All Episodes
June 15, 2021 - The Delingpod - James Delingpole
01:02:20
Dr Renée Hoenderkamp
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to the Delling Pod with me, James Dellingpole.
And I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but I really am.
And I'm really delighted to have Rene Hundertkamp on The Delling Pod, because Renée shares... Renée's a doctor.
You're a GP, aren't you, Renée?
I am, yeah.
And there aren't many doctors who are speaking out about this kind of biofascist state that we seem to be living in, not just in the UK, but I think You talk to some, but some poor sod who lives in Victoria, Australia, for example, and they're having the same misery.
And in large chunks of the US, they're having the same misery.
And I'm amazed that more doctors aren't speaking out, particularly to do with the issue of the vaccines, which we're going to discuss.
So tell me, first of all, Rennie, how...
Did you see from the start that there were problems with this so-called coronavirus?
When did you smell a rat?
I did.
Immediately.
So it wasn't so much that I smelled a rat, James, it was that I was unhappy with what I could see was going to happen.
if we lock down.
And that, for me, was obvious from the very start.
And I wrote about it extensively in the GP Magazine Pulse.
I wrote about four articles from about April through to September on different subjects.
And my first one was really because I'd spent a day in GP.
We'd just locked down.
All NHS services had closed.
And I saw four patients at various stages of cancer who had just been cancelled.
And I was outraged.
I was absolutely outraged.
One of them was a youngish woman who'd had curative lung cancer surgery.
That's curative.
If she'd have had her surgery on that day, it would have cured her of her cancer, and it had been cancelled.
I just thought, we're in April, this is going to just escalate and escalate, and patient harm is going to go through the roof.
So I wrote about it.
And when I wrote about it initially, I got so much stick from other doctors.
I can't tell you.
I was accused of not caring about people, that I was happy to see people die, that I couldn't possibly be a doctor.
And the vitriol was amazing.
And I got some support from some doctors, especially in the comments in Pulse, but it was very clear that they were very, very scared to speak out against this groupthink.
Right, so what do you think was motivating the doctors who wrote you the hate mail?
Because given that you'd written pieces expressing concern about cancer patients not getting the appropriate treatment in time, you would have thought that the argument that you're a sort of callous hag who wants people to die wouldn't really stand up to any scrutiny.
So what was their beef do you think?
I don't know, but so much of what's happened hasn't stood up to scrutiny, but continues to happen.
And I think everybody was terrified.
Everybody was being told that there was this rampaging virus that was going to kill anyone it came into contact with.
I think doctors felt very sensitive about being on the front line, and I get that.
But at the same time, we are doctors for a reason.
We're doctors because we want to help patients, I think.
And I think we had to see both sides of that story.
So yes, I wanted to be very careful about how I managed my own risk and that of my family.
But at the same time, I wanted my patients to get the best treatment that they possibly could for everything, not just for COVID.
Oh, I wish you were my doctor.
In fact, Renée, there's going to be lots of people watching you now saying, where are all the Renées?
Why aren't all the doctors like this?
Because I think one of the things, you can correct me if I'm wrong here, one of the things that's changed possibly forever in the last 18 months is that a significant chunk of us We'll never want to go near a doctor again.
We feel utterly, utterly betrayed by your profession, because it seems to... I think... I'm speaking for myself here, but I'm sure I'm speaking for a lot of other people too.
We were brought up to believe, you know, we, well, many of us grew up when you had a family doctor who knew all your family and had been checking you since you were born and was familiar with your problems and was there to help you.
And we trusted the family doctor, we trusted the surgery, we trusted that the doctor actually cared about her health and they weren't just a prescription machine just giving scripts for things that they'd been on weekend jaunts with a big pharma company to promote.
But I think a lot of our eyes have been opened by this pandemic.
The doctors haven't looked after us at all.
They've just kind of looked after themselves, number one.
But two, they've been...
Promulgating a lie.
That's the thing.
I mean, it's a big deal going to medical, you know, getting on a medical course, isn't it?
We non-medics imagine that, wow, you've learned so much stuff, you know, about health, you know, about diet and stuff.
But it's not true, is it?
I mean, you're just basically automatons in the service of this kind of biomedical state, which tells you what to do and you're helpless to resist.
Let me give a little bit of defense here to doctors, obviously.
It did take me 13 years to become a GP, so it's quite a long time, and hopefully I learned lots along the way.
Also, James, I want to say that I have very close friends who worked in ITU and in A&E at the peak of all of the different peaks that we've had, and some of them are absolutely traumatized by what they did and what they saw.
You know, saying that relatives couldn't visit a dying patient and having to do it by iPad while the doctor holds it, Putting a patient to sleep and telling them they may never wake up is traumatizing.
And that mustn't be belittled.
It did happen.
And these people have really, really suffered.
But at the same time, the GP service, which has varied dramatically.
So I see patients in my GP.
I have been in my GP surgery every single day since this pandemic started, apart from the two weeks when I had COVID and I did it from my sofa.
I still worked and I was feeling pretty rough, I can tell you.
So I do still see patients, but that is really varied.
And I have seen that from both ends because I've worked in A&E during the pandemic and I've seen patients that shouldn't be in A&E because their GP is closed or they can't get to speak to anyone, they have to do an in-consult.
And I've seen patients, you know, who just cannot get to see a GP.
So it's really mixed and it varies postcode to postcode.
Some GPs are obviously Brilliant.
And it's not just me.
There are lots of brilliant GPs and there are some who have stood back and I worry about that.
And I worry about patients.
Yeah.
Well, there's various things to unpick there.
I'm fascinated to hear about that.
One of the reasons that A&E services have been overwhelmed is because doctor surgeries aren't doing their job and people are having to come to casualty instead.
Is that right?
With what?
Come on.
So I did a three month stint in A&E from January to March, specifically to help them cope with the number of patients that were coming through the door.
And I literally had an office in the waiting room and I saw patients before they got anywhere near the actual department.
And I would say in the main, I sent seven out of 10 of them straight home because I took the view, if this person was in front of me as a GP, what would I do?
Would I send them to A&E?
No, send them home.
I treated them.
I gave them advice.
Sometimes people would turn up with a letter that their GP had emailed them that was completely inappropriate to be seen in A&E.
Sometimes it was just that they couldn't speak to a GP about a very simple thing on the phone that would have just been a two-minute phone call.
It would have been, no, no, that's fine, just carry on.
But they would come to A&E because they didn't have that reassurance.
So yes, there was lots of that.
But there is also a lot of people turning up at A&E because they find it more convenient.
So again, it's a mixed bag.
The 7 out of 10 that you were sending home, just give me an example of the kind of the non-conditions that they were.
Oh, so it would be somebody who'd had an allergy that morning for an hour to something and their face was a bit red.
Somebody that was started on the contraceptive pill three weeks ago and had started bleeding.
That's normal, but someone should have warned them.
You know, just very very simple things.
Someone with ear pain that they'd had for two days, someone whose back was hurting, whose knee was hurting for a couple of days, just things like that.
And is it because over the years we've become so infantilized and maybe the products of a dumbed-down education system and also the kind of the deification of the NHS as the kind of answer to, you know, like our kind of our mother, sort of almost like our Gaia.
Is that what has created these ignoramuses who don't know that you don't bother A&E with petty problems like that?
Okay, so I would never call a patient an ignoramus.
That's number one.
A patient is a patient.
Whatever they're worried about is a worry to them.
But I do think we have created a society where nobody can accept a moment of pain.
So the moment they get a sore throat, they phone the GP and they expect a solution.
And we have created that.
We've told everybody that there's a solution.
And there isn't, you know, we don't always have a solution.
And I think what we've lost is we've lost grandma sitting in the corner saying, oh, go and have some honey, go and have some lemon and hot water.
It will get better.
Yes.
So that's my role now.
I am granny.
And I, on the phone, explain how long these things last, what they can do to help.
I'm sorry, I'm just going to repeat this.
Everyone watching this is going to say, I better not give your address of your surgery because people are going to be wanting, they are, seriously, you're fantastic.
It's a very mixed bag, James.
I went on talk radio yesterday and complained about masks and I got people telling me they were glad I wasn't their GP.
So it's a mixed bag, I can tell you.
Right, yes, yes.
I was going to pick up on the point you made earlier.
Where you talked about medics who had been traumatized by telling dying people that they couldn't see their family or whatever.
But I think we need to be clear here.
This was not a medical decision.
This was a political decision.
Right.
This point is so important.
Yeah.
This point is so important.
Tell me, enlarge on it, please.
So I had to explain this.
So when I got when I got vilified for my first articles that I wrote back in April last year, I had to explain to doctors that this is not a criticism of you.
This is nothing to do with you.
My criticism is of the policy that has been bluntly laid on the NHS from the top down.
And you are just the victims, as are the patients.
It's not about the doctors.
No doctor ever gets up in the morning or nurse Or physiotherapists, whoever, and says to themselves, I want to do harm today.
No, none of us, I promise.
So this is about the policies that have seen these blunt instruments across the NHS just take managers with pens to waiting lists and put lines through them.
Yes, yes, exactly.
And certainly you're not the first.
I've got a few doctors who support me on Patreon or whatever, or follow my Telegram group, and they're reporting the same thing.
I mean, a lot of them, I think, are at the end of their tether, in that they joined, they became doctors as a vocation.
They wanted to help people, make people's lives better, and they found themselves trapped in this bureaucracy.
This seems to be a major part of the problem that doctors are so constrained.
It's a bit like it's a bit like a form of woke, but it's like people having to kind of go to diversity meetings in businesses.
But the medical version is you have no freedom, do you?
We have no freedom.
And I think more importantly, as GPs, it's slightly different.
We are drowning in paperwork.
And if you asked, if you look at any of the GP surveys, most of them want to retire early because they can't cope anymore.
And I watched the partner at the practice where I work, who is just drowning and going from meeting to meeting to meeting to tick this box, tick that box, fill out targets, you know, meet targets.
Go to diversity training, you know, that kind of thing.
And you're drowning, and that's not what we want to do as doctors.
So I structure my life very specifically so that I work as what's known as a portfolio GP.
I work in the same practice all of the time, so I'm part of the furniture, and I know all the patients, but I literally do it as a contractor.
So that I go in, I do my surgery for three hours, I do all of my admin in that time, my referrals, see my patients, and then I go home.
Because I'm not prepared to drown in paperwork.
It's not what I went to medical school for.
Yes.
I think we should cut to the chase here, Renny, and talk about, I think the thing that probably bothers most of us most, which is vaccines for children.
I mean, I'm horrified by this, but I'd love to hear your perspective as a GP.
Right.
OK, so I've stayed fairly out of the vaccine argument for the simple reason that it's a really complex and it's a difficult area as a doctor because vaccines in the world have been a force for good in general.
So first of all, I want to talk about me.
So I am totally pro vaccine.
I take a flu jab every single year.
My daughter, who's only two and a half, has had every single NHS vaccine, plus an extra one that I paid for, chickenpox, because why let her get chickenpox if she doesn't have to?
I have hepatitis B, which most people don't have.
So I'm fully on board with the vaccine rollout generally in this country.
And I think as a country, we do it very well.
You know, it's not mandated, which I'm fully in support of.
And we convince people that vaccination their children is a good thing.
And it is.
But this one isn't.
Vaccinating children against COVID-19, in my opinion, is awful, and it shouldn't happen.
And I've got many, many reasons for that, and much of it backed up by data, obviously, because I wouldn't just say this willy-nilly.
So, you know, the COVID vaccine for vulnerable people is a no-brainer.
It's a disease that kills people who are vulnerable.
We tend to know in the main who they are, not always, but in the main, so it's a no-brainer.
For people, you know, Over 60 who have obesity, men, older people, diabetes, hypertension, risk factors for having a bad outcome for COVID.
Yes, of course, it's a fantastic thing and we've rolled it out brilliantly in this country.
But why we're now going down to children, I don't know.
Children do not die of COVID.
In fact, in the UK, there has not been a death of a healthy under 15 year old of COVID.
They barely get symptoms.
My two and a half year old had COVID when I did, and she had a fever for an hour.
That was it.
Wow.
How did you catch that?
I mean, how are you even aware that in such a short space of time?
So the weird, well, the weird thing was, is that I had these great big rosy cheeks, like, you know, well, who's that woman in Wurzel Gummidge?
The one with the big rosy cheeks?
Oh, yes.
I look like her.
Yeah.
I really did look like her.
And suddenly I looked at my daughter and she looked the same as me.
I took her temperature and it was up.
Took it again an hour later, it was gone and she was fine.
We then did her antibodies later and they were massive.
Because that's what children do.
They have a great immune system and they just get rid of it.
So, we know that there is really no risk to healthy children from this virus.
And as a doctor, we always have to say to ourselves, first do no harm.
And any medication that you give to anyone has a risk, everything from paracetamol through to, you know, anything you can think of.
So straight away, we have to ask ourselves with kids, well, there's no risk of the disease, so why should we cause them harm?
And what are those harms?
And that's a big question, because firstly, we don't know yet, because there's no long-term data.
We don't know what might happen when this is rolled out and we saw with the AstraZeneca vaccine that in the trials it looked very safe.
It is quite safe but as soon as they rolled it out to lots of people blood clots started to appear.
You need long-term data.
So we've got a situation where we know that we have no long-term data and in the trials that are currently going on And in America, where they have rolled it out to 12 year olds and above, we already have a problem.
So the CDC reported yesterday that they are investigating 230, thereabouts, cases of myocarditis in teenagers.
Boys, funnily enough, not girls, it's affecting boys.
And Israel have now said that they too have seen the same thing.
So teenagers are getting inflammation of their heart.
from the Pfizer vaccine.
As a parent, I'm horrified by that.
I'm absolutely horrified.
Well, I'd be interested actually to see, to hear your perspective.
How big a deal is that?
I mean, if two years ago somebody had come with you and their child had an inflamed heart, how serious is that?
Serious.
So now, Most of these boys are recovering and that's the defense that the Israeli Health Minister is using to carry on vaccinating children.
He actually said it's fine because they get better.
However, myocarditis can lead to heart failure, it can lead to death.
Now it hasn't yet, but how many children do we want to see with heart failure or death?
If that's a possibility.
And we don't know which one of those children that we're putting a vaccine in might be that child.
So if I was a parent, I'd say, well, my child's not going to get sick with this disease.
Therefore, I'm not going to take that risk, however small.
And of course it's small, but it is a risk and it is there.
And the more children we roll it out to, the more children will have myocarditis.
Yes and I mean presumably myocarditis could have long-term health consequences.
I mean yes.
So that's the other question isn't it?
Who knows what damage it might do to the heart that will manifest itself in 15 years time?
Yeah.
You know so I'm really really concerned about that.
And I would temper that with, if you have a child who has a vulnerability to COVID, then of course it's a different, it's a different conversation because then you have a risk and then it might be worth taking a risk with the vaccine.
So vulnerable children, yes, of course they might need a vaccine.
Not vulnerable, which is most of them, not a chance.
Right.
I don't understand.
Out of interest, I shouldn't be asking you because it's private information, but where are you on the, have you had the vaccine yourself?
So I had COVID, as you know, back in November, and I wasn't going to have the vaccine for that reason.
But then I decided that I might want to travel.
All of those things.
It's a bad reason.
It is a bad reason.
It's a bad reason.
But I think the nudge was working on me as well, in that we wouldn't ever be able to travel.
And I've worked really hard to do so.
And I've had one AstraZeneca.
I then had my antibodies checked and they are so high that they can't be counted.
They're off the top of the scale.
Interesting.
So I haven't had the second one.
That's that's very interesting.
But I've had it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, I had it or I had I tested positive for it, whether I had it or not, I don't know, because there's so many false positives.
But yeah, I had it quite early on in March last year, although some people, I mean, I think we're getting it in December 2019.
I think it's been around a lot longer than people have acknowledged.
I tell you what really bothered me about when I was offered my, offered, yeah, I got my letters and my phone calls suggesting I come in for my lucky, you know, I'd won the golden ticket for my job.
It was very much a kind of one-size-fits-all policy.
They hadn't taken into account things like, for example, the fact that I had a pulmonary embolism a few years ago.
Now, I would have thought, correct me if I'm wrong, that would put me in an increased risk category for future blood clotting.
I mean, you know, with the AstraZeneca, say.
It would.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, having had a PE puts you at risk of having another one in the future.
Yeah, thanks for reassuring me, Doctor.
Yeah, that's rather what I feared.
And I have to say, I wouldn't recommend them to anybody.
It was absolutely horrible.
The pain I had was just... And this is what people are dying of, isn't it?
Right, so people die of PEs.
Actually, the people are dying of blood clots in the brain.
It's a slightly different, it's a clot, but it's a slightly different one.
It's one in the brain.
But the other thing to talk about children and this risk is we've seen clots in adults, and there now looks like there's some evidence that A very small proportion of kids vaccinated are also getting clots.
So even if 1% of those were to have a catastrophic clot and die, how many kids are we going to accept who have no risk of Covid to die?
And if it were someone's child, how would they then feel about having done it?
So there's a risk of myocarditis, there's a risk of clots.
And you're right, initially we were just rolling out whatever vaccine was available.
But having some long-term data now, which is the key, the long-term data is the key, we now don't give anyone under 40 the AstraZeneca because of the risk of a clot.
These things evolve in time and I think that's what we need before we go anywhere near children.
We need time and that's what we're not being given and I'm not sure why.
I did a podcast a few weeks ago with a whistleblower, a lady who works as a receptionist in quite a large practice in the north of England, 20,000 patients.
Is that quite big?
I don't know.
She's saying they've been inundated with calls from people after having had the jab and calling in concerned about adverse reactions.
Often not making the connection with the jab, but some of them have been.
And in every case, the doctor's main priority was to assure them that this had no connection with the jab, even though these doctors must have must be aware that you can't have this many problems like similar problems.
It wouldn't be a coincidence, would it?
I mean, have you had this with your surgery with adverse reactions?
We've had adverse reactions.
I wouldn't lie and say we've been inundated, but the ones I've spoken to, I've done two yellow cards on because they were odd, they were different and they were persisting.
So I have done the yellow cards, which I don't think is happening as much as it should.
Or I direct patients to the yellow card system because they can record it themselves.
We haven't been inundated.
I wouldn't say that, but I do think that as this data comes together, we are going to see lots.
I mean, there was an article in Medscape the other day, Medscape is not known to be upsetting the medical-political scene, and it was just a collection of data from doctors and nurses and healthcare workers who'd had very, very bad reactions, lots of them neurological.
So I thought that was quite interesting, that very mainstream and respected publications are now coming out with these adverse effects.
Again, I think in time, lots will come out.
That's interesting.
So that's all doctors and nurses and people who, yeah, they almost... I was about to say they don't have a dog in the fight, but they almost do have a dog in the fight and they want the vaccines to succeed.
And if they're saying that, no, something's up, then we really should be paying attention.
Yeah.
Have you done... We should.
Have you thought at all, done any research, I suppose it's a future event rather than a current one, about AGE responses?
Are you worried about that at all?
I haven't.
I know about it, obviously, and I think it could be a response if the antibodies that the vaccines are generating are massive.
And I think for some people, they are massive, especially people that have already had COVID, who may not even know they've had COVID.
Let's not forget that.
We, in July, we, well, in July, interestingly, we rolled out antibody testing in our practice.
Every member of staff had one.
And the only person who came up positive did not know they had had COVID.
So that's really interesting.
So I guess if antibodies then go up massively because of the vaccine.
And what the science is showing us is if you've already had COVID and you have one vaccine, you end up with 10 to 20 times the level of antibodies from somebody who's never had COVID and has had two vaccines.
And that's very clear.
Those are papers that have been in the BMJ, the Lancet.
It's very clear.
That's a bit...
Renée, I'm worried about you now.
I mean, seriously though.
So you've got, well you said yourself, you've got massively raised.
Is this your T-cells or is this the first layer of defence?
So this is just spike antibodies, because that's all that antibody tests for.
Before I had the vaccine, I tested my N antibodies, which is the one you get from natural infections, and they were raised, but quite normal, nothing scary.
But after the vaccine, both me, my mother, and my partner had the antibody test, and we are all off the scale, because we'd all had COVID.
Right, okay.
And what were your symptoms of COVID, by the way, apart from the temperature?
So I started with a banging headache that I didn't recognize as COVID because I often get headaches.
And then I got a really high temperature.
And it was just like a flu, to be honest with you.
I had a runny nose, sore throat.
I lost my sense of taste and smell.
I didn't have any breathing difficulties or anything like that.
And I was massively fatigued, which probably took about four to six weeks to resolve.
Right, right.
I think I was lucky.
I think I got the fever.
Massive, massive fever.
Like drenching my t-shirt for two nights running in just like that.
Like you could wring it out.
I'd never had that before.
And the very nasty dry cough.
Did you get that?
Yeah, I didn't get the cough, no.
And everybody's different.
So my other half had none of those symptoms.
He just had aching bones and was massively fatigued.
So we all got different symptoms.
But you see, the thing is, I was taking zinc sulfate drops, you know, really quite high potency.
And I'm sure that they made a huge difference.
I mean, actually, there are lots of things, aren't there, available that we can all take, which a, ameliorate your condition in the first place, but also stop you dying.
I suppose the obvious one is ivermectin.
Tell me about ivermectin.
Oh, I don't really know what to tell you about Ivermectin, James.
I mean, look, I've looked at the evidence for Ivermectin for the last year, probably, trying to work out why we're not using it.
And it's very mixed.
You know, some of the studies show it's equivalent.
Some of them show that there's not enough data to say it can help.
And there are others that say that it actually does stop you getting serious disease from COVID if you've already got COVID when you start taking it, or if you take it before, it prevents you from getting it.
And we need some randomized control trials but if you look at India now, I think it's Tamil Nadu didn't use ivermectin.
They used the very expensive remdesivir and their cases are still rising and all of the other regions that did use ivermectin, their cases are going down.
So maybe that's a big enough control trial.
I don't know.
I think so.
There's no money in Ivermectin.
Yeah.
Remdesivir is my least favorite Lord of the Rings character.
He's just absolutely useless.
Whereas, I don't know what film Ivermectin comes from.
But yeah, well, I think you've put it nicely there, that in a way Tamil Nadu was the control because Goa, we know, brought down the infection rate massively.
And you say that we need a randomized control trial, which actually I have to say is a very doctor response.
I mean, I'm much more hardcore than you on this.
I think the studies you've read saying we need more information, not enough evidence, are essentially the chaff
thrown up by the missile defenses of the, of Big Pharma, which does not want, does not want this effective cheap treatment, which, which, I mean, look, if anyone who owns horses or sheep or whatever gives ivermectin to them routinely at certain times of year as an anti-parasite drug, it's, it's pretty much harmless for humans.
It's, it's readily available.
It is.
So, so given that- Interestingly, I did see I did see the other day that there was some considerable money being spent on Google by the big pharma to suppress any talk of ivermectin, which I did find fairly shocking.
But as time goes on in this, James, very little shocks me anymore.
I had a very weird experience, which I can't I can't give you too many details on because because actually it would get me into trouble.
But I will say this very early on, very early on.
I wrote about hydroxychloroquine and its efficacy in dealing with COVID-19.
And I also referred to a study, I think from 2005, which confirmed that hydroxychloroquine, being a zinc ionophore, was very good at disrupting cytokine storms, which is what's going to probably kill you.
And that had been effective against SARS-CoV-1.
And SARS-CoV-1, we know that people who had SARS-CoV-1 have got the antibodies for SARS-CoV-2.
I doubt anyone who had SARS-CoV-1 has died of SARS-CoV-2.
I was very quickly squashed.
And I won't say how or why, but I just became aware There is a very, very powerful industry which wanted to squash hydroxychloroquine and now wants to suppress the data on ivermectin, which I think...
I'm going to make a prediction.
I think that come this autumn, there is going to be a massive wave of deaths caused possibly by AD responses to people who've been vaccinated and have been fooled by the government into thinking they're safe and they won't be.
Number one, it's going to be blamed on the unvaccinated.
And number two, I think doctors are going to be forbidden from or discouraged from prescribing ivermectin even though that is going to be the best available cure and there's going to be a rush of demand for ivermectin and it's not going to be available.
Tell me what you think about that.
Okay there's a few things in there I want to come on to James.
So let's start with the ivermectin.
You know If it's a cheap and simple drug that we use all of the time, then we should be able to do it.
But I can tell you that GPs, because I get asked this question on Twitter all the time, wouldn't be prescribing oral ivermectin.
We don't use it in the UK day to day.
And so GPs would be thinking, well, I don't know how to use this.
Yes, I could prescribe it.
But if it goes wrong, I'm going to be in trouble.
And I completely get that because I would be reticent at this moment.
So there would have to be a directive come down.
for doctors to use it.
The moment that comes, they would all prescribe it without a shadow of a doubt.
You know, I have no doubt, but at the moment we don't use it that way.
We use it topically for, you know, skin mites and things like that, but we don't use it for worms as it is used across India and Africa.
So people are going to be coming.
Yeah, topically.
That's the tip then.
They're going to be saying, well, I wonder when the other topical stuff, I wonder whether you can ingest it as well.
Probably can.
No, I doubt it.
So let's not recommend that.
So I think, you know what, I hope that you're wrong in terms of all the deaths, obviously, because I don't want there to be one more death.
But I think if you're right in that we can suddenly get a drug that stops you catching it and helps with the severity of it, then yes, bring it on.
Let's do it because we need all of the tools in the toolbox that we can have.
And on that note, let's just think about this whole vaccination push-out that we're now pushing down to 12-year-olds.
And why are we doing that?
Now, there could be one of two reasons for that, in my mind.
One reason, if I was really, really cynical and a conspiracist, which I never used to be, would just be money.
Follow the money.
That's why I like these vaccines.
They're really expensive.
And Pfizer and Moderna and AstraZeneca are making lots of money.
So that's pushing the agenda.
That's number one.
Or there's number two, which is, The government know, the scientists know that 10 to 20% of people, vulnerable people, not you and I, James, but vulnerable people who are on renal dialysis, having cancer therapy, are very old, are very obese, have some sort of immunosuppressant.
And Nicola Mendelsohn is one of them.
And she has been speaking out.
She's got a blood cancer and she's had two vaccines, no antibodies.
My son's father-in-law is one of them.
He's a renal dialysis patient.
He's had two vaccines, no antibodies, and his GP has told him that I am wrong, the tests are rubbish, and he's fine.
He will die if he gets COVID.
So I think the government know this and they're worried.
SAGE have said in their minutes that when we have our next wave of hospitalizations and deaths, 60 to 70 percent of the deaths will come from doubly vaccinated people.
The new variant doesn't miss the vaccine.
So the only answer for that can be that vulnerable people in certain groups don't get coverage.
And if you go to Kidney Care UK's page for patients, it tells them that one in five of them will not get any protection.
There are studies that show this.
So I think rather than have an adult conversation with us and roll out antibody tests to everybody and say, here you go, and they're good, the antibody tests, they work.
Here you go.
Let's see what your status is.
I'm really sorry.
This is our only tool that we have the vaccine.
And if you're one of those people who are not covered by the vaccine, you can stay at home.
You can shield if you want to.
And we will protect you money wise.
They could have that conversation, but they're not.
So I think what they're doing is they're going down the route of let's get absolutely everybody vaccinated.
And then we keep the viral load as low as we possibly can.
And perhaps then the vulnerable people are not protected won't catch it.
That's interesting.
So you're saying about 20% of the population, even when they've had two jabs, their bodies are incapable of forming the antibodies that they're supposed to form.
So they might as well not have bothered.
Yeah.
Well, they should have bothered because for them it's really important, but You know, it doesn't work and we know that.
But it's interesting isn't it?
We're seeing it.
So we're saying that policy is being...
forced through on the basis of this minority, this 10% say, who are vulnerable.
But at the same time, in this current climate, we are letting cancer patients die because they're not getting treatment because of this sclerosis, which has infected the entire system.
And that has been caused by government COVID policy, not by the virus.
It's a direct result of government policy.
Have you got personal experience of sort of the collateral damage caused by government Covid policy?
I mean, suicides, untreated cancer victims, that kind of thing?
Daily.
I mean, absolutely daily, James.
I mean, I am speaking to people day to day, and some of it seems really trivial to you and I. I'll give you some examples.
So I had right at the beginning in lockdown, I had a terminally ill shielding patient at home who needed her ears syringed because she couldn't hear.
Now you might think that's trivial, but if you've been told by the government not to leave your house and your only contact with other people is via Zoom or the telephone and you can't hear, then you are completely isolated.
And we know that isolation kills people.
It really does.
So there's a trivial.
Then moving on from that, I've got patients who needed knee transplants 18 months ago.
can barely walk for the pain, all cancelled, no lists yet because the lists are too long.
So they're sitting at home, they can't walk, they're getting fatter by the day, they're getting more depressed by the day and when they finally get to their surgery, the surgery will be much more difficult because the knee will be even more advanced in its deterioration.
I've had, as I said, cancer patients have their chemo stopped and I saw a patient who'd become a friend die because his chemo was stopped.
You know, I mean, it's absolutely tragic.
I've seen people in the middle of their fertility treatment whose time is running out.
Let's, you know, fertility is a time sensitive treatment.
Can't get to be seen, can't have their IVF.
I mean, for some reason, our local hospital can't even do a sperm analysis at the moment, so I can't refer someone.
I don't know why.
I don't know what they're doing that they can't do that.
We can't send patients for same-day blood tests anymore, where we just give them a form, they walk in, they have their bloods.
The earliest urgent appointment for a blood test I can get is next week.
I mean, it's endless.
The list is endless.
Yes, and with cancers, I imagine it's really important that you get to them early.
And I mean, a month's delay can be the difference between life and death.
Is that fair?
Yes, of course.
Now, the one thing I will say about cancers and GP is, if you've got a GP who's doing a good job, even by telephone, you know, I picked up five cancers by telephone this year.
And those people I can refer within two weeks.
That service has continued to work.
It stopped for a couple of months, but then it started to work.
So as long as the patients are coming forward and they've got a GP who's taken a good history and asking the right questions, we can get them seen quickly.
The problem, of course, is that everybody's been so terrified that lots of people are not coming forward when they should.
And so then when they do come forward, things are much more advanced.
And I know colleagues in secondary care are seeing patients who come in with much more severe disease than they would have had if they'd have come four months ago.
Right, right.
Sorry, I just got distracted there by the cat meowing about something.
And tell me, because I'm worried you might have knocked over the milk.
Thorn?
Can you check the cat's not up to... Well, he'll clean it up.
The cat's making noises and it could be knocking over milk or something, I don't know.
What about... He'll clean it up.
I get so many people, and I think it's tragic that I am people's lifeline, but people actually say this to me and in the comments they say, You know, if it weren't for your podcast, you know, I would have gone mad.
People really are at the end of their tether.
Now, I imagine you at The Sharp End must have had lots of people with mental health issues.
I mean, are you prescribing lots of antidepressants?
What's going on?
Yes, I mean, it's absolutely massive and it has got worse.
Quite often they don't need an antidepressant.
They need to talk to somebody and that helps.
But I've seen mothers who have been so traumatised by homeschooling that even though the kids are back at school now, they're still falling apart because they can't actually get over the stress of what that last year has done.
I've seen children who are too anxious to go out.
They feel like they're going to kill their granny because that's what they've been told.
Who told them this?
Schools?
Or CBBC?
It's been the messaging!
No, we've seen the messaging, you know, from, you know, don't hug granny, you don't want to kill her.
You know, I mean, this is absolutely tragic.
We've convinced our kids that they are little walking suicide bombers who are going to infect people and kill them.
So we've seen a lot of mental health amongst kids.
And there was a survey, I think, by Save the Children, just recently in May, that said that 65% of children were struggling with isolation and one in four would have lasting mental health distress from these lockdowns.
These are our future.
Kids are our future.
Not only have I seen that, James, but because I've been quite outspoken, I went, I was looking through my phone last night and I noticed I had a voice message on Instagram, which I never use.
And it was from somebody saying to me, she was crying.
She was saying, I hope you don't mind me contacting you.
I've seen you on Twitter.
I wanted to thank you for standing up for us.
I can't take much more.
I don't know how I can go on if they extend it.
That's a complete stranger leaving me a message.
Yeah, yeah.
I think people are just really having their lives destroyed.
How do you, when you've got a child coming in with these anxieties, how do you reassure them?
Is there anything you can do?
Take off my mask and talk to them so they can see my face.
Yes.
Because that's really important.
Yes.
I'm not going to give them COVID.
I'm really safe.
No.
And are their parents there with them?
Yeah.
So does the parent leap back and go, you're not wearing a mask?
Or are they generally understanding of that?
No.
And I explain to them, you know, that I have antibodies, I've had COVID, you know, and I would rather talk so that they can see me.
Because I do eight-week checks on babies and they don't smile until I take my mask off and they can see my face.
And they're making new ones in their brain every time they see a smiling face.
So I worry, I really worry.
And one of the biggest issues I've had is how we've treated pregnant women.
And I've had a couple of patients who went to their 10-week scan, all excited about their pregnancy, were not allowed to have anyone with them to be told, which is common, one in four, that their baby was dead.
And they're on their own.
It's making me go cold as I say that, James.
They're on their own.
They don't have anyone with them for support.
It's barbaric.
I've seen women who go into labor and are not allowed to have their partner with them until they're in established labor.
But if you're going to have the partner in the room at six hours, why is it any more dangerous at zero hours?
It's just all madness.
There's no sense to this.
And it's barbaric.
We can't treat people like this.
They're humans.
Yes, we should just take a step back to Florence Nightingale at Scutari Hospital.
And what did Florence Nightingale do?
What she really did, she wasn't advancing medical research.
She held hands.
She was keeping them clean and holding their hands.
Yep, absolutely.
And that human warmth is surely, I mean, that's the first job of a nurse, surely, to keep the patients happy and loved and clean.
I actually think it's the first.
I think it's the first.
It's the first job of all of us.
I mean, I've got a couple of very elderly patients who I see every couple of weeks face to face.
They have a few grumbles, but there's actually nothing wrong with them.
They want some human company, and they just want to sit and talk to me for 15 minutes, and that's fine.
It's absolutely fine.
You know, the job of a doctor or a nurse is not just to give out medicine.
It's to be compassionate.
Well, I would totally agree with you, and I think people think that's what doctors should be doing, but I think a lot of doctors aren't doing, aren't thinking like that, are they?
They're thinking like, I mean, they are.
They're just... It's really difficult because I think a lot of doctors are worn down by it all.
I don't think they're deliberately not being compassionate, but they're worn down.
They don't have the answers.
They're scared.
They're scared of saying anything that deviates from the government line in case they get in trouble.
Because, you know, we all have a license to protect.
But at the end of the day, my view on all of this has been that everything I've done and said Has been because I'm caring about patients and I want the best for patients.
So I'm not sure how I could be criticized for that.
I mean, I have been.
I mean, let me tell you, I got a complaint at the surgery because on Twitter I had said that only 368 healthy people under 50 had died of COVID.
And I got a complaint to my surgery saying that I'm not compassionate, I should care about even those 358 people, and someone didn't feel safe in my care.
So you have to be mindful of everybody's approach.
Everybody has a different approach, believes different things, and I try and be mindful of that all of the time.
Yeah, but you know what, I think you are an argument for the wholesale reform of our healthcare system, because at the moment this top-down structure, this one-size-fits-all policy, means that doctors are not allowed to use their initiative to, for example, I mean say you wanted to prescribe ivermectin based on, I mean there have been peer-reviewed studies,
The fact that you've got to wait till the powers that be say you're allowed to prescribe something, whereas, I mean, look, here's the thing.
You mentioned that Ivermectin had not had a randomized control trial, but nor have these These rushed vaccines, I mean, they're still in phase three of their trials, aren't they?
They haven't completed phase three.
They don't complete them until 2023, I think.
And yet these gene-altering treatments, because that's what they are, they're gene therapy, they're not like traditional vaccines.
They don't take a dead version of the virus, which hasn't even been isolated, I don't believe.
Well, AstraZeneca does.
AstraZeneca does.
It's more traditional.
I hate to argue with a doctor, but I think that's an urban myth.
I think the AstraZeneca one is actually also experimental gene therapy.
I think a lot of people console themselves with the notion that, oh, I've gone AZ and actually I'm OK.
No, I don't think you are.
I think Pfizer, Pfizer Biotech, is it?
AstraZeneca and the other one, what's the other one?
Moderna.
I mean, if I had to take one, if the Gestapo came for me, I would take the risk with the Sinopharm, just because even though it's going to have shitty Chinese, you know, badly put together, probably with, you know, sort of chicken feet and stuff, at least it is actually a vaccine.
I don't think that, yeah, But obviously I wouldn't want to take one at all.
But yeah, it's bizarre, isn't it, that these things are being... I mean, doesn't that send a bit of a shiver down your spine, the fact that these vaccines are being, which aren't vaccines, are being pushed on us in an unprecedented way?
So what concerns me about it is, as I said at the beginning, I'm pro-vaccine and I do think that for people like my son's father-in-law it's a no-brainer because He can't go out.
He can't meet people because he will likely die of Covid.
So for him, the vaccine is the only tool we have for him.
So, of course, for vulnerable people, I think this vaccine, the actual benefit outweighs the risk.
What concerns me is young, fit, healthy people and children will not be damaged by Covid in the main.
And yes, of course, I'm sad.
at any death of anyone, be that healthy person or not.
But in the main, that doesn't happen.
And I think, as you rightly say, the messaging has been astounding.
So this week, or last week, Sky pushed a story at the beginning of the week of a 34-year-old man who had been in hospital for five months, imploring young people to get the vaccine.
But when you actually looked at that man, he had a BMI of probably 40.
And that was why he was 34 and in hospital.
But Sky didn't tell you that.
They just did a headshot like this.
How did you discover this?
How did you discover the body?
Because other people looked at social media and he had open social media pages and he was obese.
And we're not talking about obesity as a risk factor for Covid.
And it's probably the single biggest risk factor.
So I find it really, really odd that the messaging is ignoring all of the actual data and the stats and who really gets sick from COVID.
And it's pushing it on us and it's pushing us on our young people who don't need it.
And as you say, we're not even finished the trials in terms of seeing the long-term data.
So why are we doing it?
What are we doing?
And the messaging is all around this.
I'm convinced that the reason they're talking about delay in the 21st of June is to make young people rush out and get the vaccine.
Yes, I feel you're right.
It's more nudge.
If you were my doctor and you'd sent me the letter out and I rang you up and I said, look, A, I've had a pulmonary embolism, so I'm worried about blood clots and B, I've had the virus.
So I don't think, you know, I've got the T cells.
What would you say to me?
So, I would say to you that the NHS advice is that you should go ahead and have your two vaccines.
If I were looking at it from my perspective and I'd had a PE and I'd had COVID, I would look at the data and I would just share the data with patients about longevity of immunity and how the immune system works, PEs and the risk of PEs, and I would then go through the risk factors for COVID.
And those risk factors are very clear.
It's obesity, number one.
Even BMI is over 25.
It's a linear relationship.
COVID has been a map of obesity around the world.
That was very clear from the obesity report last year.
Men, men are more at risk of COVID than women.
Diabetes, immunosuppressed, hypertension.
If you don't have any of those things, your risk of dying of COVID is very, very, very small.
It's not my risk to take, it's yours.
But all I can do is give you that information.
Yes.
Well, that was a good answer, Doctor.
Thank you.
I'm so glad that you are speaking out because I think it's very brave of you.
I mean, I don't think you've said anything that's going to get you sacked.
I hope.
But why aren't more doctors speaking out about this?
Saying the things you're saying?
I think it's been really interesting because I speak to lots of colleagues and when I give them these, the data, for example, the data about if you've had COVID, you only need one vaccine, which France has now said is the rule, by the way, because they're following the science.
They look at me like I'm mad.
They look at me like I'm a conspiracy theorist.
And that goes on all the time, even when I present studies and data.
So what I think is this.
I think doctors are tired.
I think they've been bamboozled.
If I could show you the daily newsletter I get as a GP from my CCG, it is pages and pages long with hyperlinks to new policies, new this.
No GP could ever read it if they wanted to have a life in the real world.
So we've been bamboozled.
I think people are terrified of being reported to our governing body, be that nurses or doctors.
And having an investigation, which is also very scary.
And I also think that doctors, because of this fatigue and being bombarded, are not doing any of their own reading.
And I find that really sad, because doctors are best placed in society to be able to look at research and data and read it and assimilate it for themselves.
And they don't appear to be doing that.
Because if they were, then they would have different views.
Because it is there.
The data is there.
I mean, this GP who has told my son's father-in-law that the antibody tests are rubbish.
They're not.
I advise for a small not-for-profit testing company.
They're very good.
They've got all of the accreditation and they work.
And I'm wrong that even if he hasn't produced any antibodies, he will have immunity.
I'm not wrong.
The chances of him having immunity, it is there.
It's minuscule.
But that's a GP telling him that.
Where does he go from there?
Who does he speak to?
His renal consultant has said to him, oh, I don't know anything about this and I'm not involved in the vaccine rollout, but I'm really not very sure about antibodies.
So these are consultants and GPs giving advice on things that they have done no reading on, clearly, and are not in a position to advise.
But we see this in medicine.
I get this with menopausal women every day.
I get menopausal women speaking to me because it's an area of interest.
telling me that their doctor has said something, which is materially wrong.
Just wrong.
Wrong.
The woman isn't being treated properly.
They've not read the NICE guidance.
They don't know how to prescribe.
That's every single day I get messages like that.
So this is not limited to COVID.
Yes.
Yes.
Well, I suppose it brings me back to my point at the beginning, and you're clearly an exception to all these rules.
But I think, you know, a lot of us had um for a while this belief that that doctors knew best doctors know best
And a lot of us have discovered that by reading around on the internet, you know, I mean, um, various people, Robin, Robin, uh, Menotti, Grazadeh, his telegram has been just coming up with reams of, reams of, of, of research showing about things like ivermectin and, and, and showing about AD responses and, and, and so on.
And it's shocking that the people who most need to read this information aren't reading it.
They're just, I don't know what they're doing.
I know.
And even when they retweet stuff, they haven't really read it.
They're just retweeting.
And I actually answered a comment on Twitter earlier and I said, if you'd actually watched my entire interview, you would have known that I did say what you're accusing me of not saying.
You know, people don't.
They just make comments and they sling insults and they don't watch things and they don't read things.
It's very sad.
I don't do anything on social media that I haven't read.
I haven't thoroughly researched.
I'm very careful because it would be remiss of me to do that.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Oh, well, I'm so glad we finally got this chat together because I know you've been keen to appear on me for a week or so and I just couldn't get my act together because I'm so busy.
But no, you've been absolutely brilliant and I really wish you all the best with your patients and they're lucky to have you.
May I remind my lovely listeners, if you'd like to support me and to help me make more podcasts like this, you can find me on Patreon or Subscribestar, Patreon James Delingpole, Subscribestar James Delingpole, or my delingpoleworld.com website.
And Renée, again, thank you.
Absolutely.
First rate.
Pleasure.
Thank you for having me.
And I salute your bravery and your warmth.
Thanks, James.
Bye-bye.
Thank you.
As a postscript, Rene and I have just realized that there's one thing we didn't talk about, which is long COVID.
And I'll give you my view on this in a moment, but I'd love to hear your view.
Long Covid is very interesting and there does seem to be some markers now for people who do, adults who do get some long-term effects from long Covid, but the rest of it is just post-viral syndrome.
This is common, it's been written about for donkey's years, there's plenty of research papers, people who get viruses You know, get syndromes that last a while, but 99% of them resolve.
We tell patients who get pneumonia that it will take six months for them to feel better again.
That's normal.
And I think long COVID is a new name for post-viral syndrome.
It's as simple as that.
Some people, sadly, might go on to get ME or CFS.
And that's very sad because it's a horrible condition.
In terms of children and long COVID, because this is the next accusation that's coming.
Well, if you don't vaccinate children, they're going to get long COVID.
Firstly, there's very little data at the moment because we haven't got enough of it.
But there's been a very interesting study this week from Germany of 1500 kids.
Some have had COVID, some haven't.
And they were doing long COVID stroke depression scores on them.
And they were equal scores in both the kids that had COVID and supposedly long COVID to the kids that hadn't ever had COVID.
And what the assumption is, is that it's depression.
We've locked these kids up for a year.
They don't have long COVID.
They have depression and they've got anxiety and they're feeling really fed up with life.
That sounds a really good take on long COVID.
Yes, I totally agree with your analysis.
Speaking of someone who had effectively Chronic fatigue.
I mean, I had Lyme disease, but I think it becomes a chronic...
What's the phrase I'm looking for?
The symptoms are very much the same.
And I think, in my research, because you know how when you get a sort of obscure condition, you often know more about it than the experts do, and you find a way through.
And I found very effective for conditions like this, for long COVID, the person who treats me, She treats people with Lyme disease, with ME, and with so-called long COVID.
And they are.
They're a post-viral fatigue problem, which seems to afflict people who have not got a properly functioning lymphatic drainage system, the limbic system and the lymphatic system.
What she does is she massages your head and gets the drainage going.
And that seems to be very, very helpful.
Anyway, if people want to find out more about that, they can email me at my website and I'll put you in touch.
But I agree, long COVID is a kind of, it's an added scare thing, which has been put in there, I think, to say, this is serious people.
And it's just another, This is the stick.
It's another stick.
Yeah.
It's like the Scariants.
Like the, you know, the Indian Scariant and the Ulaanbaatar Scariant and the, I don't know, Glastonbury Scariant.
I don't know what they're going to come up with next.
Yeah.
Good.
Well, I'm glad we agreed on that.
They'll come up with something.
They will.
Thank you again, Renee.
That was great.
All right.
Export Selection