigged the market.
So they are filtered and the only way they can make money is through this industrial monocropping with ultra-processed food ingredients.
I don't think small farmers are very happy right now.
I think it's all moving to the big guys, and that's actually putting us at threat.
I think it's putting our food system at threat, being super consolidated right now.
I don't think individual farmers are that happy with USDA agriculture subsidies and incentives.
I'm just saying, they tend to push back against this idea of regenerative farming.
Listen, I know farmers are going to make the right decision.
This is what President Trump's talking about.
This is what Robert Kennedy's... Let's go one step back.
We are incentivizing the wrong thing.
Let's just change the incentives.
No, of course.
Let's just change the incentives.
So I have a strong belief... We have a ton.
Of billions of dollars of incentives that create and incentivize our ultra-processed food system.
If that follows the science, and just even taking those incentives away, we'd be at a mud... I trust farmers to make the right decision, but we incentivize them to use these toxic chemicals.
I'm not saying we should ban them.
At the very first step, I think the USDA and the NIH should say what scientifically these chemicals do.
My point, and this is something RFK is talking a lot about, no command and control regulation.
I want the science to be clear.
I want, let's just at least be on the same page about what glyphosate is doing.
Then the public policy chips can fall where they may.
I do think if you get into what I, and you know, President Trump can obviously speak for himself, but if you get into what I would recommend, the first year should be about the truth.
It should not be about any taxes, any ban—like, get that off the table.
But the USDA should be saying, like they're doing in Europe and around the world, what these Chinese chemicals that we're subsidizing and spraying our food, what they're doing.
We should all just be on the same page.
And we have a similar thing where we have with COVID, where we're just not getting the correct information because these industries that make and profit from this system have bought the institutions off.
They've bought the science off.
So what to do?
I don't know.
Get the truth out and stop changing, change the incentives that are incentivizing this industrial monocropping and work with farmers to get back to a free market is what I would say.
So I totally agree.
Hey, this is Charlie Kirk, and I know a lot of you have been suffering under the Biden economy.
Recently, school loan payments have been reinstated, and for many, it's adding thousands to their monthly expenses.
My friends, Andrew Del Rey and Todd Avakian, they're amazing.
They really helped me through a tough, tough situation recently.
They've been excellent.
They're ethical, they're just really great people, they're followers of Jesus Christ, and our worldviews are the same.
I love them.
And so please go to andrewandtodd.com.
Interest rates are coming down, and they may be able to lower your overall payment.
In fact, one of our team members said, Charlie, is it time for me to own a home?
I sat down, I went through the numbers, I said, get in the owner game.
Honestly, enough renting.
You are burning your money renting.
It might be a little bit more to own, but you're building equity.
That's money you'll have for the rest of your life.
Perhaps a reverse mortgage is a perfect solution.
It's about expertise.
You could trust in times like this.
I can't tell you how helpful they've been for me personally.
They've just been excellent.
Andrew and Todd, I'm honored to call them friends.
We hang out when I go to Orange County together.
They're really great.
So say, Charlie sent me!
888-888-1172.
That's 888-888-1172.
They helped me through a mortgage situation recently that was super complex and moving pieces, and it was really, really tough.
And other banks, by the way, wanted nothing to do with it, and they crushed it for me.
10 out of 10.
AndrewandTodd.com.
So check it out right now.
AndrewandTodd.com.
If we have some semblance of a free market system, how will it ever then be in the healthcare company's best interest to heal when you can make more money when they're sick?
You say that.
How do you fix that?
I say this as a free market guy, and it is the best contention of the anti-free market crusaders.
Well, let's take Medicaid.
So Medicaid is a piggy bank for pharma where fundamentally it incentivizes more people to be sick.
So we spend more to treat metabolic conditions on Medicaid than the whole defense budget.
Farmer created Medicaid, and we have that government program, right?
It doesn't kick in until the poor person gets high cholesterol, and then it pays for that statin for the rest of their life.
It pays for the metformin for the rest of their life.
It pays for the Ozempic now, it appears, for the rest of their life.
Fundamentally, Medicaid is incentivized for more sick people to be sick.
So we have this government program.
So just think about it.
If somebody is diabetic, under 30, they're going to generate millions of dollars of taxpayer annuities to pharma.
So, that's corporate corruption, right?
The fact that literally a poor person is incentivized to get sick, to not to get healthy, to not practice metabolic healthy habits, and just to go on drugs is a problem.
And then, pharma's rigged it that there's, you know, Ozimbic costs ten times more than Germany and Scandinavia.
So, they have to pay that full price.
So, the way our systems are actually designed is fundamentally incentivized.
How is Ozimbic more in this country than in their home country?
So this is something President Trump's talked about, and frankly, you know, President Biden's talked about.
Biden's done nothing on it, but it makes no sense.
There is no free market rationale.
We are paying on average three times more for drugs.
Who sets these rates?
The pharmaceutical companies.
Why does the government accept it?
Obamacare put it in that there can be no negotiation whatsoever.
So you have all these coupons.
So if you're buying Ozempic out of pocket, you'll get a coupon from the drug companies and you'll pay, you know, $700.
But by law, by law, the Medicare and Medicaid cannot use the coupon.
They have to pay the full sticker price.
So at Ozempic, there's a big bill to have it count for Medicare and Medicaid.
It's going to be $1,600 per person per month from the government, and there's a target market of almost 80% of Americans who are overweight or obese.
This is how the system—so you have fundamentally government as the main payer.
It's the biggest part of our budget.
It's the fastest-growing part of our budget.
And the reason health care costs are growing is because of this embedded incentive that the laws are made by this corrupted industry.
They've got the science from academic institutions where I was funneling money as a lobbyist to get reports saying right now they're literally saying obesity is genetic.
It's not tied to lifestyle.
That's what Harvard is literally saying.
So they're using those reports to say we have to subsidize these drugs and we have the sick care system.
So, it's not actually that hard.
I mean, fundamentally, the first thing you have to do is just have the scientists say the right thing.
But the FDA is 75% funded by pharma.
I mean, that's something Trump could change.
So, I mean, what you're saying, though, and I agree, is that scientists are basically hookers.
A hundred percent.
Listen, listen.
They're not independent thinkers.
They just take money and they do whatever.
They're basically prostitutes.
My sister talked about this eloquently.
I'm not doubting it.
I'm just trying to make sure.
No, no, no.
Yes, yes.
I think the genius of the system is that you take a lot of good people and put them into that position.
But, fundamentally, at Stanford Med School, as my sister talks about, they are trying to be janitors.
They are trying to profit from the mess.
They are absolutely un-incentivized.
When my sister brought up a dietary intervention for somebody that had chronic migraines,
she was told, they used a very bad word, they said, don't be a PU, they called her a slur,
and they said, that's not serious medicine.
We give people drugs and cut people open, you didn't go to dietician school.
So that's the culture embedded, is that serious medicine is a scalpel and a prescription
pad.
And again, this core spiritual crisis we're in right now is we're detached from our soil.
We're detached from our food.
We're attached from just fund the Sun.
We're detached from this fundamental inputs that create health and we're told there's a Savior with a jab or with a pill that dynamic is producing an unhealthy unhappy population and just mathematically will bankrupt us.
So let's take one of the countries you mentioned.
Japan has 3% childhood obesity.
We have 50% childhood obesity.
50% of teens are overweight or obese.
Not quite.
What are two things Japan does that we don't do that we should adopt?
Yeah, if things the president can sign tomorrow is Japan, it doesn't allow their scientific research institutions to be paid by food or pharma companies.
So they're paid by the government?
Yeah.
I don't think NIH grants should stop, but 80% of NIH grants go to a professor at a university with a direct conflict of interest.
No, what I'm getting at, and I can say this as a free market guy, we're kind of a victim of our own model, though.
100%.
Is that we worship markets, we love markets, but markets have kind of created this insidious corporate oligarchy that then influenced the intellectual positions that then, of course, influence what we do.
Yeah, and I think what has to happen is we need to, you know, just ask simple questions.
I mean, should Harvard Med School be able to have 50% of their budget from pharma as they're receiving billions of dollars of government grants?
They say there's no conflict of interest.
They say it doesn't even matter.
Should government regulators and people on government nutrition panels be able to accept money from food and pharma
companies who are making nutrition guidelines?
I mean if you can just get that corruption out you get to the truth
You like like our it matters what our scientific leaders say it happened during Kobe
I mean Kobe was the worst public policy disaster in American history. We are not learning the lesson
So Callie, I just want to put a bow on this part of the conversation because by the way, I'm incredibly passionate
about this I eat, like, only six foods.
I don't have sugar.
I have dessert twice a year.
You know, I don't drink.
I'm very much passionate about this stuff, and it's so easy to gain weight in this country.
Oh, my goodness.
So, what is metabolic dysfunction?
So my sister graduated med school and had to choose one of 42 specialties.
We'd segment the body and disease into all these different silos.
Metabolic health is what's happening to our cells, how our cells are powering our body, which is fueled by simple things like our amount of sunlight, our amount of sleep, the food that we're eating.
And if you look at the top killers of Americans, 9 out of 10 killers of Americans are foundationally metabolic disorders.
They're foodborne illnesses.
I mean, you could wipe heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, upper respiratory infection, even COVID deaths.
You look at COVID deaths.
COVID was an attack on our weakened immune system.
People in Japan died three times at a lower rate per capita than the people in the U.S.
COVID should have been a wake-up call.
And this is where the corruption comes in, right?
There could have been a moment where Dr. Fauci, you know, stood up there And talked about how this is a wake-up call for our immune system, right?
This is a wake-up call of how we got to harden up a little bit and steer our collective healthcare thinking to get the corruption of food and pharma out and actually talk about how basic habits.
I mean, again, this isn't political, but it's just like we can't go on continuing to poison ourselves.
Kids get two hours less sleep than they did a hundred years ago.
Kids are sitting in such a sedentary environment at schools and our incentives that 77% of
21-year-olds are not eligible to join the military and the military is considering lowering
the standards because we have such a metabolic health crisis.
Metabolic health is how our cells are powered and if our cells are not powered correctly,
that the cells in the brain show up as depression, the cells in the liver show up as liver issues.
I mean, this is the foundational...
Sorry to interrupt.
What powers metabolic health?
Sleep?
Diet?
Whether or not you're putting toxins in your system, right?
Alcohol?
Drugs?
Processed food?
I know you talk about this in the book, but are you getting vitamin D exposure to sunlight, right?
Exercise?
Movement?
Hydration?
That's it.
I mean, you just said it.
If there's something I'm missing, then tell me.
No, we go step by step through those exact factors.
I mean, the key thing that Casey learned at Stanford Medical School, and I learned as a lobbyist for pharma, is the goal is to make it complicated.
The goal is to make you think that your heart issues, your high cholesterol, high blood sugar, obesity, depression are different siloed issues.
Fundamentally, if you are getting the right amount of omega-3s and omega-3 supplementation, that's a more effective intervention for depression than an antidepressant.
Fundamentally, diabetes is not... Same with methylfolate.
It's way more... I have it right here.
We go through the supplementation... Much better than SSRIs or benzos.
100%.
So, yeah, foundationally, at the highest level, We have kids in sedentary environments force-fed ultra-processed food with a weapon of mass destruction for chronic stress in their pocket, and we're drugging them.
When their core inputs that impact their cells, that impact their cells' ability to make energy, are under threat.
We have to understand this environment the kids are living in and talk openly about that.
It starts with the science not being corrupted.
So, I want to make sure we're fair about the American healthcare system.
There's one thing the healthcare system is good at, and that is acute.
100%.
What is the difference between acute versus chronic?
I always say, a gunshot wound, we're one of the best in the world to make sure that you don't die.
Heart attack, we know how to put you under, right through the wrist, we'll make sure that we can put a stint in your heart.
What is the difference between acute and chronic?
Because as soon as it gets into chronic, we are some of the worst.
You're reading from our book, literally.
Because I have read your book.
I cannot stress that enough.
There was never a chronic disease treatment, ever, until the birth control pill in 1960.
And the medical system said, oh my gosh, somebody could take a pill for longer than a week.
You know, it used to just be antibiotics, and you know, you cure the issue.
In 1960, 0% of the medical budget was chronic conditions.
Today it's 95%.
All medical attention after World War II, taking the trust of antibiotics and medical innovations to help win World War II, they said, we can convince people of lifestyle conditions.
So by 1970s, 30% of American women were on Valium.
The cover of Time Magazine was Valium Nation.
Very addictive, harmful drug.
Heard a lot of people talk about it.
Mommy's Little Helper, they called it in advertisements.
And, you know, we just started racking up today where we educated people that heart
disease was a STAN deficiency, et cetera, et cetera.
It's a rite of passage.
But what has happened with every single chronic disease treatment, the rates of the chronic
disease that it's trying to treat has gone up.
Because if you take your STAN but continue to pour metabolic unhealthy things into your
body, continue to eat toxins, you're going to not get better.
STANs have not lowered rates of heart disease.
It's only exploded.
Has SSRIs lowered rates of depression?
So you fundamentally have this kind of a lie.
But it's very profitable.
And we've co-opted this system.
You know, the medical journals were funded in the 70s by the Sackler family.
They created a bunch of fake medical journals to push this.
You know, you start going down.
So that's the simple dynamic.
The birth control pill unleashed this observation that you can get people on pills for a long
period of time.
And all medical attention went to people getting recurring revenue hooked on these issues.
Now, if you have a complicated childbirth, a gunshot wound, a burst appendix, 100%.
But that's only 5% of medical spending right now.
That's only 5%.
An infection, whatever.
Go see the doctor.
But if your doctor is pulling out a prescription pad to get your kid on a statin, or something that's not going to kill you or your kid right away.
Yes.
So I want to get right into the specific of this, which I think is the number one contention.
So we're very blessed in our family.
We don't feed our kids sugar.
We spend Probably a thousand bucks a week on food, groceries, all that.
For a family that says, I want to feed my kid avocados, coconut milk, I want healthy fats, salmon, but I can't afford it.
Outside of what we want to do from a public policy standpoint, is it possible to not feed your kid Lunchables on a budget?
We go through it step by step in the book.
I have two messages on that.
Number one, there is a bottoms-up here.
We're getting systemically screwed, but to a mom, a lower-income mom, who says that I can only... My heart goes out to them.
It does.
But I want to be clear.
If she says I can only afford Lunchables, my response would be, at the highest level, it is personal responsibility, you are poisoning your child.
And you are setting your child up for a life of more metabolic dysfunction.
If your child gets diabetes by the time they're 30, they're going to die 15 years younger than an average American.
They're going to have a four times higher chance of committing suicide.
They're going to be a less happy, more tortured child.
We are poisoning our children at scale.
And to that mom, I would say it is your responsibility to do whatever you need to do to not feed your kid ultra processed crap.
And it just literally gets down to that.
Not even getting organic or this other stuff.
If you can just take the 70% ultra-processed food is the average child right now, take
it down to 20% or below, your child is going to demonstrably live a much healthier, happier,
more productive life.
And I do think we need to be honest.
Like doctors, right, when it's about a drug or about a pharmaceutical injection, no cost
is too high.
And it's not worried about the mom's circumstances.
You know, when the medical system talks about prescribing drugs, there's no equivocation.
We need that same type of communication about food.
Why is the media censoring anyone who questions a pharmaceutical product but not taking that same stance to metabolic health and food?
And kind of a flippant attitude about it's kind of a foregone conclusion that kids are going to eat poisonous food.
When 9 out of 10 killers of Americans are chronic conditions, and 33% of young adults now are pre-diabetes, and 50% of teens are... It's actually a tone of the medical system.
So what should happen immediately is every single doctor with a child who's metabolic and healthy or overweight should be really clear with the mom that she is setting that child up for failure.
So we need actually bottoms up, obviously empowerment, to talk to people like adults.
We're poisoning our kids.
My heart absolutely goes out to that mom.
And from the top-down policy solutions, President Trump and the RNC platform, most people didn't see this, there was one big line on health.
It said, we support benefit flexibility.
And that's what we're talking about with HSAs.
A single mom should be able to have an account where it's not just top-down, your kid needs drugs.
Right now, Medicaid is like, okay, your kid has this, drugs.
And they wait for the kid to get sick.
What if, and this is what President Trump's talked about, this is what's in the RNC platform,
what if people had flexible accounts where that mom could actually choose
to invest in exercise for her child, to invest in actually research supplementation,
and actually keep that kid healthy?
I believe if we empower Americans with their healthcare dollars
and see these medically valid interventions, food is a medically valid intervention,
exercise is a medically valid intervention.
The problem is we have a one-size-fits-all system that does not trust Americans
and waits for them to get sick and then jams drugs down their throat.
That can be unwound very quickly.
So the mom that doesn't have the purchasing power that she wished she had, I agree, there's a way to make it work.
There is.
There's not as bad options out there, correct?
There's growing startups that have organic type competitors to juice boxes.
What then, I know you wrote this in the book, but advice or direction, farmers markets, at some point it's also, are you just being lazy and you want the easy way out?
Yeah, so as Casey talks about absolutely like we've had and she talks about this very eloquently that feminism has convinced people that it's somehow lesser to cook food for your family and we've absolutely been destroying like at home cooking.
So I think that is essential somebody in the partnership doing that.
And then, what do you buy?
You buy pasture-raised meat, ideally.
You buy organic fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds.
You know, you buy stuff that isn't in a box.
I mean, fundamentally, what we talk about there is, you know, you can get deeper.
You can get into the omega-3 versus omega-6 profile.
You can get into what type of antioxidants you need.
You can do personalized blood tests for just a couple hundred dollars and see what kind of nutrient deficiencies you have.
which absolutely tie to disease down the road, and look for food that matches those needs
that you have with your food.
But fundamentally, and we talk about this, and this is our big message,
if you can get your ultra-processed food consumption down to your family and figure out inexpensive ways
to bulk buy beef, to bulk buy some vegetables, and cook that for your family as much as humanly possible.
We also go through packaged and fast food alternatives that are healthier, but you've got to get
the ultra-processed foods.
There's three ingredients, Charlie, that I would really harp on.
It's added sugar, it's seed oils, and ultra-processed grains.
Would you say high fructose corn syrup too?
Added sugar, I would cut.
So there's 50 names for added sugars.
And then high fructose corn syrup is one of the worst offenders, because fructose actually
makes us want to eat more.
It actually hijacks our biology.
It subsidizes obesity.
So there's 50 names for sugar.
Then seed oils is really inflammatory, very cheap oil, not used in much of the rest of the world.
I think very problematic.
Is it true it came from John D. Rockerfield?
Yeah, so it was literally a byproduct of oil production.
They actually used it as engine lubricant.
And John D. Rockefeller lobbied to have this basically classified for human consumption because they had so much of it.
And literally, it greased the machinery that he used.
So he invented the seed oil industry.
And now seed oils are the top source of American calories.
Now, again, I want to be clear.
This is what we're talking, what I'm advising.
There's policy implications here, but we at least need to all be on a common knowledge about the facts.
It is probably not a good thing that the top source of American calories is engine lubricant that was created 80 years ago and we're not evolutionary made yet.
Again, I'm not a liberal, but I will say though that the higher up the income ladder you get, the more concern I see for healthy eating.
The lower, it's just they say, this is too expensive, it's too much.
I see the byproducts, I just, the healthy food stores, like True Foods for example, which I'm sure you're aware of, tend to be cloistered in higher income areas.
Luxury belief for the rich, being able to go to True Foods, have edamame, guacamole, and an ancient grains bowl with all naturally sourced stuff, and a single mom in the West Valley can barely afford her rent.
So, I'm saying getting her to care as much.
So, this is my framework on it, Charlie.
I think the fact that we see not poison your kids as a luxury belief is how far we've gotten away from, I think, the reality.
You can absolutely stereotype, you know, guacamole and organic quinoa.
But if you talk to that—you tell me, you're talking to a lot of them—if you talk to that lower-income voter, they're very concerned about their kids.
Of course.
It's just there's an exhaustion and fatigue, and there's just a financial despair.
So I think the Make America Healthy Again movement that is now brewing is actually—there's a couple steps before telling that voter to go to Whole Foods and buy organic quinoa.
It's actually, we need a political movement that's fighting to protect kids.
Perfect segue into politics.
Right now, you know, Michelle Obama was actually right that schools, you know, kind of subsidizing
really toxic ingredients for kids was a problem.
She actually got bought off.
They got to her and she shifted to exercise and got away from food.
Yeah, went from eating to just move.
She actually, it was too much heat.
The federal school lunch program is one of the largest sources of American calories.
It has no dietary guidelines whatsoever.
If we're going to spend that money, we shouldn't be subsidizing toxic food that's going to
cost trillions of dollars of downstream health impacts.
It's not conservative or liberal to have an opinion about that.
So what I would say to that single mom, and I think this is really the issue that I'm
really pushing and I'm advising on.
is it's not about lecturing anyone on food.
It's about creating a political movement that's fighting against the corrupt forces that are
profiting from poisoning and drugging our children.
And we can have a very systematic policy platform to chip away.
But this is the problem, right?
And I think this does connect with that voter.
There's forces at work that are making a lot of money by that poor child being sick.
A poor child who's a woman dies 15 years younger than a rich woman in America.
That is predominantly because of our toxic food environment.
And there is many, many things we can start to do to root out that corruption, those forces that profit from that kid being sick, well before, you know, lecturing them to go to Whole Foods.
So, you know Bobby Kennedy pretty well.
You've been advising both him and the Trump campaign.
What is your take on them combining forces?
Yeah, I just want to say this from my very small vantage point, is that this was not about horse trading.
This was not about, you know, kind of polling.
This was hours and hours of true emotional connection on what I think they've both talked about, like what issue could be more important?
What issue could be more important that a child born today is going to live shorter than their parents right now in America?
What is just more important that, you know, this epidemic rate of mental health issues and chronic disease among kids?
We are truly, when you look at the stats, poisoning our population.
And it's because of these forces that have propelled, I think, President Trump's movement.
There's this thing that people can't quite put their finger on, but there's dark forces against us and there's institutions that are failing.
They, again, from my small vantage point, all I can say is there was true bonding on that issue and a desire to put this existential topic more at the top of the national conversation.
No real deals or horse trading.
It was really just a bond over that, and I think you've seen that happening over the past couple days.
For over 23 years, Selective Search has been America's leading matchmaking authority, especially for conservatives and people of faith.
They know the challenges you face trying to find someone who respects your traditional family values and is on the same page politically.
So if you are a 35 to 45 year old man who loves God, loves his country, and wants a family, Selective Search has female clients looking to meet you.
And the best part?
Selective Search offers 100% complimentary and confidential candidate program for you as they search to match their clients.
Some of my dear friends are using the service and speak very highly of it.
Men, this is what you've been looking for.
Visit SelectiveSearch.com today.
This perfect conservative woman is waiting for you.
Let the professionals at SelectiveSearch.com surprise you with women already looking for you in Southern California.
If you're in Southern California, listen carefully.
There's amazing women waiting for you.
Go to SelectiveSearch.com today.
That's SelectiveSearch.com today.
If you're in Southern California, sign up right now and maybe you'll find your partner
Check it out right now.
So Callie, what can be done and maybe address my one concern?
The only thing that made me disagree in your segment with Tucker.
Wow, you listen carefully.
And I remember, too.
So fundamentally, the framework is stop recommending the crap and stop incentivizing it.
And I do think there's a meeting, actually, with 100 members of Congress in my coalition over the next month, bipartisan.
I mean, you know, there's a lot Congress can do.
But I'll just give a couple examples of how you just root out this corruption, root out this environment that's profitable against being sick.
So let me give you an example.
50% of TV news advertising budget comes from the pharmaceutical industry.
So the reason—you listen to Joe Rogan, you listen to your podcast, They're talking about kids being sick.
They're talking about what to eat.
They're talking about how to exercise correctly.
This is what Americans actually want to talk about.
There it is right there.
There literally is a drug commercial on there.
Not a single, not a single segment, not a single segment on the mainstream news about the fact that 33% of kids have prediabetes.
And then of course COVID, you know, was all about a pharmaceutical solution instead of the fact that this was preying on our immune systems.
There's not a bigger issue than the obesity and chronic disease crisis among kids, but the reason they don't talk about it is obvious, because they're paid for by pharma.
With one stroke of a pen, just as Reagan initiated D2C advertising, we cannot be the only country in the world that— Does it require legislative— No!
It was an executive order to an FDA department.
That was how it was created by Reagan.
I'm an amazing president, but I think a mistake on this one.
And there's nothing conservative or liberal that the pharmaceutical industry that, as a demonstrable fact— So wait, you can make it illegal to advertise?
Day one.
Yeah, and we're the only country that allows it.
And it's a beautiful situation, because that's a— Oh man, they would riot.
So it's a 90% support that would have, at least, and it would cut—maybe I'm telegraphing too much here—but They're going to freak out, but it would cut 50%.
I mean, everyone should be shorting media stocks.
Well, the media companies would riot, too.
They would.
They would say it's an assault on free speech, but it would be... Could you imagine a more beautiful situation than what they would possibly say?
Would they win in court?
No.
No, no.
I mean, you know, no.
I mean, this is an executive order thing, and this is the president.
Oh, I love that.
The president has a lot of constitutional authority, and we get in the state of emergency.
You know, the Federalist Papers talked about this.
There's several areas, including public health and, you know, taking executive authority on military stuff where the president is endowed with some authority.
And if the president sees a public health crisis like with COVID, there were a lot of that was executive authority.
There's no more important issue in the country right now than the chronic disease crisis or more.
And this would be undoing something.
Yeah, yeah.
It'd be an undoing executive order.
That's a stroke of a pen.
So if it could be done by executive order, it would be undone by an executive order.
And I'd urge President Biden to do it tomorrow.
He should.
But who would buy all this commercial airtime?
Well, you're advertising great stuff.
You're advertising wonderful, but it would not be good for the corporate media.
It's white noise.
It would not be good for the corporate media.
It's the white noise advertising carousel of Ozempic, and you've got to get Allegra, and it's just non-stop.
You could not watch the news or the Olympics without getting a new pharmaceutical product jammed down your face.
Simone Biles, you know, unfortunately, you know, it's GLP-1s, right?
So that, as I talked about with Talker, is not just to influence the consumers.
That's a way to influence the news itself.
By being the largest funder, they're able to call, and this is where it all connects, right?
Because they're like, hey, you're criticizing Ozympic, but I got this Harvard study saying Ozympic's perfect.
Like, that's misinformation.
So the gravitas of the academic research helps the news censor.
So that's number one.
You could, tomorrow, with a stroke of a pen, say that the USDA and NIH Guideline Committees that make guidelines on standards of care and nutrition guidelines can't take members that have conflicts of interest.
That sounds like something everyone would assume already happens.
That's not true.
As I mentioned, 95% of the USDA Nutrition Guideline Committee, 95% of the members take money from food and or pharma companies.
Literally, we have a co-opting of the systems.
The NIH recently came out during COVID.
NIH researchers made $800 million of royalties for COVID-era things, undisclosed.
Everyone sitting at the NIH and the USDA is on the payroll of the industries they're trying to regulate.
The FDA, as I mentioned, I can tell you from being in DC, and you know this, bureaucracies are built to grow.
How does the FDA grow?
They are paid for by pharma.
They're not paid for by taxpayers.
They are paid for by pharma user fees.
They just corrected RFK and I on a stat.
We said 50% of their budget comes from pharma.
They said, no, it's 47%.
And it's actually 75% when you get to actually approving of drugs.
So there's a simple set of executive orders, even without this state of emergency.
That that can be instituted by the president to just start targeting this corruption.
And then when you get the science right, you get the children's health right.
All roads lead back to big pharma.
I'll tell you, man, who would buy all this ridiculous advertising?
These companies would plummet.
That would be great.
He's got to do that day one.
So, Callie, state of emergency.
Yeah, my argument on that—so the president has clear constitutional authority to declare a state of emergency on a public health issue.
There's been dozens over time.
And let's just get at the highest level possible here.
We have, I think, agree, a true emergency when it comes to childhood chronic disease in this country.
I think it is one of the greatest examples of crony capitalism, the corruption that President Trump talks about has fueled his movement.
It is one of the most visceral areas, these institutions that have profited from kids being sick.
And it's existential because it's going to bankrupt our country.
It's 20 percent of GDP right now growing at an increasing rate, faster than any other industry.
It's going to be 40 percent.
I mean, the downfall of America will be because we let ourselves get sicker and then bankrupt our country while doing it.
So there is an emergency here.
And I think my just high level point, and just my personal opinion, is the Make America Healthy Again platform should be robustly working with bipartisan members of Congress and looking at executive actions To really build a movement around getting kids healthier.
And I think as you do that, you actually uncover and shine light on systemic regulatory capture that is hurting our country in many other areas that we're talking about from the military-industrial complex to what I would argue is, frankly, an education-industrial complex that does not have our kids' interests at heart.
So I think that would just be my personal argument is, a platform of robust action.
And I would just say, and this is what my opinion is, I'm advising strongly on, this is not hard to unwind.
You don't think so?
I don't, I really don't.
This has happened quickly and it can be unwound quickly.
I don't think that an American is lazier than an Italian.
And the diabetes rate in Italy is like three times less and the obesity rate substantially less.
There's just different policies and incentives in place.
And again, I think that flows from the science.
It just flows from the fact of like knowing that glyphosate is like.
crushing our microbiomes, and we have neurotoxins in our food. It's like just,
just, we should just hear the truth and let the policy chips fall where they may.
But it starts with getting the corruption out. I actually think it's
breathtaking how much our country's been brought to its knees by the corruption
of our scientific entities. I mean, have we not learned a lesson from COVID and
the worst public policy mistake in American history with the lockdowns? I mean...
Some have. Some have, for sure.
My eyes have been opened.
I have two questions.
For your health agenda, do you believe Donald Trump is the best choice to advance that?
I have been engaging with all sides of the aisle.
After my mom died, my sister and I declared we devote our lives to this issue.
I have gone to the White House.
I have met with members of Congress.
The two people, the two sides that have followed up and shown a genuine, deep, emotional, almost spiritual connection to this issue is the Trump campaign and the RFK campaign.
And right now, they're the people who understand this issue, and they're the people who are going to fight with us.
Is corporate media generally embracing your message and what you talk about in your book?
Good energy.
Yeah, the book Good Energy is the number one book in the country, number one on Amazon charts the past 14 days.
We thank Tucker for that.
But there's a real movement brewing.
The best-selling health book this year, we have had a complete and utter blackout from mainstream media.
So why won't the media cover the number one book in the world?
This book is in my sister's voice, and it is not one word of politics or partisanship.
It is a manual for personal empowerment.
It really hits on what you've been probing on, Charlie, of what a family can do on a budget.
It is a positive book, and I have heard from friends behind the scenes at NBC and other networks that because it even hints on a criticism of pharmaceutical
companies and food companies, which are their two largest advertisers, it's a complete
blackout.
I mean, but look, I just hope our audience understands you have the number one book in
the country that hints about criticizing a powerful institution and media now protects
powerful institutions?
The media used to be the referee and- Or should be, in the ideal.
Yeah, it used to be.
It is the protector of industries.
It is the referee of what acceptable debate is.
This book is an empowerment manual to take our health back, to understand our blood tests, to use bio-wearables.
It has detailed shopping lists of what food to buy.
You know, it's an empowerment manual.
In the midst of an undebatable chronic disease catastrophe happening to the American people where 80% of adults are overweight or obese.
I mean, some things happen.
Infertility we didn't even talk about.
Male sperm count is plummeting.
Why do you think that is?
Why is infertility skyrocketing?
Our body is crying out for help.
Our core evolutionary function.
It's the same point I made about metabolic health.
You look at PCOS.
Nobody knows this.
No doctor talks about this.
PCOS is insulin resistance.
Casey talked about this on Tucker.
It is literally the same branch as diabetes.
PCOS not only can be reversed quickly through a keto diet, it also is a warning sign that mother has essentially some kind of early diabetes.
We have a friend who their doctor was like, oh, you have PCOS.
She didn't believe the doctor.
Two months did a prolon fast. I know diet got pregnant 30 days like six days later
They wanted to put her on drugs. Oh, yeah, and all this and she went back to the doctor was like well
I got pregnant all these like oh weird things happen sometimes no contrition no admission no understanding and
Charlie just the last point This is where things can change quickly.
It's just get that conversation between the doctor and the patient.
That doctor recommending drugs instead of a keto diet, that's corrupt.
And we just need to have the correct science in the medical guidelines.
We just need to literally follow the science.
The most important dynamic in this country is when a patient has a chronic condition and they're sitting across the doctor and that doctor starts getting them on a pharmaceutical treadmill.
We just need to enforce and make sure that doctors follow the science.
Everything will flow from there.
People listen to doctors.
People listen to Dr. Fauci on the jab.
90% got them.
People listen to food paramedics.
People listen to the Surgeon General on smoking.
We just need the correct science.
Is it because the doctor deep down thinks the patient won't file dietary guidelines?
Like, okay, just take the pill.
I think that part of that is like they just think so low of their patient.
They're like, you're not going to eat avocados.
Just take the pill.
Casey, the first day of Stanford Med School, they said the American patient is lazy.
Is the American patient lazy?
I do not believe that my mom wanted to not meet her grandchildren.
I do not believe that Americans are systematically trying to be fat and not walk There is something systemically happening.
getting so much heart disease and diabetes.
I do not, I believe Americans want to live and thrive and I do not believe they want to be
mass poisoning their children.
I do not believe we're significantly more suicidal and lazy than Spaniards or Italians, okay?
There is something systemically happening.
It is at the beating heart of what's fueling this frustration in our country
and what's fueling the MAGA movement.
And it is such, and I'm so optimistic about what's happening with RFK and Trump.
This is a true nonpartisan, bipartisan issue.
It's us versus the Uniparty.
It's us versus corruption.
And there's no more important issue.
So no, I do not believe American patients are trying to poison themselves and die.
I think there's a clear systemic problem.
Yeah, and I think the doctors should acknowledge that.
Do you know who I think is lazy?
I think doctors are lazy.
100%.
I think doctors are lazier than their patients because they want to get to what?
You eat what you kill, as you said in the podcast, right?
And the most amount of people that you see, so if you can see 20 patients out of 15, let's get this over with.
Prescription pad.
I make the money, I go.
And also, the doctor doesn't want to do the follow-up or do the hand-holding necessary of, oh, are you staying on diet and all that?
They'd much rather just give them Ozembic.
We've completely lost our way, and I think you need that Elon Musk energy that I talked about briefly.
Elon Musk, I don't care if I lose money on Twitter.
There's a bigger issue here.
I don't care if it hurts Tesla's share price.
I'm going to speak the truth.
Actually, if the medical system just had that moral courage and pharmaceutical CEOs and the dean of Harvard Med School who takes millions of dollars from pharmaceutical companies on personal payments, if they just started actually just fighting for kids, fighting with the moral clarity that Donald Trump and RFK have spoken about at the last speech, start talking like that.
This is not that complicated.
No.
But, I mean, in my own opinion, you don't have to say this, Kamala Harris is purchased by the very same food companies and food regulators.
That's just demonstrable.
It's just a fact, and it will not get better unless we have a change in leadership.