All Episodes
Previous Next
July 26, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
01:01:07
FDA + CDC Abandon Science to Get Big Pharma Products Approved - Toby Rogers, PhD
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Transcription by CastingWords
Transcription by CastingWords Welcome to Against the Wind, Doctors and Science Under Fire.
This is Dr. Paul, your host.
Today's show features an extensive interview with Dr. Toby Rogers.
This gentleman, this man, spent days listening to all the FDA meetings that were being presented to make a decision about whether or not these vaccines, the COVID jabs, were going to be approved for kids down to the age of six months.
He then sat through two more days of the ACIP, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice meetings, where it just felt like they were rubber stamped.
And then of course, boom, everybody's celebrating these vaccines have been approved for six months and up.
And you know, that means they become part of the regular schedule.
And you know what that means, folks?
No liability anymore for these Experimental jabs that never had long-term testing, they bypassed animal studies, and we already have a mountain of evidence and data showing harm.
It is on all of us to get this information out to everybody we care about who might have children, because they are putting a target on kids who just don't need this.
They do not need these jabs.
It's all harm, no benefit.
Enjoy this show.
I'm Dr. Paul. Dr. Paul, coming to you from the heart.
My topic today is independence and the word freedom.
As a country, we just celebrated the 4th of July, Independence Day, and it's a big celebration for many.
I happened to have been blessed to be at the Oregon coast for that particular celebration.
It was a sunny day, the whales were out, it was beautiful, it felt peaceful.
But it wasn't peaceful for everybody.
Those of you who are watching the news or you've seen on social media, a lot of unrest in our country.
A lot of people are having a pushback feeling about even celebrating independence because they just don't feel like they have freedoms that they should have had by now.
I just want us all to be cognizant of the fact that many paid the ultimate price for an amount of freedom that we experience in this country that is indeed still there compared to many places in the world.
But let's focus now, I'm a pediatrician, I'm a dad, let's focus on our children.
It's about our kids and what legacy we leave for them.
Think about your toddler or your young child and what does independence mean for them?
They need to learn to become independent of us, right?
The parents.
But it's a partnership, right?
So there is also responsibility as you become more independent.
There's freedom that we achieve as we become more independent.
As a parent, as someone who takes care of and interacts with kids, we want to raise up secure, independent young people who will become the next generation of leaders.
And that's our goal.
But as a country, let's not lose the fact that we fought so hard for so many of the freedoms we still do have, even though it feels like they're slipping away in many cases.
We are all in this independently, but together.
I'm Dr. Paul. - Welcome Dr. Toby Rogers to Against the Wind, Doctors in Science Under Fire.
What a privilege to have you on the show.
Well, thank you so much for having me on the show.
I've been such a huge fan of yours for a long time.
I was working on my PhD down in Australia when the Vaccine Friendly Plan came out.
Yeah.
Back in 2016, was it?
Yep.
And that book was a revelation.
I quoted it extensively in my doctoral thesis, and I've probably bought 20 copies over the years to give to friends.
It has saved so many lives.
So I've been indebted to you and grateful to you this whole time.
I'm delighted to be on the show and have a chance to chat with you today.
Well, thank you for that.
Folks, you need to understand that Dr. Rogers here has a PhD in political economy from the University of Sydney, when I guess you read my book.
But your thesis, doctoral thesis, The Political Economy of Autism, I think threw you into that world, right, of what's going on with chronic health.
And you've since studied all the different classes of toxicants that increase autism risk.
You then went on, I think, or have had a Master's is a public health degree from the University of California, Berkeley.
That is a very strong, strong program.
And I got to meet you because of your speaking and writing and teaching that you do on chronic illness and children, and then the medical freedom work that you've been doing.
You have an amazing sub stack, tobyrogers.substack.com.
Folks, if you want to read some of this man's incredible work, you're doing good work for the world.
So thank you for being on the show.
Well, thank you.
And just one small note, it's a master of public policy degree from the University of California, Berkeley, rather than public health, but politics, policy and public health, they all intersect these days.
And one of the things that I did in my in my public policy degree was to look at these sort of risk benefit Analysis documents and I got good at tearing those apart.
Well, I do that all the time now in the medical freedom movement where I tear apart the FDA's risk-benefit analysis documents and I understand how these sorts of things are rigged and I know what makes for a good risk-benefit document and a bad risk-benefit document and so those skills have served me well since then.
And they're skills that most of us don't have.
So this is why I wanted to get you on the show.
You really have the ability to sift through the mess that's put together to try to make something sound like it is what it's not.
So most impressively, I was aware that you were attending all these meetings that were going on in June, from the FDA, the VRBPAC meetings, and you can describe what that means, and then the CDC ACIP meetings.
The whole thing just looked like a freight train.
The culmination of what they've been trying to do, which was to get the COVID jabs onto the childhood schedule, Reason being, I think, and you can validate this or not, that once that occurs, then they can have liability-free product ongoing.
Yes, so June was completely heartbreaking.
The FDA and CDC just completely trampled scientific norms.
They ran roughshod over proper methods and they just abandoned science, candidly, over the course of It turns out there were 10 meetings over the course of June that I watched via Zoom to document for history exactly what the FDA and CDC were up to.
There were four meetings of the FDA's so-called Expert Advisory Committee, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.
There were four meetings of the CDC's so-called Expert Advisory Committee, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
And then there are two other meetings in there.
There was the Advisory Committee on Childhood Vaccines and then there was the National Vaccine Advisory Committee in there as well.
Each of these meetings are five to eight hours long and they're just completely heartbreaking because what you want from a process like that is good science.
You want the best of the best coming together, having the hard conversations we need to have as a country.
Shifting through the evidence to see what the signal is, what the noise is, and make good decisions on behalf of the country.
And none of that happens.
What happens instead is politics.
These people have made a decision to get these products across the line no matter what, no matter how bad the data is.
No matter how many harms are uncovered in the clinical trial, it's shocking.
When I came into this process working on my PhD, starting back in 2015, I assumed that the FDA and CDC are the best of the best, they do high quality work, that they know what they're talking about.
It quickly becomes apparent that that's not the case.
The science that's talked about in these meetings would fail a high school biology class.
It's that poor.
It's shocking how bad the evidence is.
I watched meeting after meeting and wrote about it on my sub stack.
And really saw the collapse of public health, the collapse of allopathic medicine, and the CDC and FDA just giving up on science and medicine altogether in order to reward the pharmaceutical industry.
Yeah, fellow physicians who might be watching who have not yet come to the realization that the CDC is simply a marketing agent for pharma at this point.
Yes, they do a good job in some respects of collecting certain data, but you and I also watched Over the COVID story of the last two, three years, that they would stop collecting data that became inconvenient for their narrative, right?
So while they have the manpower and the funding to do incredible work, they choose, it seems, to only do work that will benefit pharma.
Is that your assessment?
Sadly, it is and it brings me no joy to reach that conclusion.
I want these agencies to succeed.
They're very important.
Unfortunately, they're completely captured and capture is a term that comes from political science and it's when agencies are supposed to be protecting the public good and instead they become captured both financially and culturally By the industries that they're supposed to regulate.
And so that's what's happened here.
It's extreme regulatory capture.
You'll actually see in these meetings that the FDA and CDC, when they're giving their presentations, they'll often say we.
When they're referring to the manufacturer, when they're referring to Pfizer and Moderna, they say we.
They see themselves as one in the same, part of the same team with the pharmaceutical industry.
They don't see themselves as adversaries.
They see themselves as partners with industry.
So there's nobody there looking out for our interests.
There's nobody there who is articulating the needs of children, who's speaking for families.
It's it's it's two branches of the same industry pushing forward a marketing plan.
That's that's what these meetings are.
Yeah, I've actually just thinking back.
I was invited to be on a panel to help assess the HPV vaccine.
So I'm invited big dinner and what we want you to give us your input so we can assess the HPV vaccine.
It turned out the whole thing was strategies for rolling it out.
It had nothing to do with whether or not it was a good idea or not.
And if you're describing the same thing, I know you've written about this.
Moderna and Pfizer, they had their own risk benefit documents, right?
And what did those show?
Yes, so let's take each one at a time.
So prior to these meetings, so prior to an FDA Expert Advisory Committee meeting or prior to the CDC Expert Advisory Committee meeting, the FDA releases documents 48 hours before the meeting CDC releases documents 24 hours before the meeting.
That's as much time as the public gets to look at these documents.
So I wait at my computer for these documents to show up online.
I download them instantly.
I print them and I start tearing them apart.
I work through them over the course of two days and I publish my results on Substack prior to the meeting in hopes of shifting the debate.
And so When it comes to the FDA, there's two sets of documents.
The FDA creates a risk-benefit document and then the sponsor, Pfizer and Moderna in this case, presents their case for why they should get emergency use authorization.
And these documents are woeful.
Should be robust.
They should be the sort of thing that anyone in the public can point to and say, hey, the FDA has figured this out and we're in good hands and these products are safe and we can proceed.
That's not what happens at all.
So let's talk about Moderna first.
Moderna applied a year ago.
to inject its mRNA shot into adolescents, into older kids.
And the application has been held up for a year because studies from around the world show that this shot increases myocarditis risk.
We have very good studies from Europe and Nordic countries showing that the Moderna shot increases myocarditis risk between two-fold and seven-fold as compared with the baseline.
So, the Moderna shot has been held up for a year in this age group because of these concerns.
What I was interested to find out is, wait a second, why has this process been restarted?
The data hasn't gotten any better in the meantime.
How on earth is it proceeding for a vote before this committee given these concerns?
And it's right there in the FDA's risk benefit document.
It's page 19 and 20 if anybody wants to look it up.
And here's what happened.
And it's completely shocking.
I figured that what happened, my guess, my hunch going into this, was that the FDA had given Moderna an extra year to massage the data, right?
To lose a few troublesome kids from the clinical trial that made their results look bad, to group the results in a certain way so as to make the results look more favorable.
That's not what happened.
What happened in the year between when Moderna applied and when the vote actually happened in front of the FDA is that the FDA laundered Moderna's data for them.
The FDA laundered Moderna's data for them.
So, here's what happened over the course of that year.
FDA and CDC put their fixers on minimizing the signal of myocarditis that was showing up in these studies and in these clinical trials.
So, the CDC has three full-time fixers.
Who all they do is manipulate data to hide vaccine safety signals.
It's Matt Oster, Tom Shimabukuro, and John Hsu.
And so over the course of the year, they produced four papers and they brought in Nicola Klein at Kaiser Permanente.
And they published these in various journals because journals want to hear the story that these things are safe and effective.
And they sliced and diced and massaged the data, changed definitions, categories, what have you, and shrank the signal from twofold down to a 7% to 50% increased risk of myocarditis.
So even with all their manipulations, which are complete junk science and completely unwarranted, they still couldn't make the signal go away.
The myocarditis signal is still there.
Even with all their manipulations and the increased risk according to CDC and FDA is now 7% to 50%.
Well, already there, Moderna fails any reasonable risk benefit.
And the reason I say that is that the health benefits from these shots in these clinical trials were small to non-existent.
And a couple problems with these trials is they're always intentionally too small.
They enroll too few people, that's on purpose, to hide harms.
And they're always too short.
The Pfizer trial in adults was six months and then they wipe out the placebo group and inject all of them with the vaccine as well.
So there's no long-term safety data whatsoever.
In children, they wiped out the control group even sooner.
Sometimes the results are only from four months.
Sometimes the results are only from two months.
Well, when you shrink the trial like that, you're also going to get fewer health benefits too, right?
If these shots actually did work, you're not going to find many cases of myocarditis in there either.
So there were no benefits.
In the clinical trial, these massive harms, anywhere from 7% to 50% increased risk of just one side effect, myocarditis.
There are a lot of other side effects.
But if you look at the 26 studies from around the world, they're very high quality peer-reviewed.
They show a two-fold to seven-fold increased risk in myocarditis.
So, it fails any reasonable risk-benefit analysis and the FDA approved it.
I think in that case, there was one abstention.
The new guy abstained because he was confused about something.
But other than that, it was a vote of 21 to 1 to proceed with a shot that we know is going to cause more harm than benefit.
So, that's Moderna.
That was a lot.
Is it okay if I walk through the Pfizer piece?
Yeah, please do.
So Pfizer had a different set of problems and it unfolded like this.
Pfizer had a clinical trial over the summer in 2021.
The clinical trial concluded in the fall and Pfizer thought that their clinical trial was going to work, right?
So they wiped out The placebo group.
They gave their vaccine to everyone in the placebo group.
Well, when they actually started looking at their data in October and November, they found out the shot didn't work.
The clinical trial failed.
So now you have somewhere in the neighborhood of 2,500, 3,000 kids in the trial.
You have no placebo group anymore.
You have no RCT anymore at all.
And the clinical trial failed.
So they had to cobble together a new clinical trial with a third dose out of the ashes of this failed clinical trial.
So it appears that they enrolled some new people and then they kept some of the people from the older clinical trial and they tried to They tried to show that it worked and this was during the middle of the Omicron wave.
So, what was happening was all these children had natural immunity already, right?
By February, we had 75% of kids with natural immunity and by now, it's probably closer to 100% of kids have natural immunity.
So, there just weren't any health benefits to look at in the clinical trial.
The shot made no difference on health benefits.
And so, they do this weird thing called immunobridging that I've written a lot about.
They said, okay, well, the health, okay, we didn't show any health benefits in the clinical trial.
Don't worry about that.
We're going to switch to blood work.
We're going to look at antibodies in the blood.
We're going to compare antibodies in the blood of children to antibodies in the blood of adults.
And we're going to try to make some sort of comparison to suggest that in the future, somehow these shots will be protective, even though they weren't in the clinical trial.
That's how preposterous the FDA process is, that they allow this sort of junk science to proceed.
And I will add the FDA's expert advisory committee acknowledges That there are no known correlates of protection in connection with COVID-19 shots.
What does that mean?
It means you can't use any of these proxy measures like antibody levels to predict who will be immune to coronavirus.
At the end of it all, so Moderna applies to FDA to have their shots approved for little kids.
Pfizer has nothing at this point.
They rush together an application, they submit the next day.
Their so-called clinical trial, this third shot in little kids, only had 10 COVID cases in it.
10 COVID cases.
Wow.
Three in the treatment group, seven in the placebo group.
And they said, well, therefore...
It works.
No, come on.
You cannot base national policy involving 19 million children on 10 cases of this cobbled together, rickety, janky Pfizer study that failed and then they add that piece together.
That's insanity.
I have 10 cases in my practice from the last month.
Exactly.
They all are very healthy, did fine, no big deal.
Let's compare.
Yeah, it's garbage.
It's outrageous.
And look, I'm a political economist.
I shouldn't be able to run circles around the science that the FDA and CDC do, but I can because it's just junk.
If you have any college-level statistics, You can figure out how the process is rigged.
And it's abundantly clear that these shots cause more harms than benefits.
It's unquestionable.
And then for the FDA and CDC to then approve these things unanimously, they're living in a parallel universe where facts are not allowed to intrude upon their biases.
It is surreal to watch these people work.
Yeah, I couldn't have done it.
I mean, yes, I would have forced myself if I needed to, but that had to be just painful to watch.
I mean, these trials are so small.
I mean, you shared those small numbers of just 10 cases, and I think one of the kid trials had like 60-some kids in it, and you're going to base national policy on this?
They're vanishingly small, and the FDA has the power to stop them from doing that, and the FDA never insists upon proper standards.
Yeah, I understand there was one slide in one of these decks that you reviewed where it was talking about the COVID leading cause of death in children, I think was the quote.
What did you uncover there?
Yeah, so that's an interesting case of what's called popular epidemiology, sort of epidemiology from below.
The CDC rushed out essentially a marketing slide saying that COVID-19 was the fourth or the fifth leading cause of death in children.
Well, people on Twitter took a look at that and they thought, you know, that doesn't look quite right.
And so, a mom in Georgia Started working through the data, looking up the references and that sort of thing.
And what she found is that the CDC was intentionally double counting.
So the CDC took all of the fatalities from COVID over the course of two years.
And took that number and compared it to fatalities from accidents and other things in children over the course of one year.
So they double counted on purpose.
And so this mom in Georgia, she wrote to the study authors.
There was a study out of the UK and said, well, you made this mistake and pointed it out to them and the study authors corrected it.
The study authors said, you know what, you're right.
They rewrote the preprint and it moved COVID as a leading cause of death down to somewhere around 9th or 10th.
But even that's misleading because the number one cause of death in little kids is accidents.
So if one is really concerned about the safety and well-being of children, one should mandate fences around swimming pools.
Dollar for dollar, that's the biggest bang for your buck.
That would reduce more fatalities than anything.
But accidents are 25 times more harmful than other categories.
So if you actually broke it out into separate types of accidents, each of those would be their own category of harm.
And then COVID-19 as a cause of death would fall even lower.
As you know, for healthy children, the risk of COVID-19 is vanishingly small.
And for the FDA and CDC to pretend that there's a health emergency in connection with SARS-CoV-2 in this population, it's just dishonest.
And there's far better treatments that are available.
One could treat it with ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine or There's the notion that we should vaccinate them with this shot that all the evidence shows causes more harms than benefits.
It's really outrageous.
It's not doing proper science.
Yeah, it's insane.
I have over 6,000 patients, all children.
I'm a pediatrician.
Not a single child has ended up in the ER to my knowledge.
Definitely no hospitalizations.
Of course, no deaths.
Almost, as you pointed out, almost everybody's had it by now.
So I've made a standard practice over the last two, three months of asking every patient I see, so has your family been hit by COVID?
Every time.
I think maybe one exception.
Oh yeah, we had it in January.
Oh yeah, we just had it last month.
Oh, we've had it three times.
You know, and in many of those cases they did some testing, so they actually proved a COVID positive test, even though we know there's problems with the testing as well.
But the point is, the kids all did well.
They're doing just fine.
What would happen to those 6,000 patients of mine if they were vaccinated for this COVID jab?
First of all, they're already immune, right?
So, and they've got natural immunity.
And secondly, I mean, The risks of just myocarditis, not to mention all the other problems, which we can debate as well.
You're right.
It's insane.
It is absolutely insane.
Just for amusement's sake, what did they present as the benefits of these vaccines?
I mean, surely in these days and days of testimony, you've got the likes of Paul Offit and all these other top, top dogs in the vaccine world.
They're trying to get this approved, obviously, because that's the goal.
They must be saying something about benefits.
Yeah, so the way that they proceed is they exaggerate the risks of SARS-CoV-2 virus.
They inflate the benefits of the shots.
So they'll say things like, these are a miracle.
And they'll use just marketing numbers, right?
80% effective, 90% effective.
They'll say things like, well, we see that this is working in adults.
And what's odd is occasionally there'll be a slide from CDC or FDA that's honest.
It actually shows negative efficacy from these shots during the Omicron wave.
The slides during the presentations in the recent meetings showed that Pfizer has negative efficacy after the first dose until well after the second dose and then there's a little bit of benefit and then it declines later.
Occasionally, the truth comes through, and then the committee just ignores that.
They just blow right on by that.
Any inconvenient facts, they just keep on going with the narrative.
They just keep on going with the mantra, the chant, safe and effective, safe and effective.
And then they go to great lengths to minimize harms.
They just don't pay attention to adverse events.
And so they bring their fixers into the meeting.
They bring in Tom Shimabukuro to massage the data in front of them and to hide the signals of myocarditis and other harms.
So as you surely know, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System has shown 29,000 deaths Following COVID-19 shots since they were introduced in December of 2021.
And in children, in children 5 to 11, the Pfizer shot has only been on the market a short while, just since October of 2021.
Already, the last time I checked, there were somewhere in the neighborhood of 115 fatalities from the shot.
And we know that that's an undercount.
We know that that bears significantly undercounts harms from vaccines by a factor of anywhere from 10 to 100.
The CDC quite literally acknowledges one fatality in kids following COVID-19 shots.
Even though we have evidence of at least 115, probably much more than that.
And even though we have evidence of 29,000 reports of fatalities following COVID-19 shots in adults, they don't acknowledge any of those either.
And in fact, At the FDA's meeting, their lead vaccine guy, this guy Peter Marks, twice he had a meltdown about the vaccine adverse event reporting system.
And one day it was trending on Twitter during the middle of this FDA meeting.
He's like, no, no, you can't draw Causation from the VAERS system.
Well, nobody's saying that you can.
What we're saying is it's the only reporting system that we have.
It's existed for 32 years.
It's the canary in the coal mine.
The purpose of this system is to identify signals in the data that merit further review.
But what happens with the FDA and CDC is there is no further review.
They just dismiss these harms out of hand because that contradicts the narrative, and they just proceed.
So it's a shocking process, exaggerating risks of the virus.
Exaggerating benefits from the shot and minimizing adverse events.
None of those things that they do hold up to even the most minimal scientific scrutiny.
And that's standard operating procedure for these committees.
It's outrageous.
Yeah.
No, this has been a playbook of theirs all along, is to have very short studies, very small groups, and destroy the control group.
And, I mean, that they did this with this technology is criminal.
You know, to take the Pfizer and Moderna large trials, I mean, those trials were large enough.
If they had just kept the control group, we would already know by now it was a disaster.
But they use this little trickery of saying, well, it's not ethical to force these poor people who are in the control group, not allow them the opportunity to get vaccinated and get the protection.
And so they scare the control group into getting vaccinated and they wipe out their whole study, making it virtually worthless.
They're not drives me nuts.
Yeah, they're not doing science and anybody who thinks that the FDA and CDC are looking out for their well-being, they're making a category error.
These agencies no longer exist to protect our well-being.
The only person protecting the health of children is parents.
And doctors, including you, but there's there's vanishingly few doctors who are as aware as you are.
But parents are on their own.
They need to do due diligence.
They need to read this evidence for themselves.
I help with that process somewhat by by breaking it down on my sub stack into more manageable pieces for people who are busy.
But but the FDA and CDC do not Look out for your health.
They launder data on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry.
That's what they do.
Yeah, absolutely.
So what do you think, Toby, are the long-term implications of these decisions and this new rollout of the COVID vaccine down to six months?
Yeah, so there's one other key piece of this series of disastrous meetings we have to talk about which is the very last meeting and then I'll get into the implications of all this if that's okay.
Yeah.
So the last meeting, the capstone meeting of all this was on June 28th.
The FDA met to consider what's called the Future Framework and it is so Orwellian that to describe it plainly risks appearing unhinged because the FDA is so completely out of control.
But let me describe what happened.
So The FDA knows that these shots are not performing well.
They know that they're what they call breakthrough infections.
Well, that means that the shot isn't really working.
They know that the virus is evolving very quickly.
The fact is SARS-CoV-2 was never a good candidate for a vaccine because it evolves too fast.
We don't have a vaccine against the common cold.
We don't have a vaccine against HIV in spite of decades of trying because these viruses evolve too fast.
And the flu shot tends to fail each year for the same reason because the flu evolves so quickly.
So they never should have entered this territory to begin with, but they did and now they're just going to double down on their failed experiment.
So they know these shots are failing.
They know that this virus is evolving rapidly.
And so heading into the fall, they know they need to reformulate the shots to try to make them work.
But I see no reason why they're suddenly going to be able to make them work now when they couldn't make them work over the last two years.
There's no new sort of approach that's going to solve the underlying weaknesses in this technology.
So, but if you reformulate a single molecule in these vaccines, well, you would need to do a new clinical trial to test for safety.
And one would also need to go through the FDA regulatory process again.
Well, the pharmaceutical industry doesn't want that, right?
The pharmaceutical industry doesn't want new clinical trials because they very well could fail.
They don't want new regulatory review because that's when the public gets to look at these at the weak data and start speaking up as we've been doing.
So the pharmaceutical industry, with the collusion of the FDA, figured out a way to rig the process in perpetuity.
And the way they do it is this thing called the Future Framework.
So, what they've said is, well, the flu shot every year, we reformulate that.
And indeed, there's this whole global flu surveillance system.
And then these public health officials get together and stroke their chins and they choose four variants to go into the flu shot every year.
And they don't go through new clinical trials each year.
They just get grandfathered in as safe and effective because they're called biologically similar to the existing flu shots.
Well, here's what's sad about that is the flu shot Process doesn't work either.
So, the CDC presented evidence that showed last year the flu shot was somewhere between 8% and 14% effective.
And then there was a flu outbreak at the University of Michigan, and it turned out the flu shot was 0% effective.
So they have this whole elaborate political theater to choose the flu shot each year and it fails completely.
And what the FDA has said is, what we're going to do is, we're going to do the same thing with COVID-19 shots.
We're so smart, we're going to play God, this is the FDA speaking, and they're going to choose now two variants to put into the flu shot every year.
And in the process, They're going to skip clinical trials altogether.
There will be no COVID-19 clinical trial data in humans going forward.
So this meeting on the 28th, they seriously got together and said, well, we want a new shot.
Based on the original Wuhan strain and based on BA4, BA5 variants of the Omicron variant of coronavirus.
Now, there was no data whatsoever On the effectiveness of coronavirus shots against this new variant.
I should correct that.
Pfizer had a tiny study in eight mice.
And they were these mice that were specifically genetically engineered to have an exaggerated immune response.
Literally, they had data from eight mice.
That was all the data that they had.
And the FDA voted unanimously, this expert advisory committee, voted unanimously to approve a bivalent shot.
Two variants.
For the fall, it's going to have absolutely no clinical safety data whatsoever.
The FDA wants to inject hundreds of millions of Americans, adults and children, with a shot with No clinical safety data.
That's the plan going forward.
And was that approved?
It was approved 19 to 2.
I think I said, I misspoke or I think I said it was unanimous, but it was approved 19 to 2.
Paul Offit, of all people, voted no.
Can you believe that?
Paul Offit's never met a vaccine he didn't like.
He voted no.
Not only that, The next day, he went out and wrote an op-ed in Stat News that poured cold water on this idea and said it was a bad idea.
So, he's still fighting to try to nix this proposal.
But it's just, it's madness.
So, FDA, CDC, and the pharmaceutical industry, they were losing the game, right?
Their shot didn't work.
There was negative efficacy.
We have evidence of antibody-dependent enhancement.
Things were going badly.
What they're going to do instead is double down on a failed strategy and just throw the chessboard against the wall and stop playing the game altogether and just stop doing clinical trials because clinical trials candidly made them look bad and they don't want to look bad anymore.
And so now they're just going to skip safety data altogether and say, just trust us, we're good, we've got this figured out, We know what we're doing.
And they don't.
They have no idea what they're doing.
No, it's absolutely horrifying and scary.
The scary part is you and I are aware of what's going on and some of our viewers watching, I think you know what's going on.
But so many of our friends, loved ones, fellow physicians, I mean the majority of pediatricians, so therefore the majority of parents in this country Go to their pediatric office trusting their doctor to give them the best advice.
They will get advised to take this shot, this jab, that has only harm, no benefit, no testing as you pointed out.
Going forward, it's just pure whatever we want to put into this jab.
Let's see what happens.
It's pure fantasy.
Yeah.
It's so postmodern.
You know, postmodernism says there's no hard, fast, universal truths in the world.
Truth is the only perspective.
Well, it's sort of, we have this postmodern FDA, this postmodern CDC that says, well, you know, the truth is what we think it is.
Don't worry about that data.
The data is, we don't pay attention to data anymore at the FDA and CDC.
And so to follow up on your earlier question, The FDA thinks that they've won this great victory because they had the votes and they got these things across the line in this series of rigged meetings over the course of June.
And so I think they're going to pat themselves on the back and take a long vacation and candidly start preparing for these well-paid jobs that they're going to get at Pfizer and Moderna as a reward when they retire early from FDA and CDC.
They're going to go cash in by working for these companies.
But what they don't realize, because I don't know how they think, but they certainly don't think in terms of long term, is they've really sealed their own demise.
They have not thought this through.
So these shots are not popular.
The public is on to them.
Only half of adults have gotten a third dose.
Only 25% of adults have gotten a fourth dose.
So, what percent of the population is going to get a fifth dose of a shot that has no clinical safety data?
It's going to be vanishingly small.
It's going to be the hypochondriacs in the population, but that's about it.
In children, only about a third of the older kids, 5 to 11, have gotten two of the Pfizer shots.
The rollout in little kids is not going well for the CDC and FDA.
In the first week when one would assume that all these parents would rush out, only 1% of parents have gone out to vaccinate their little kids because people are waking up to what's happening.
And so what the FDA has done is guaranteed the demise of the FDA and CDC.
No one's going to trust them.
No one's going to listen to them going forward.
I think they've also damaged allopathic medicine going forward, and I'm pretty sure they've damaged their beloved vaccine program going forward as well.
And so what's going to happen over the coming months and years is that lots and lots of people are going to be maimed and killed by these shots.
And when that happens, those people are never going to trust the FDA and CDC again.
Those people are going to rise up against these criminal actors within the FDA and CDC who have allowed this to happen.
The backlash is going to be massive.
Peter Marks at the FDA sends more people into the medical freedom movement than Bobby Kennedy and Dale Bigtree combined.
Because he's so incompetent, because he's so criminally corrupt, he has grown our movement by 10, 20 fold over the last year.
All of those people are going to become single issue medical freedom voters who are going to demand accountability from these institutions going forward.
So it breaks my heart To think about the level of hardship that's coming.
You're going to see this in your practice as people who have gone and gotten vaccinated through, you know, these pop-up clinics and all that are going to come in with injuries.
We're going to have to get really good at treating vaccine injuries, but political backlash is going to wipe out the CDC and the FDA and all the people who allowed this to happen.
I don't think The short-term thinkers at the FDA and CDC have really thought this through.
This is going to end badly for them.
Yeah, I think it's going to end badly for public health officials that these departments are all overrun and corrupt, pushing the same narrative.
And it's not going to bode well for your allopathic traditional mainstream docs.
I mean, pediatricians who are pushing a dangerous product on their The population they're charged with protecting, right?
And I know they're doing it mostly, I think.
They truly are blind to what they're doing.
These are not bad people.
All they read and all they hear is this CDC nonsense, the public health nonsense, the lies, the throwaway journals are just filled with all this stuff.
And Anybody that tries to present the other side of the story, the actual data, we get marginalized, right?
I mean, I've got to ask you, as a career, to choose to take this on, that's got to be financial insanity.
I mean, you're coming up in the ranks.
You could have gone and worked for Pfizer or Moderna and probably made a killing.
Yeah, career-wise, it was a bad choice, but you and I have both faced this, right?
And everybody in the movement has faced this, which is you see the pattern in the data, and then you have a choice to make.
Do you take a dive and pretend you didn't see what you just saw?
Or do you stand up and tell the truth?
And you and I have both made the hard decision to stand up and tell the truth.
And there are enormous costs to that.
You and I are both hunted by the pharmaceutical industry.
They have people watch everything that we say and everything that we write.
And they send people after us, they censor our work, they put out hit pieces on us.
It's madness that we have to put up with this because all that you and I want is an honest process, a fair process, clean data to make good decisions.
And for that, we are vilified.
But I will add, this is a unique moment in history, which is Unprecedented censorship, unprecedented power and control from the pharmaceutical industry.
We're seeing the emergence of a sort of global pharma totalitarianism where they are controlling the regulatory state, where they're shaping elections, where they're shaping laws, all to increase their profits while harming the public.
But the public is figuring this out and the truth is routing around the censorship.
So Substack has been wonderful for our community because there's no censorship there and people are free to tell the truth on that site.
And so the people who are banned from Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook now have Substack accounts where we do long-form journalism.
Well, we explain to people exactly what's happening and we provide data, links, that sort of thing.
All sorts of things that the FDA and CDC should do, but don't do.
And the public is finding us.
So I have this massive audience on Substack and I'm a small fish compared to some of the other accounts.
And people are finding our work and people can subscribe to my work for free, but they can also do paid subscriptions as well.
And so we're actually able to make a living off of telling the truth.
And so it's such a strange moment because intellectually, I'm invigorated by the fact that The people are figuring this out, doing epidemiology from below and rising up to take control of their lives and to overthrow the pharmaceutical industry and these corrupt governments.
On the other hand, we live during a time of unbelievable hardship where the pharmaceutical industry in collusion with government is taking actions on a daily basis that we know increase suffering in the world.
And so we just have to keep the faith and keep pushing forward because I think we will break through.
I think we will be able to topple the nonsense coming out of pharma, the FDA and CDC.
And the public is figuring this out.
It's just going to take a while to build up the movement, candidly, so that we're strong enough to take power and write the laws ourselves so that this never happens again.
Oh, so well put.
I mean, this whole thing started in a sense way before Fauci and his gain-of-function work that he helped fund in Wuhan, and then the release, whether it was accidental or on purpose, of this SARS-CoV-2, and then this whole nonsense with this, quote, vaccine that's just You know, injecting mRNA to turn our cells into factories of spike protein, the actual toxin that's causing all the harm.
And then, of course, all the rigmarole with hospitals and incentivized programs to put people on ventilators and kill them.
You're right.
We've really harmed What was, in some ways, a very good medical system.
I mean, it's had problems because of the pharma control that most people weren't aware was going on for a very long time.
I still feel like the way forward, in addition to what you have to say, and I'm going to have you get the last word here on where we go from here, but we need to preserve the control group.
And I'm going to say that there's two control groups.
There's the control group of people who've never had a single vaccine in their lives.
You are the absolute pure control group, and your health is astounding.
People who have never been vaccinated know this.
You can go to thecontrolgroup.org and look at that data.
It's incredible.
But we have another super important control group, and that's those of you who have not yet had the COVID jab.
Even if you've had other vaccines, there is something uniquely, extraordinarily dangerous about the mRNA technology and what's been put into this COVID jab.
And when we start comparing, if doctors and anybody, all of us, whenever somebody comes down with some weird ailment, myocarditis was unheard of in pediatrics.
We're starting to see it all over the place.
So people don't make the connection.
Oh, this weird ailment has to do with the COVID jab.
Well, just start asking, did you get the jab?
You know, did you get the COVID vaccine?
Usually, when there's an unusual new ailment, they did something that we've never hit.
So we start to the picture starts to become very clear of what these things are doing to our heart to harm our health.
So we need to preserve the control group and and get good data out there.
But this thing is a heart and soul thing, too.
I want you to have the last word.
Where do we go from here?
Yeah, so I'm so glad you brought that up.
So what's going to happen over the coming months and years is the world's largest unnatural experiment.
So the people who have not gotten COVID-19 shots are going to do better against COVID and they're going to have fewer of these other weird side effects.
And the people who have gotten these shots are going to experience higher rates of COVID illness because these shots have negative efficacy.
And they're going to experience all range of horrific side effects, heart issues, strokes, probably cancers, and all sorts of other Horrible outcomes, including what they're now calling sudden adult death syndrome.
Well, that's that's vaccine injury.
We know that.
So people are going to see this and they're going to connect the dots.
And so I think our challenge going forward is to welcome new people into the movement.
Grow the movement and also focus on writing the laws so that when we take power this never happens again so I have sort of three things I'd like to see going forward.
The next few months are going to be heartbreaking.
They already are.
You are going to see children dying at recess and in sports class and on the ball field and on the soccer pitch and that sort of thing.
We're going to see more celebrities and famous people in the news who have injuries from these vaccines like Justin Bieber and his wife that we just saw and so many other celebrities and sports heroes and that sort of thing, friends and family, neighbors, they're all going to be injured by these shots.
That is going to cause a tremendous emotional burden on all of us.
It's going to break our hearts every day.
And one of the things I think we should do is to not Absorb it all and to not take on the entire emotional burden ourselves.
My advice to people is when you see a heartbreaking story, what I want you to do is I want you to print it out if you're reading it online or cut it out of the newspaper.
And I want you to mail it to the people at FDA and CDC who approve these shots.
I have all the addresses for these people on my Substack, tobyrogers.substack.com.
I want us to barrage them with mail from now until these shots are withdrawn from the market.
And I think all you need to do in sending it to them is put a little note on it that says, this is on you.
You did this.
And I think we should Daily send them letters to show them exactly the harms that they are causing in society so they can't continue to live in their information bubble.
The second thing I think we need to do is the medical freedom movement needs to mature.
We were a small fringe group of four to five percent of the population A few years ago, that's no longer the case.
We're at least 30 to 40 percent of the population.
Now, we could be depending on how you ask the question, more than 50 percent of the population.
We need to think.
In terms of taking power, we need to think of ourselves as the majority, and we need to think not as responding to them, but rather, how do we go on offense and how do we how do we take power?
Every group In the medical freedom space needs to set up a 501c4.
A 501c4 is a non-profit that can do political work, can put money into campaigns, can endorse candidates, can do messaging in connection with campaigns.
We need to reward our friends and punish our enemies.
And we do not have a political wing of the movement yet.
And until we do that, we're not going to be able to Gain leverage over this situation.
These 501c4s can be set up in an hour.
You just call an attorney, they write the paperwork, you set up a board, off you go.
It's best practices in every large nonprofit nationwide that's able to make a difference on the political debate.
They always have a 501c3 nonprofit that does education, a 501c4 that does political work.
We've got to do that sort of thing.
In the meantime, I'm a huge fan of Jeff Childers on COVID and Coffee.
It's a sub stack that reports every day on the COVID pandemic.
Jeff Childers is an attorney in Florida.
He's absolutely brilliant.
And he does this thing called Operation Multiplier.
Operation Multiplier is anytime a politician does good by us, anytime a politician tells the truth and stands up for us, Jeff Childress puts a link on his Substack article that says, go and donate any amount that you feel comfortable with.
Don't break the bank, but show this person that we appreciate what they did.
And have the number end in the number 2.
So you can give $102, you can give $10.02, any number that ends in two, so that the campaign can track that those donations came from the medical freedom movement.
And so he generates hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations immediately for people like Senator Ron Johnson who stands up for our rights.
I think we need to do a lot more of that sort of thing.
I love that Jeff Childress is doing this.
It makes an instant impact and that helps our people get elected.
And rewards people who are standing up and doing the right thing.
So those are three things I would start with right away in order to turn the tide.
And in all this, I think we just have to keep the faith.
We have science on our side, the data is on our side, logic, reason, rationality is on our side.
We just have to keep doing the work day in and day out, even though it's heartbreaking.
And eventually, this corrupt regime of the pharmaceutical industry in cahoots with government, it will fall apart because their plan is not sustainable.
And the work that you do is sustainable.
You give life to people, you improve people's lives.
And And the work that you do is the work that we have to amplify going forward because that's the life-giving medicine that we need, not this junk science that's coming from FDA and CDC.
Wow, Dr. Toby Rogers, thank you for that wrap up.
We've got a call to action here, folks, and I love the fact that you ended on a positive note.
We are in the right.
We have the data, we have the science, we have the logic, and we've got heart and we've got love, and we're going to do what we can to save everybody that's willing to listen and just wake up to what's actually going on.
So thank you for that.
You bet.
Well, thank you so much for having me on your show.
I'm such a huge fan of your work and I read everything you put out and it's just so nourishing for the soul and it improves lives and improves health.
I'm just so grateful for your courage day in and day out.
And I absolutely believe that we're going to prevail.
We are going to win this fight.
It's just we have to keep the faith, keep doing the work, and eventually we're going to win out.
It's only a matter of time.
Yeah.
Amen, brother.
Thank you.
Please visit DoctorsAndScience.com.
There you can access our Members Only section.
This show is member supported.
We don't have to take sponsors.
We don't have to have anybody controlling the content of our show.
This is a huge perk most people aren't aware of.
Your membership gives you access to my ebooks, transcripts of every show, powerpoints from talks I'm giving around the country, and live bonus peeks at behind-the-scenes work we're doing, my off-the-cuff thoughts and reviews on current events.
Your support makes all this possible.
Thank you.
▲
Export Selection