Jillian Michaels and Joe Rogan dissect generational shifts in skepticism toward COVID-19 narratives, exposing institutional misrepresentation of lab-leak origins and vaccine risks—like myocarditis, spike protein shedding, and AstraZeneca trial injuries—while debating systemic manipulation, from FDA revolving doors to CIA LSD experiments mirroring Manson’s radicalization. They critique progressive ideology’s role in normalizing child gender transitions, citing Pfizer’s financial incentives and Becerra’s push for age-limit removals, alongside media distortions like "anti-Semite" labels for guests like Candace Owens or Daryl Cooper, whose arguments often align with later official reports (e.g., House Oversight Committee). The episode underscores how tribalism, malinformation, and selective outrage—like prioritizing a gay hairdresser’s deportation over MS-13 threats—fuel polarization, urging evidence-based dialogue over reductive attacks. [Automatically generated summary]
And I've got my stepdad on testosterone replacement, which is nice, and he's seeing benefits of those things.
So it's like they're slowly starting to incorporate some of these things, but their whole life they've been told that the doctor knows everything and that the news is always correct and anything contrary to the news is bullshit.
We've been talking about this a lot lately, that imagine if the roles were reversed and if podcasters were the ones yelling at everybody to go out and take these experimental shots, and then they were experiencing all these complications and all these side effects.
Mainstream news would be chastising us.
Like, how dare you give people the advice to go out and do that?
You're responsible for these people having all these side effects and all these unnecessary deaths and all these people that would have had no problem with COVID.
You encouraged them to take this vaccine and they had strokes and they had this and they had that.
And the reason I remember that she was in her 30s is because she told me, oh, this tech has been around for 30 years.
And I thought...
But you're only, you're like 35. No, no, we've been evolving this technology for 30 years, and you see all of these trials for safety.
It's just bureaucracy.
I didn't understand what it meant to push something through that emergency use loophole at the time.
I didn't understand the difference of, oh, this is a dead pathogen, and this is a live pathogen, and we're worried about adjuvants, but this here, this is gene therapy.
Didn't even begin to comprehend what that was, what it meant, or the fact that we would fuck around with something that was experimental.
And the scariest part is I had been talking with a woman named Brianne Dresden, who was injured during the AstraZeneca COVID-19 trials.
And the NIH was studying all of the people that had been injured during the vaccine trials.
As they ruled out the vaccine with no concerns and lied about every component from it stays in the shoulder, it's out of the body in 24 hours, until you find out, no, it's coated in lipid nanoparticles and it can cross the blood-brain barrier.
Well, you've heard Brett Weinstein talk about the flaws in just the technology itself.
You know, the fact that when it gets into your body, if it gets especially, you know, the thing is nobody aspirated, right?
They didn't inject people and pull back to make sure they're not on a blood vessel.
They just plunged it, including when they did it live with Biden on television, which I don't think that was the right thing.
I've said to this day, people are like, yeah, well, you're a conspiracy theorist.
Yeah, I think.
Yeah, I'm telling you right now.
I think it's a conspiracy.
I don't think they would take a chance in injecting a fucking 80-year-old man when you know that you have to, like, stay there at the clinic for 20 minutes in case you drop dead.
And what Brett was saying about it is if you don't aspirate, you're shooting it right into a blood vessel.
If you're shooting it right into a blood vessel, it could go to all sorts of areas of the body where the body's going to attack it like it's a disease, particularly the heart.
And he's like, this is why you get myocarditis, because the heart doesn't heal, which is why you don't get heart cancer.
Your heart just scars over.
So people have these inflamed, enlarged hearts, and then diminished cardiovascular function.
And he was talking about this way earlier than anybody else.
And they were, blood on his hands!
He's killing grandmas!
The vaccine saved millions of lives.
People say that all the time.
They've saved millions of lives.
Like, how?
If people still got COVID, not only that, they got more COVID than people that didn't get COVID.
I remember when Bill Maher was talking about how it was people who...
There was a study that came out of the CDC, and forgive me because I don't remember the exact percentage, but it was upwards of 80% of the people who died or had severe cases of COVID were obese.
Or overweight.
And this is when, you know, you could be healthy at any size.
And I'm like, you show me where I've shifted my position on any issue outside of Trump.
I used to think he was Hitlerian and he was going to round up all the gays and we were all fucked.
None of that happened.
I thought Russia, Russia, Russia.
I thought that was real.
As new evidence came to light and I managed to survive his first term intact along with my gay relationships, I somehow started to feel that maybe a lot of that was bullshit propaganda.
But outside of that, not one of my positions has changed.
Not one.
And I find that arguably the right is more welcoming and more tolerant now.
I can sit down and have a conversation with Matt Walsh.
And debate gay marriage in a civil fashion.
And I ended up, again, I bring up Bill because I work with Bill in some capacity on his podcast network.
And I was having to defend him on Piers Morgan because he was sitting down with Trump.
And they called him a bigot and a racist and anti-science because he was going to sit with Trump.
I'm like, well, where's the outrage that he sits down with Newsome?
And I find that it's more respectable when you speak in the fashion that you do.
And I've tried to really curtail that behavior throughout every other aspect of my life, personally and professionally, whether I'm fighting with a contractor on my house, I try to lower the octaves of my voice, or I'm trying to win somebody over in a debate.
But I think, you know, Joe, honestly, I think because it's entertaining.
As mentioned, I am not interested in being on her bad side.
However, when I tune in, it's not because I want to see...
Her reaction or her opinion on something, it's because I want to learn what is the counter-argument to deporting this guy, Kilmar Obrego Garcia.
I'm like, okay, steel man that argument for me, and then tune into something else, and try to disseminate what the truth is, and she's, I think, a constitutional attorney.
So I feel like I'm getting great information.
With you, you're not just learning about something, but you're also curious what you think about it.
If you're going to go, ah, bullshit!
Or if you're like, if you do the, wow.
You know, you want to say what you think about it.
I was just actually talking to Mike Rowe about that.
Why do we hold on so fastidiously to our dogma?
And honestly, because it doesn't feel right to have somebody say, I told you so.
I will do the mea culpa, and I have a million times.
But it is...
Certainly more rare.
I mean, how often do you see a walk back or a course correct?
Not often.
And I know that, you know, when people wag their finger at me, are you happy?
This is what you voted for.
You want to defend things that arguably you may agree with them on.
And I'm like, don't, don't, don't do it.
Just do you, do you see their point?
If so, acknowledge you see their point.
And then I still feel the need.
To play the lesser evil game, even when they're right.
They're still wrong because when I weigh out the choices I had, even though you're right on this issue, I'm right about my choice ultimately because more things went the way I wanted them to than the way I didn't.
It takes a lot of ego strength to admit where you're wrong, and I just don't think a lot of people have that.
There is a tribalism with everything, whether it's workout trends.
Diets, for God's sake.
We've seen this kind of dogma in health and wellness for years.
That's no fun to say you were wrong, and in some cases it can have professional repercussions for people.
Well, let's go into it, because that to me was so fascinating.
The concept of fat shaming, which I don't think you should hurt anybody's feelings, but I think at a certain point in time...
Sometimes hurting someone's feelings causes actions.
And hurting someone's feelings with the truth.
And you can give the truth to someone lovingly.
You know, you can say, look, I care about you.
This is why I want to tell you you're a fat fuck.
Like, you really are.
You're disgusting, and you need to lose weight, and you're fully addicted to food, and you don't understand what it's doing to your body, and you're being lied to by all these other people, like these fat doctors.
Like, there's some lady in the UK who calls herself the fat doctor.
And this idea that shaming people is worse than telling them the truth that's going to make them feel bad, maybe temporarily, but you could do it with kindness.
And then that person can make choices.
And then you encourage them.
Like, I'm so glad you changed your diet.
I'm so glad you cut out this and cut out that.
And now you're doing well.
And you've decided to walk 10,000 steps a day.
And you've decided to start exercising a little bit, you know?
This episode is brought to you by DoorDash.
This Mother's Day, why give mom only flowers when you can give her flowers plus a real break?
For a limited time, use code JOE50 to get 50% off.
Up to $15 value when you spend $15 or more on local florists, convenience, grocery, and retail stores on DoorDash.
And starting May 9th, Mother's Day weekend, your flower order will unlock credit towards select gifts that'll take cooking, planning, and more off mom's plate.
So big food, put simply, hired a bunch of registered dietitians to co-opt this concept of intuitive eating.
And I'm dead ass serious with hashtags like derail the shame and they paid them.
And they put out all of these posts and went to all of these conventions and promoted the narrative that you can be healthy at any size.
And it's just a flat out lie.
It is a flat earther conversation.
It is pseudoscience.
At its best, there's no truth behind that.
There is a robust amount of data that show us being obese is associated with like 170 comorbidities.
This is a non-factor.
It's been debunked.
We know this for a fact.
So when that happens, what they're doing is essentially...
Placating someone who already feels, now I can attack what's going on, or address rather, what's going on with an individual who is that size, and it is largely psychological.
Once you are past the point of dad bod, you know what I mean?
Like, oh, I worked three jobs, life beat me down, it's a food desert, and I'm 40 pounds overweight, and I've let myself go.
This is a different...
When you're dealing with somebody who is 50-plus pounds overweight, there is a psychological component.
So the first thing we need to do is make them aware that there is a problem without question.
But you can do it without shame, giving them facts of, listen, this is unhealthy.
And because you are such a valuable individual, I want you to understand this because only from a place of feeling truly worthy are you able to facilitate a change.
You don't work out because you hate your body.
You work out because you love it.
So it doesn't need to be a shaming.
There's no shame there, to be honest, Joe.
I know that people claim there is because you pointed out this vulnerability or this flaw in the person.
But we all have flaws and vulnerabilities, people who are overweight.
Yeah.
Yeah.
By educating them first, and then, without question, I like to give people, or when I was able to do the work hands-on, that rock-bottom moment, because they are overweight because it is providing them with something extraordinarily significant.
And I can give you examples should you need them, but I promise you that at one time or another, people turn to addictions, in this case food.
Because it means their psychological survival.
So put simply, the most obvious example would be a person who was incested, molested, raped, puts on a way to desexualize.
That's just one example of many, but it's easy to illustrate the point.
So whatever this thing is providing them is the part that's so hard to let go of.
Because unconsciously it's terrifying.
And you've got to first show them, this is why we need to change.
And then you've got to give them that path towards change and you've got to make it harder.
You've got to make them feel the pain.
It could be physically, it could be psychologically, but it doesn't have to be shameful.
Of the way they've been living so that the work and the sacrifice associated with change is less painful than continuing the negative and destructive habits.
R.J. Reynolds and these tobacco companies bought all these fast food, processed food companies, and they used the same tactics that they used with that to push terrible foods on people.
Remember the days when you weren't allowed to have food at a bookstore?
And now every friggin' bookstore has a cafe with a 600-calorie drink.
You are surrounded.
There is nowhere you can go right now where food is not omnipresent.
In particular, this crappy food.
And they generally do it through government contracts and subsidies.
So it's at your schools, your hospitals, anywhere you go.
You will find this garbage food.
So even if you have that moment of willpower, which is arguably this fleeting moment of bravado, if you're constantly surrounded by it, you will give in.
Managing your environment is a large part of helping someone be successful.
It's a band-aid, right, if you're dealing with sexual abuse, for example.
But controlling the environment is definitely a component in helping them.
You can't control the environment.
You can't control the narrative.
You can't control what's in the food.
And it's all by design.
It's not just the crap in the food.
It's how they control the narrative around it and how they engineer the environment and how they systematically shut down the people that point it out as.
But what I can tell you with certainty is that the rate of early on-site cancer diagnosis in people 18 to 49 has gone up 79% over the past two decades.
So if, in fact, bad baby is being untruthful and deceitful, those statistics are real.
There was a doctor that was on the Tucker Carlson show the other day that was saying he's seeing pancreatic cancer in kids for the first time ever in his career.
He said, my entire career I never saw pancreatic cancer in children.
We've talked about digital threats and protecting your personal information on the show before, but it's just as important that you take care of yourself and your loved ones in the real world, too, and that's where SimpliSafe comes in for your home security system.
They use a mix of AI technology and real live breathing people to keep you safe.
Like if some weirdo is loitering around your property, AI powered cameras can help detect it and agents can act quickly to deter them or contact the police.
But SimpliSafe is there for more than just the bad stuff.
Their cameras also capture the moments you might want to save, like the first time your daughter rides her bike down the driveway or your kid is opening their acceptance letter
Keep your family safe so you can experience moments like that.
You can get 50% off your new SimpliSafe system with professional monitoring and your first month free.
Just go to simplisafe.com slash rogan.
That's simplisafe.com slash rogan for 50% off and your first month free.
Having grown up in California and spending a lot of time in the water, I have known this for years and now I can't even imagine, by the way, in California who would dare to get in the ocean at this point.
Oh, we're not doing any forestry mitigation because of the environment, and yet these fires have rolled back all of those protections by something like 20 years.
He's like, we knew about this for seven days with the winds and we could have, you know, we could have borrowed firefighters from all different states and this and that and had them pre-positioned.
Like an actual progressive is a person who's kind, who wants people to just exist and be yourself and live amongst us and we should all have social safety net and laws that like are kind and compassionate.
We should look at the fact that we are an incredible first world nation and we should like roll out the red carpet to all the people that live here and try to make it a better place.
That's real progressivism.
And then it morphed into this, like, let perverts get into the women's room.
Let men compete in women's sports.
And ignore the fact that some people are fucking psychotic and give them a blank check as long as they just say they're a woman.
Like, oh, you're a woman.
Go ahead.
Carte Blanche, get in.
Not only that, but treat them better than you treat women themselves because they're actually more oppressed than women.
If you interrupt puberty in the stage 10 or 2. And the reason I bring this up is because they'll tell you it's reversible.
But here's the thing.
I actually went through this exercise with somebody and I was like, show that to me.
And they went on chat GPT and it's like, yes, this is reversible.
And the argument is that should you have a child that starts puberty at seven and you use puberty blockers, it's very rare.
It can happen.
And they do it strategically to slow that down for a child and help them develop at a normal pace.
It doesn't sterilize them or make them incapable of having an orgasm.
So the distinction that's key is when you block puberty at the stage of 10 or 2, which is arguably the appropriate age that puberty is meant to begin, then you've got sterilization.
You've got an inability to ever have an orgasm.
It affects bone development.
It affects brain development.
It's terrible for them.
Their friggin'children, their body is not developed.
Developed properly.
Nobody understands that.
They don't, when they make that argument, they're told the parting line of, if you make them go through this, they'll kill themselves.
And it turns out that the data doesn't bear out to prove that either.
And when you look at who's funding this stuff, I remember, my God, I used to go to the friggin' human rights campaign dinners and donate.
You know, when you're fighting for gay marriage and I'm a good liberal.
And now, when you go to their page, if...
They've got a score, and forgive me, I can't remember the friggin' name of it, but there's a score where they rate different medical institutions on how they provide gender-affirming care.
And if they get a bad score, it impacts, I think, how much grant money they can get.
There's a page for this.
I believe it's through the HRC on their website.
And when you look at who funds it, Pfizer.
Oh, that's not at all surprising.
One drug, I think Lupron, is almost a billion-dollar-a-year business.
Well, it's just the money thing is so scary because when money gets attached to anything, all ethics and morals go out the window and they just try to make as much money from these things as humanly possible.
And they've always done that.
They've always done that across the board with virtually everything and we're surprised when it happens with children.
And if it doesn't affect them personally, they feel like it's important to espouse these beliefs because these beliefs show that you're a good progressive.
Yeah, it's like people's minds have been co-opted by...
You know, I don't necessarily believe in demons and angels.
I don't believe that.
But if you were the devil...
Like, wouldn't money be your most valuable tool to get people to do absolutely atrocious evil things that are going to ruin their lives?
Money is like the devil's...
It's like where the devil can convince good people to do things, and then you use words like gender-affirming care, and you can kind of change the narrative.
But the end result is really just you're profiting off of people's confusion, and you're doing so in a way where you're sacrificing.
It's literal child sacrifice.
Those children that wind up committing suicide because they went through this...
Gender-affirming care and are horribly depressed and they don't have breasts anymore and they're so confused and they can't have children and they just wind up killing themselves and this is sacrifice.
This is like a form of child sacrifice for financial gain.
I mean you're not sacrificing them to the gods or to demons.
You're doing it to money.
And it's really wild that we can't see that.
We can't, like, look at all the data and see and understand, like, the complex interaction of human beings and people that are around them that influence them.
And, you know, that they get encouragement, and then they get positive feedback, and then they show up at school wearing lipstick, and everyone's like, you're amazing!
You're amazing now, Bobby.
Now that you're Roberta.
Like, now you're amazing.
You used to be some guy that got stuffed into a locker.
And now your girl is incredible.
And you're giving them this positive feedback.
And it's money.
And people are profiting off of it.
It's fucking insane.
And it's so wild to watch it all play out and realize, like, we are so vulnerable to influence.
Human beings are so vulnerable.
I mean, this is why cults exist.
This is why people are willing to be religious martyrs and blow themselves up.
Which, by the way...
Like, why do they do that?
Why do they get kids to wear suicide vests?
Because you can't convince a 55-year-old guy to do it.
A 55-year-old guy with a job and a family and a lot of, you know, interests and good friends.
Tough to get him to wear that suicide vest.
You know, he's like, what?
What am I doing?
I'm going to a mall?
What the fuck?
No, why am I doing that?
I'm going to heaven?
And I'm going to get 72 virgins?
Can you show me these virgins?
Like, they're a fucking...
What happened to them?
How do these poor virgins wind up in heaven just getting raped by this 55-year-old guy who blew himself up?
Jolly West was the CIA operative who visited Manson in jail.
He's also the guy that visited Jack Ruby after he shot Kennedy.
And then Jack Ruby starts saying, I'm seeing demons and the Jews are on fire.
And, you know, Jack Ruby didn't have a history of mental illness like that, like complete psychotic breakdowns.
But he did after...
Jolly West visited him in jail.
Yeah, there's like real documentation about those experiments.
One of them is Operation Midnight Climax.
So the CIA was operating brothels and they were operating brothels where they would have two-way mirrors and they would be behind the mirrors and these prostitutes who were working for the CIA would give the Johns LSD and then they would observe them.
Do you think that the LSD simply accelerated that mental vulnerability or the ability to warp someone's mind?
Because when you tell people now you're going to perform a sex change on a child...
They think that's a good idea.
And I'll tie it back to one thing that also is seemingly unrelated.
Everyone's outraged about RFK.
He's not a doctor.
Oh my god, he's trying to get to the root of autism and he's misguided about it.
Where was your outrage when Xavier Becerra, who's not a doctor, wanted to remove all age limits for sex changes on kids, whether surgery or not, the medicalization component that we talked about?
Like, that to me is a group psychosis.
I wonder, like, to get an adult to, I'm like, where's your outrage and your concern about this because this is...
It's batshit crazy.
And nobody said a word.
Nobody cared.
It went completely under the radar.
And I'm just wondering if the ability to capture someone's mind in the way that they did through these CIA studies, did LSD simply accelerate a vulnerability that's already pre-existing and you're watching the brainwashing of people go on over the course of decades?
Because if you said this to a person, arguably in Obama's first term.
When he ran on gay marriage, that you were going to run sex changes on children in the year 2024, people would have lost their friggin' mind.
And we know that human beings are very vulnerable to group influence.
Now, when you have someone that's actually being trained by people that are psychologists and that understand influence and then also trained in using the implementation of LSD on these people, one of the things that Manson would do...
Because he would pretend to take LSD and then he would give it to them and then influence them while they were under the influence and he was sober.
And this was all learned through the Harvard LSD studies, which, by the way, created the Unabomber.
Ted Kaczynski was a part of the Harvard LSD studies.
Well, yeah, there was a bunch of things wrong with him.
First of all, when he was a baby, he was severely ill, and they put him in some sort of an infirmary, and he didn't have any.
Wow.
They just – like when he cried and he's in his crib, they left him there.
His brother talked about it.
There's a documentary on Netflix about him and his brother talked about – like even before the Harvard LSD studies, they would – he was like really fucked up, really fucked up, complete lack of empathy and just –
Yeah, a complete sociopath as a young man.
And it would express itself when he would experience rejection from women.
He would have, like, violent reactions to that rejection and write them horrific letters and torture them and yell at them.
The whole country believes that women have to cover every part of their body except their eyeballs.
Yes.
And this kind of thinking, we're very vulnerable to groupthink, and especially groupthink that's being intentionally manipulated also, and then being done with psychedelic drugs.
Now, they did it during the Manson era because they were trying to stop the anti-war movement.
Like the hippies and all these people that were like, hey, make love, not war.
We have to change the association that the general public has with these people because too many people are joining up with them.
And so what they did was they got the Manson family and they got him to commit these horrific crimes.
And every time Charles Manson would get arrested, he would get let out of jail.
I mean, he was violating parole left and right.
And the cops that arrested him were all being told when they were interviewed, they would say, this is above my pay grade.
They're telling me that I have to let him go.
So they would be contacted by someone from the State Department or wherever and saying, let him go.
But this man was more seriously affected and had to be removed from the exercise.
After 35 minutes, one of the radio operators had become incapable of using his set.
And the efficiency of the rocket launcher team was also very impaired.
Ten minutes later, the attacking section had lost all sense of urgency.
Notice the bunching and indecision as they enter a wood occupied by the enemy.
Almost immediately, the section commander tried to use a map to find the location of troop headquarters, and a prisoner's escort had to have the way pointed out to him, although it was in plain sight, 700 yards away over open country.
Fifty minutes after taking the drug, radio communication had become difficult, if not impossible, but the men are still capable of sustained physical effort.
This man nearly succeeded in felling this tree using only a spade.
However, constructive action was still attempted by those retaining a sense of responsibility in spite of physical symptoms.
But one hour and ten minutes after taking the drug, with one man climbing a tree to feed the birds, The troop commander gave up, admitting that he could no longer control himself or his men.
I mean, there was also some experiments that they ran.
I think it was in St. Louis where they were using a fan and they were spraying things, aerosol spraying to see what kind of effect things would have on people.
Like our government, if you give them the license, right?
I don't want to say our government.
Let's just stop saying that.
Let's just say human beings with unchecked power.
Human beings with unchecked power, they have an imperative.
What are they trying to do?
Well, they're trying to figure out what this stuff does and what's the best way to do it.
You tried it out on soldiers.
They've always done that with vaccines and a bunch of different experimental androgens.
They've dosed them up with steroids and all sorts of different things to increase aggression.
Norman Ohler wrote this insane book on the ubiquitous use of drugs during the Third Reich and how it caused them to go through Poland in three days because they stayed up for three fucking days on meth.
And they gave the most meth to the people that were driving the tanks because they were at the front.
So it was like they gave different doses.
Depending on what your job was and they just messed up ran through Poland and they They caught these people just like in France that like their soldiers were given wine So these people were like drunk and then the Nazis came through messed up and just fucking killed everybody You know,
And, you know, in Vietnam, people were taking heroin and smoking weed, and they were still doing that.
People have an...
Evil capacity to other other people and decide you see it politically, you know in this country like people on the left Demonize people on the right people on the right will demonize people on the left.
It's just like it's a tribal thing that it's it's a An echo of our past, because essentially, when we were small tribes of 150 people, and then you got invaded by a neighboring tribe,
you had to be able to commit extreme violence against the other.
And you had to be able to think of them as not you.
Some of it is just so visceral and hideous, and I don't mean to bring the vibe down, but it's one thing to kill another human being that I have to, this is how we survive, or whatever it is.
We're fighting Nazis, and you don't have a choice.
Okay, fair.
But to beheads, just that kind of stuff, I just think...
It's tough, though, because when people fight dirty, it's such a massive disadvantage that then you think, well, I'm going to lose if I don't make this sacrifice in how I'm behaving or how I'm tackling this.
Yeah, if you want to defeat evil, you have to become a monster.
Because if you don't, you won't beat it.
You have to do horrific things to beat horrific people.
You have to kill them, right?
Like if someone's invading and they're shooting guns at people and they show up at the beach and they pull up in boats and they start gunning people down, you have to do the same to stop that.
You can't like bring out daisies and go, hey guys, like I bake you these pot brownies.
He's like, listen, if you aren't willing to talk to the worst enemy, you have to fight them.
But it's when the talking doesn't work.
And you see that all the time.
You see, I see it in my own personal life.
All of my best intentions and my calmest demeanor and my most empathetic approach to something fails because you're just not dealing with somebody who is rational or well-intentioned.
When you do look back at the plague and they started killing all the cats because they were associated with witches and that's when the plague was able to run more rampant because the cats were keeping that rat population down and the fleas on the rats caused...
The cat thing is fucked up because they're not even doing it for food.
But it's like that thing inside of them has been...
It's there.
You can't...
Satisfy it with just food.
I mean, they literally are the cleanup crew for nature.
That's what they are in Africa.
When you see them, they're looking for the wounded antelopes.
They're looking for anybody who's old.
They're looking for anybody who just can't run fast enough.
And that's what they do.
And that's how they keep the populations down.
You know, this is the reason why they've reintroduced wolves into Colorado and that's the reason why they reintroduced wolves in Montana and the elk populations decreased significantly because the elk populations were out of control.
And we're still trapped with these primate bodies.
We're territorial primates with weapons.
And we're still trapped with the same instincts that got us to the dance.
The same instincts that caused us to create walled cities.
You know, allowed us to survive.
And then agriculture, which allowed us to develop surpluses.
And then people wanted those surpluses.
Nomads.
And they came in.
The roving barbarians.
The Mongolian hordes.
You know, this is like all part of our history.
And this is the battle of good versus evil.
And the battle of good versus evil, I think this duality has to exist.
I think you have to have good to combat evil and you have to have evil to keep good in check, like to enhance good and to force people to really rise and to innovate and to figure out how to defeat evil.
Without evil and without...
The idea of these hordes, we never would have developed cities.
If we never developed cities, we never would have gone through the Industrial Revolution.
We wouldn't develop cities if we were just roving, peaceful, nomadic hunter-gatherers.
You're definitely one of those guys, which is why, bringing it back to the very beginning, I think that you're number one, but I also think you're one out of quite a few.
Yeah, I think, unfortunately, evil can co-op people, and because good people can become evil when they experience so much evil that they have to become, you know, become a monster, fight against monsters.
And if money is the devil, that's a perfect example.
How much do you need, though, Joe?
That's my question.
It's not you, though.
The problem is...
Corporations, I'm sure you've seen this before, corporations behave like a psychopath, right?
Because corporations don't have humanity.
And when you have a corporation, which I don't know how we get away from not having corporations, so what's the solution there?
But corporations have an obligation to their shareholders.
And sometimes you have to do fucked up things in order to make more money.
And that's when you're in the business of drugs.
If you're in the business of making movies, I mean, what fucked up things can you do to make more movies and make movies that more people are going to see?
Really nothing.
It's like you just have to make them.
Resonate with people.
But if you're selling drugs, well, boy, you can influence people.
You can lie about studies.
You can have your scientists perform studies and then throw out all the studies that don't jive with whatever you're trying to sell.
But the real problem is when they advertise, and Callie Means talked about this extensively, now the media will not criticize them because they're responsible for an enormous percentage of their income.
I've heard this conversation, and I'm trying to remember who one of the researchers was, but Callie was there, Mark Hyman was there, and they were having this exact conversation, and one of the people on the other side was suggesting that they have already gamed this out,
They make you look like you're insane when you do.
You're a crazy person.
I was on CNN talking about Ozempic one time and they essentially called me anti-science because I suggested that a lot of the drugs, yeah, I was like, whoa!
Like, when we give people statins and we give people blood pressure medication...
On all medications, largely, it's a cost-benefit analysis.
So if you brought an individual who was morbidly obese and already had atherosclerosis and type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease, and you said, we've tried everything, they're a death's door, and this is arguably the last step.
Well, in that case, the downsides of the medications are Far less than not trying it.
So in that instance, you could twist my arm for sure.
But if you gave me my way, I would prefer to look at what the medications like ibogaine or psilocybin could do for the psychological component, the addictive component.
One treatment.
Doesn't go on forever.
And then, because diet and exercise do work, what's stopping them from engaging in those habits consistently is all the stuff we talked about in the beginning, the psychological component, the physical addiction.
So, you know, no one's ever tried it, though.
So there's no way to actually know.
And you can't, it's almost impossible to do the research on it, which is, again, why the Texas Ibogaine Initiative is so important.
Because you can begin this kind of research, although it is in veterans and addiction and so on.
But would that be the first step?
And when I've asked the people in the space, like Matt Shepard, for example, who, is it Shepard Pratt?
And one of the guys that's the foremost experts on psilocybin and treating addiction, he's like, yeah, theoretically, it would work great.
Theoretically.
So for me, if we got all the way to this place and I had no choice, that's like saying, Jill, if someone had stage 4 cancer, would you do chemo?
I mean, I guess so.
But I'd like to, if there was an alternative way forward, or if we could prevent it to begin with, that would be ideal.
So you could twist my arm to that point.
I think there's something to be said for, again, what Brigham is doing at Ways to Well, which is why being able to compound the GLP-1 drugs allows you to titrate the dose.
So when people argue with me on this matter, they'll suggest that a titrated dose, a lesser amount of these drugs can be effective with significantly less side effects.
But when they're trying to block that and you can't even explore it.
If they do allow the use of Ibogaine and then also allow the use of psilocybin, if more people start taking it, more people are not going to buy whatever the pharmaceutical drug companies are selling.
And they'll just naturally sort of deteriorate.
You're always going to have fools.
You're always going to have people that just want to, what do I take?
You have to have freedom of the use of these alternative methods.
And I think naturally, those would overcome.
They would succeed.
I think you'd still probably have gambling addicts.
You still probably would have people that want to take...
All the pharmaceutical drugs, like whatever the doctor wants to prescribe to them.
But it would be less and less.
And they don't want that, which is why you're seeing the pushback from the FDA with peptides and all these different things.
It's because they're concerned that if you give people a bunch of things that are going to make them healthy, they're not going to take as many pharmaceutical drugs.
I mean, which is why there's no model for prevention in healthcare.
It's not profitable at all.
But it's ridiculous.
There's a peptide called cerebralizing.
That they give to stroke patients in other parts of the developed world that can have a massive impact as well on cognitive function and can be neuroprotective.
You can't even buy it here.
Literally, I had to find it in Austria, ship it into the country, and Brigham and Dr. Rexford, I was like, now what do I do with this?
He's freaking about to walk me through how to use it on freaking FaceTime.
By the way, there's a new stroke drug that I actually just sent my friend Rich because our friend Keith Robinson, I don't have his number, but he suffered from a stroke.
And there's some new drug that I'll send this to you, Jamie.
These UCLA scientists.
Oh, you got it already.
They developed first drug rehabilitation to repair brain damage.
The drug replicated the recovery of movement control produced by rehab in mice.
A new study by UCLA Health has discovered what researchers say is the first drug to fully reproduce the effects of physical stroke rehabilitation in model mice following from human studies.
Yeah.
Which is wonderful.
So this is the benefit of pharmaceutical drugs.
There are some pharmaceutical drugs that are wonderful.
So the goal is to have a medicine that stroke patients can take that produces the effects of rehabilitation.
Dr. S. Thomas Carmichael, the study's lead author and professor and chair of UCLA Neurology, rehabilitation after stroke is limited in its actual effects because most patients cannot sustain the rehab intensity needed for stroke recovery.
Further, stroke recovery is not like Most other fields of medicine where drugs are available to treat the disease, such as cardiology, infectious disease, or cancer.
Carmichael said rehabilitation is a physical medicine approach that has been around for decades.
We need to move rehabilitation into an era of molecular medicine.
So this is why, you know, you don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
And this is a real problem that we've had in the last few decades because there's been this revolving door between the FDA and pharmaceutical drug companies.
So people were there, I think it's like seven out of eight heads of the FDA went on to work for pharmaceutical drug companies.
So you've developed these relationships with these pharmaceutical drug companies where they're funding the studies, they're funding all, and then you leave and then you go to work for them and you get a nice, cozy job.
When I was at the Senate testimony, I can't remember how many months ago that was, but Calumene's had us meeting with different senators and their aides, and a kid came up to me, and I, of course, brought that up, and he's like, it's so much worse than that.
And I was like, elaborate.
What do you mean it's so much worse than that?
And he said, essentially, they develop the drug, have stock in the company, go to work at the FDA, approve the drug, and go back to the drug company.
I was working on a book or have been working on a book where it looks at each and every law that was put into place with good intentions.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions and how each and every one was co-opted by Big Food or Big Ag or Big Pharma to wreak complete havoc and destruction.
And you're going to keep seeing that if nothing gets changed.
And that's what's encouraging about this administration.
So the thing that I was most excited about was Bobby Kennedy.
When Bobby Kennedy united with Trump, I was like, okay, I'm in.
Because, like, if he can get in there, you can see real change that's going to affect the way our lives are forever.
It's going to change things.
It's going to give people a real understanding of what's going on behind the scenes, why you've been lied to, why all these drugs are everywhere, why you're seeing poor health outcomes, why we're the richest nation in the world but also the sickest.
And across the board, with education, we're the richest nation in the world.
We have terrible education scores.
Like, why?
Why, since we developed the Department of Education, have our scores plummeted?
I was speaking with Kelly, and he's like, you know, don't pull punches, because you want to be diplomatic, but I am finding myself defending Kennedy, who, by the way, I've met twice.
I have no...
I don't work for this administration.
I have no personal affiliation.
It's just right and wrong.
There is a huge problem that needs to be addressed, and this administration wants to address it.
And yet you are seeing the resistance.
You are seeing the opposition flood the zone with his...
Hysteria.
24 fucking 7. And it's crazy.
It's constantly taking people off piste.
I actually did an interview the other day on News Nation where the host was like, well, he promised results on autism by September and that's unrealistic.
And I was like, who gives a fuck if it's unrealistic?
But it's a closed system, and what I mean by that is even if I did the gimme...
Oh, you're right.
Autism is genetic.
Well, what about...
The rise in early onset cancer diagnosis, the rise in obesity, the steady increase of infertility year after year after year.
We went from adult onset diabetes to type 2 diabetes because children have type 2 diabetes now.
Come on!
How far are you going to push it?
People are not stupid.
They're not.
You can capture them to a point.
But when the evidence is overwhelming, we are sicker than ever.
Existence is mind-blowing to this guy every day.
Oh, well, now, you know, he fired the guy that's tracking gonorrhea.
I'm like, you know what?
I mean, wear a fucking condom!
For God's sake!
Hopefully, that guy will get his job back.
But at the end of the day, he's also tackling the grass rule and trying to get to the bottom of autism and getting poison out of baby formula and removing soda from snaps.
It's just like...
Where is the perspective for the general public to read through the media bullshit?
And when you have an us-versus-them thing going on, which is what we do here in this country, you know, like, I keep seeing, like, people online saying, in these dark times, like, are these times so dark?
Like, what is happening?
You know, you know what's dark?
Yeah, if you're living in Gaza, it's pretty fucking dark.
If you're living in Ukraine, pretty dark.
But, like, here, have things gone dark?
Like they're calling this totalitarian regime.
Right. Okay, what's totalitarian?
That they're cutting fraud and waste?
Like, have you paid attention to the fraud and waste?
You paid attention to the fact they spent $250 million on transgender animal studies?
Like, where's your fucking money going?
You're not concerned with this unchecked spending that this government has been able to do for decade upon decade and these millions of NGOs?
Do you know there's an NGO in India for every 600 people?
And there's also, well, my friend Coleon Noir, he brought this up and I was never aware of it until he said it.
He went to San Francisco and he saw the rampant, and he's a lawyer, so he went to San Francisco and he saw all this homelessness and he's like, what is the problem?
There's not enough funding?
And a guy over there going, no, no, no, no, you don't understand.
It's the opposite.
There's a business now.
So these people that are working in the homeless, you know, whatever the organization, they're making quarter million dollars a year.
I don't know if you've seen Anna Kasparian talk about this, but she can elaborate on this subject matter to the point that you literally want to forcibly remove Gavin Newsom from office.
Well, you know, I just had this conversation, actually.
I was talking to Carola, and he was telling me that Gavin Newsom had told him back in the day that the face of homelessness was not addiction and mental illness.
It was women and children.
And there's a loophole.
A friend of mine who's a reporter with the New York Times looked into it.
Because she's like, why don't you push back on that?
Because he's right.
She goes, no, no, no, no.
I looked into it and it's women and children.
And then she ended up getting to the bottom of the loophole.
And the way that he was able to put forward that narrative is that homeless is a person without a stable address.
He was saying that women, like the mom that owns two jobs, that's who I'm trying to save.
We don't need to tackle addiction and we don't need to tackle mental illness because this is about the underprivileged individual, the female single mom with two kids who, you know, this is the face of homelessness.
And Carolla was like, you're a sociopath.
It's addicts and people with mental illness.
And I ended up then in a debate with this journalist who's lovely, named Molly.
And she's like, well, the statistics say that homelessness is, in fact, women and children.
But when I challenged her and sent her San Francisco, whatever, we go back and forth.
And she ended up coming back to me after doing the homework.
And there is a distinction between homeless and unsheltered.
But don't believe what you see with your own eyes.
That's the game across the board.
Don't believe your common sense.
Common sense would dictate all the things we talked about.
Autism is increasing.
We shouldn't give sex change.
We shouldn't sterilize 12-year-olds.
But don't believe any of that.
Don't believe that people who are homeless Need help psychologically.
Some way to treat the addiction.
Obviously, there are more intelligent people like Schellenberger that have a plan for this, despite the fact that he didn't get into the governor's office, which is a shame because he would have done far better than what California is dealing with now.
But it's this constant game and manipulation of the facts all the time.
And this is where...
If I could do one thing in my job, it's teaching people how to defer back to their common sense.
But then when you finally decide it doesn't matter anymore.
You become immune.
So I was, I was, it's interesting.
Back in the day when I, you know, my friend used to refer to me in this capacity.
She'd say, you know, you're like the fat person's Jesus.
This is the early 2000s.
Oh, Julian Michaels is, doesn't judge, but then she's open arms and she's trying to help people.
And then the very same person, the very same.
Belief system and the very same strategies in dealing with the problem became the ultimate enemy, the ultimate fat shamer, the ultimate science denier.
And it just goes to show you how the narrative shifts.
It's tough to call me a transphobe because I fall under that acronym umbrella.
Despite the fact that gay is very different than trans, I've never really understood the acronym either.
What's a trap?
Completely.
But you can't say, like, go ahead.
I'm a homophobe?
Come at me, bro!
It's a tough one!
I'm married to a woman.
I haven't been hit with a racist card, although I'm waiting for it.
I don't know, maybe because my kid is Haitian and she gives me a pass.
I have no idea.
But you get certain protections simply because you're a card-carrying member of the club.
But I got hit with everything outside of that.
You know, transphobe, ish, ish, fat shamer and anti-science and ableist and privileged and all of that stuff.
When I was getting in trouble with CNN during the vaccine days, the COVID days, they would use a photograph of me from the UFC weigh-ins because when I go to the UFC weigh-ins, I say, welcome to the weigh-ins, everybody!
Well, that's my friend Daryl Cooper, who was on my podcast, you know, because he said hyperbolically that Winston Churchill was one of the main villains of World War II because he started blockades and forced Hitler into action and starved the German people.
It's like what he said.
It was really unfortunate the way he said it the way he said it, but he was trying to say that Winston Churchill did some things that if he hadn't done them, maybe World War II wouldn't have gone the way it went.
But the problem is when you say that and it gets taken out of context, people say, oh, he's a Holocaust denier and a Nazi sympathizer.
But then you listen to his podcast.
He's got this, I think it's like 30 hours, called Fear and Loathing in New Jerusalem.
And it's the most gut-wrenching tale of the persecution.
The persecution of Jews in Eastern Europe, just the beginning of it, I tell everybody, just listen to the first, like, 40 minutes of it.
It's so heartbreaking.
Like, this is not the words of a homophobe or, excuse me, of an anti-Semite that would say those things.
This gatekeeping of information— But he's neither an asshole or an idiot, and he's being called an asshole and an idiot by people who don't consume his work.
Because I see this a lot with the gatekeeping of information, and God forbid you don't fact-check everybody on everything, which has been something that I've gotten a bit of.
Like, well, you nodded your head, and you said I see your point.
I'm like, well, sometimes I see their point, and sometimes I don't know, and I can't fact-check everything.
And I'll talk to somebody else who has a differing opinion.
This taking people out of context and trying to use this reductionist perspective and label people with these pejoratives that are inescapable.
The racist, homophobe, anti-semi, all those are inescapable.
And once you get hit with those, that's your fuck.
And that's what they're trying to do to you because they're trying to silence you and because they want to win and this is a real problem with human beings when it comes to ideas is that like if I believe something and you believe something differently I don't want to listen to you.
One of the conversations I've referred to a couple times is the one I had with Matt Walsh.
There's no universe where I'm going to change Matt Walsh's mind about gay marriage.
But...
At least I want to understand them.
And I also am hoping that some people who are in the middle of this argument and could be influenced might go my way.
And I cannot remember if this was a TED Talk or where this information or this story was put out in the world, but it was the story of a black man who ended up befriending a grand wizard of the Klan.
Well, that's Daryl's a really amazing person, a shining example of what's possible when you just show people like he's like, man, you're different than all the others.
It's like, actually, I'm just a human.
I just have more melanin in my skin, you know, and you are unfortunately you have been trapped by an ideology.
You have othered people simply by their looks.
You know, and you haven't learned this lesson that we were supposed to be taught by Dr. King in the 1960s, you know, judge a man by the content of the character.
It must have been your show actually where I heard it, but it changed the way that I approach 99% of my conversations because I thought, okay.
If I listen with an intent to hear and an intent to understand, and I can expose people to the things they're uncomfortable with in a way where we find common ground, I may not change their mind, but at least you're, in some cases you hopefully can,
The only way out is to educate people or enlighten people or expose people to other ideas.
Like you're not really going to educate them but you will expose them to other ideas and I think over time.
The good ideas will win.
It's just – it's been so many years of bad ideas and it's so indoctrinating and it's so difficult.
And then also it's your identity.
Your identity is just – whatever it is, whether you're Matt Walsh or whether you're a 420-pound trans person.
Like your identity is like embedded in whatever you think of yourself as being and it's very difficult to take wisdom from someone that you think of as the enemy.
That's why I think community is such an integral part of treating addiction.
Because you have that supportive group to keep you accountable, to show up, to feel like you're a part of something, and we've seen it work for you and work against you.
The only time I find myself doing that these days and I'm going to stop it is when my son will challenge me on something and then my mother was like, we're debating something.
She's like, honey, you're litigating this with a 13-year-old.
Guys, we have clips of all of you saying the exact same thing.
It's so clear.
It's a narrative.
And when he told me, he was, God, this blew my mind.
He went pre-COVID.
He was talking about this event at the Milken Institute where Fauci, and I'm going to screw this up, but I think it's this guy Rick Bright.
Forgive me because this may be wrong, but this group of people, definitely Fauci, were talking about what it would take to get a global vaccine program.
Fauci says, probably going to take a pandemic, and this is like five months before COVID.
You know, just put my tin hat on and roll myself in tinfoil and jump all the way down the rabbit hole.
But then Averill Haynes said, well, what are we going to do about misinformation at this event that she put on shortly after that?
And he said that's where they came up with the Trusted News Initiative right in time.
It's crazy, but it's just like you can't just go on narratives because these narratives are just designed to make the Trump administration look like monsters.
And what I have learned so far, because I've really been trying to get to the bottom of that one, because I don't understand why the left isn't leaning on that one.
The other guy beats his wife, suspected trafficker.
You want to be outraged?
This guy is a gay hairdresser.
I guess he committed—I was listening to Tim Poole talk about this—immigration fraud.
I think, if I'm understanding it correctly, is that if somebody can be deported, but they are withheld because of asylum, Correct me if I'm wrong here.
Because they worry going back to their home country is dangerous or deadly, like Kilmer Obrego Garcia.
Because he's not a gang member, but he's afraid of being killed by other gangs that aren't MS-13.
You caught that one, right?
So it's like, I can't go home because the other gangs will kill me, but I'm not a gang member.
Nevertheless, there's a deportation order on him, so I believe that they can just send him to a third country, and that's not illegal.
Inheriting this problem, like you've had open borders for four years, and they've let thousands and thousands of potential criminals in here, if not millions.
They've let millions of people.
Who knows how many of these people are suspected terrorists?
It's not just one.
It's not zero.
Okay, so what's the number?
I don't know.
How many of them are gang members?
Is it zero?
No, it's not zero.
So they let in gang members.
Okay.
How many of them are in the cartel?
It's not zero.
Okay, well, what the fuck do you do?
What do you do if you want to clean up this mess that has been In mass for four years.
Exactly.
Just flooded.
Open borders.
Not just open borders, but like bussing them in, flying them in, giving them debit cards, giving them phones.
I've had this conversation with intelligent people, and they're like, well, there's no evidence that they're voting.
Okay.
But if we were to game this all the way out, if I was to hit Elon's points that I believe I understand, first of all, I think they can vote in some states in local elections.
There's a woman who was explaining when she was working for the Social Security...
Office what they would have her do.
So they would have them get permanent disability and the way they get permanent disability is just to have to say you have a back problem.
So if you have a back problem then you have permanent disability and if you get permanent disability then they start labeling them as a client.
If you label them as a client then they get money forever.
And so if then you have people like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and all these people saying, we need to give these people a road to citizenship.
Okay.
Well, then you potentially have millions and millions of people.
Now, if the Democrats are in charge, they can change the rules and make it so that these people have a road to citizenship.
Then they can vote on elections.
So now you've imported millions of people that are going to vote for sure for the people who gave them the money, not for the people who hired Tom Holman to kick everybody out.
I think it came out of PragerU where they were saying like, well, you know, black people don't have access to ID and they can't figure out the same thing.
unidentified
It's the most disgustingly racist thing that you can say!
I actually never saw that show with him, so I wasn't able to fully comprehend the accusations.
And simply thought, like, you can't gatekeep information, and people are, if somebody's going to believe that if this was in fact the truth, right, and he was this guy that was saying Hitler was innocent, or not innocent, but the lesser evil with regard to...
But what he was really saying that apparently historians also agree with it, that Hitler kind of hid his anti-Semitism early on.
And that early on during his rise, he would keep it confined, like the really rampant anti-Semitism, he'd keep it confined to these like smaller meetings.
While rumors and conspiracy theories have circulated suggesting a Jewish grandfather, a Jewish ancestry, these claims are not supported by any historical evidence and are widely dismissed by a historian.
If you can't disseminate that bit of information, because, let's say, again, hypothetically, this gentleman Daryl was trying to make that point, then you're an idiot.
Like, if you can't determine, there are skinheads in KKK that are going to tell you the same thing.
If you can't determine that that person's fucked up.
Virus possesses biological characteristics that is not found in nature, in italics.
Data shows that all COVID-19 cases stem from a single, in italics, single introduction into humans.
This runs contrary to previous pandemics where there were multiple spillover events.
Wuhan is home to China's foremost SARS research lab, which has a history of conducting gain-of-function research, gene altering and organism supercharging.
Wow.
At inadequate biosafety levels.
And this is where Fauci, you know, they could get him on perjury because he was, you know, when he was being questioned, when he said famously to Rand Paul, you do not know what you are talking about.