All Episodes
Previous Next
June 7, 2024 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
58:52
Andy Wakefield joins Mike Adams to talk about his new film called ‘Protocol-7’
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, everybody, to today's bombshell interview here on Brighteon.com.
I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon, and today we are joined by Andy Wakefield, who is, of course, well, he doesn't need an intro, but his new project is Protocol 7, the feature film, and is at the website protocol7.movie, and this thing is, this is a history-changing film, and joining us to talk about it today is Andy Wakefield.
Welcome, Mr.
Wakefield.
It's always a pleasure to have you on.
Mike, thank you so much.
Great to be back on again.
It's great to have you here, Andy.
You have been busy.
You've been doing extraordinary work on this film, and it's now out.
What was the official launch date?
Tell us what's happening with the premieres of the film right now.
Well, it premiered in New York last Friday.
It screened over two days in New York.
It's screening their Until Wednesday.
And then we have our Austin premiere.
Why Austin?
Because we shot the movie here in Austin, in this wonderful city.
And then we have our LA premiere starting next weekend.
So we're busy, busy, busy.
Then we go to, in mid-July, we have just secured a contract with Regal Cinemas across the United States and with Cineplex Cinemas in Canada, so very exciting times.
Wow!
So when is it going to be in those theaters?
I think the start date is mid-July, so it'll be in the middle of the summer vacation, which is great.
Okay, fantastic.
What I'd like to do for the audience here is just play the trailer, and then we'll continue our discussion on the other side.
He was an orphan of conflict in Africa.
He was smart and bright and then we got him home and he crashed right in front of us.
Apparently, we're in the midst of a month's outbreak.
Another?
Some people, some very important people are saying our vaccine does not work.
We have a U.S. monopoly and a major share of the world market for MMR. And we own the only one that works.
Except that it does not.
We all sign contracts, Chad.
Company interests above all others.
Make it work.
They fake the data.
It's all there.
They cheated on every level.
You said you're a lawyer.
Family law.
And you want to understand why.
Let me see it.
They couldn't get the result they wanted.
So they re-engineered it.
Not objective to improve the vaccine, but find something that gets them Fix it, gentlemen.
Ninety-six percent.
If the vaccine fails, we're all out of a job.
It has failed.
You need to know what's going on here.
Is he in danger?
Internal memos were released.
Quote, we may have to seek them out and destroy them where they live.
Chilly knows.
And yes, he is in danger.
What about Shaw?
Your son and every other son and daughter depends on whether or not you choose to live by their rules.
Incineration.
Immediately.
Can't we trust him to keep it together?
Were you aware?
Some tests included the weakened strain, I believe.
And did you approve?
I guess so.
Were you aware of the lab's failure to demonstrate efficacy of the mumps vaccine, a level required by the FDA? No.
To respond to the FDA's concern.
And leave a dangerous vaccine on the market.
Dangerous?
Objection.
Strongly recommended booster shots.
Of course you did.
What have they got?
Right, nothing's what they got.
Would you please identify this document for us?
Please identify Exhibit 2 for me.
We've got stuff.
Don't worry!
Exhibit 3.
This is a controversial thought.
Objection.
These were shredded.
It's a protocol.
They've got the sheets.
They've got the evidence I was told they didn't have.
No one will ever believe them again.
We're all making films all the time, Andy, aren't we?
Okay.
Very powerful medium, Mike.
When I was in the clinic, I could...
You know, help one child at a time.
But when you make a movie, you can get that message out to thousands, hundreds of thousands of people at one time.
It's a great medium.
Absolutely.
And in your case, I think that this film is going to reach tens of millions of people.
I mean, there's no question.
This is going to be one of the most sought-after films among people who are beginning to ask questions.
In my view, anyway.
What are you hearing so far in terms of the feedback from those who have seen the full film?
Well, exactly as you say, Mike.
It's two groups broadly.
It's the people who already know.
Those mums who've got vaccine injured children, families who are affected, and then there are the people who've woken up during the COVID era.
They've realized that they've been lied to, they've been deceived, and that there is a very different message out there and that they should invest their trust in those people who've been trying to bring them the truth all along.
And then there's the group that we really want to reach, and those are the people who are still undecided, still unaware of the deception.
People say, well, okay, there may be a problem with this COVID vaccine, but the childhood vaccine schedule is perfectly safe and effective.
And what this film does is take them back over the bridge and say, no, actually, this has been happening for many, many years.
The behavior of the industry, the behavior of the regulators has been the same for many, many years.
Recently, Fauci testified before Congress just a few days ago.
I'm sure you saw at least the highlights of that.
And he was accused by several lawmakers, especially Marjorie Taylor Greene, accusing him of essentially, I'm paraphrasing, but crimes against humanity and that he should face prosecution.
What's your reaction to Fauci's testimony that he gave and then the fact that we now have members of Congress calling him out for his role, his complicity in all of this?
You know, Mike, I reached a point in that when I had to turn it off.
I'm so incensed by the practiced bureaucrat deceiving, misleading, lying to Congress that When you watch someone, particularly in medicine you learn to do this, in filmmaking you learn to do it as well, and that is your response to people is visceral.
You know when they're telling the truth, you know when they're lying.
Fauci is a liar, and Fauci is a very, very dangerous man.
The problem comes, and when I watch that it becomes manifestly obvious, is that there is no accountability.
Fauci's going to get his huge pension and move on and to hell with the rest of the world.
And that, to me, is something that cannot be allowed to happen.
And that was what was in danger of happening with this story and this film, Protocol 7.
And I thought, whatever the consequences for the filmmakers, this film needs to get out there right now so that those who were responsible for this fraud are held accountable and not just allowed to move on to another job, you know, continue getting this film needs to get out there right now so that those who were responsible for this fraud are held accountable and not just allowed to move on to Absolutely.
When I first knew that your film was coming out, I knew it would be very powerful, and I also knew that it wouldn't be widely embraced by the establishment, even though, this is the interesting contrast I want to ask you about, there are films about Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family,
and there's a very broad willingness among mainstream media, even Netflix and others, to condemn what Purdue Pharma did in terms of the over-prescribing of these dangerous opioids.
Do you think that that kind of opioid moment is coming?
Or maybe your film is starting to break out that opioid moment for the harm caused by vaccine manufacturers and their concoctions?
It's a very good point, Mike, and I think that their moment is coming.
I think films like series like that, like...
The revelation that they deliberately got people hooked on these drugs, which they knew to have disastrous consequences.
People for a long, long time thought, well, maybe the drug companies behave that way in the context of regular pharmaceuticals, but not vaccines, surely.
Surely these are for children.
They wouldn't do harm to children.
Now people are realizing that There is no difference between what happens on the 10th floor and the 11th floor of Merck or whoever else it may be.
The policy is the same and that is the bottom line is everything.
The stock price is everything and everything else comes second and in particular in this case children.
So people are now coming to realize that I think with the vaccines they've made a huge error.
With the COVID shot, they've heard a lot of people and that is becoming manifestly obvious, even on the front page of the Telegraph saying, you know, Is the excess mortality down to the vaccines?
Using language which they would never have used before.
That's right.
There is a huge groundswell, a change in people's perception.
So this film could not come at a more important time.
Again, I think this film is absolutely pivotal in the history of understanding what I would call the widespread weaponization of medicine against the human race.
So, a question I have for you on this.
How did you fund this film?
Because the film, this is not some low-budget thing.
I actually participated that one Saturday in Austin.
I was part of the background scene of the trade show scene for your film.
Robert Scott Bell was there, and we had a Breitian booth set up there and everything.
That was fun.
I met a lot of great people that day.
And you were filming that day.
And I saw how professional this was.
You know, professional...
Photography, all the extras, the director, everything.
How did you fund this?
Very good question.
We've had some very loyal funders.
I mean, I've made, this is number five in the sort of sequence of films I've made.
And each time it gets a little easier because people say, okay, you've proven you can do this.
Here you are, go and do it again.
And this was such a compelling story.
That people came alongside.
We had donors, but this time we did something different as well.
And we had people invest in the film.
People should get a return.
Whether they choose to invest that return back into a charity or into another film in the same genre.
That's their choice.
But it enabled us to reach a budget of, what, $5.5 million that it took to make a film that looks like a $25 million film.
Absolutely.
Having the right team is everything.
And, you know, you really have some very notable actors in the film as well.
People who are professionals, who are well recognized for their body of work.
I think that's really remarkable.
Yeah, we had a really interesting combination.
I'm so glad you asked that.
We had Eric Roberts.
There you are, an established actor.
I think he was nominated for an Academy Award.
He was wonderful.
He played the part of one of the villains.
He played it perfectly.
And then you have people like Rachel Whittle, who played the heroine.
And she was a girl who came to us from Lafayette, Louisiana.
She had Virtually given up on her acting career.
She couldn't get the job she wanted.
She'd said, I'm not going to touch the COVID vaccine.
This was the same for so many of our actors that they'd said, no, we are not going to have, we're not going to be forced into taking this vaccine and it's going to cost us our career, but that's the choice we're making.
And then they found this film, which really appealed to them on so many levels, but allowed them to come and act without the constraints Of testing or demanding that they're vaccinated or they stand within a specific radius of the...
And Rachel was outstanding.
And I think that...
I hope this film launches the careers of a number of individuals, not least of which was a young English guy...
He's called Harrison Tipping, a Shakespearean actor from the stage who came and played the young, the third in the sort of hierarchy at Merck, the young guy who is ultimately duped into a major part of the fraud that took place.
So watch out for these names because I think that the younger guys will really make a name for themselves.
Matthew Marsden was there.
Matthew's a seasoned actor and he played the doctor character in the film.
Very, very good.
It was a joy to work with these people.
They were truly professional.
That's really extraordinary, and I love to see your focus and your career and your life journey You know, I
could never have predicted it.
I could have got to the point where, as a surgeon, I'd taken out 5,000 gallbladders and I decided it was time to retire.
So I could never have predicted that this was going to be the course.
But I've absolutely loved it.
I started screenwriting back in 2004.
And one of the reasons for doing that, Mike, was that over the years, because of the position I'd taken, people had come to me from the industry or from the regulatory agencies like the CDC, FDA, and said, we've done a terrible thing, and here is the evidence.
And initially I would hand that off to lawyers to be dealt with according to its merits, you know, people dealing with false claims act litigation.
And then I thought, well, these would make extraordinary stories.
They're the kind of thing that, you know, screenwriters would die for.
The insider, Erin Brockovich, you know, Silent Spring.
And here they are.
So the time has come to tell this particular story.
The original screenplay was...
Written in 2012.
I then finished it some years later with input from my great friend Terry Rossio.
People say, who's Terry Rossio?
Terry's written some little-known films like Shrek and Pirates of the Caribbean.
Godzilla vs.
King Kong.
A man at the top of his game and a wonderful sort of guide through this entire process.
Wow.
It's been a real journey.
It's been such fun.
May I ask, what's the final duration of the film?
Around 145.
That seems perfect.
And I bet it's hard.
It's hard to cut it to that.
It is.
You know, what you do when you write, you write a whole bunch of scenes you never get to use.
You write them because they seem to fit at the time.
Then you get to the cutting room and you realize that they sometimes have the effect of Slowing down the pace, the necessary pace of the film, the story sort of accelerating to the key point at the junction of act two and three.
And so you take them out and you realize that you don't miss them when you do take them out.
Some are redundant.
You put them in there for fanciful reasons and you can't even remember why you put them in there.
They just naturally fall away.
Others, you really love them as a scene.
But actually removing them allows the sort of dynamism of the story, the telling of the story to unfold in a better way on the big screen rather than on the written page.
Now, I don't mean to get you into trouble with this question, but it's possible that might happen.
But do actors push back on the script?
Because I've heard of this happening in Hollywood a lot.
Not that you represent Hollywood, of course.
But do actors push back on the day of filming?
They're like, I think my character should not say this exactly.
They should say it this way.
Does that happen?
Yes.
In a way, the girls, and I don't mean this to be just a fact of life.
The girls who are not in the principal female role say, Andy, when can we sit down and discuss me having more lines?
Every one of them.
It's the same.
I say, I love you.
I love you.
This is the standard line.
And the other is, yes, Eric Roberts.
There was one line, he said, I wouldn't normally say that, and I say, you do today, and he said, you know, the potential is there to be intimidated, because these people, their season, they've been there, many of them, for a while.
They know the games to play, they know the tricks to pull, they appeal to your sense of, you know, justice and fair play.
But you have to be...
In fact, they were a joy to work with.
We'd never had any conflict at all, but they were just those moments where, oh dear, what do I say now?
And the best thing is to do is to just use some humorous aside to sort of lead them off into how wonderful they really are and they don't actually need extra lines and...
It's perfect for them just as it is.
Okay, all right.
Good answer.
I had to ask.
Is that sufficiently diplomatic?
Well, but that's, you know, as the director, you have so many hats to wear and so many roles to play.
You know, on the financial side, it has to meet a certain budget requirement, but there's the human side.
There's the creative side.
So many things to manage.
I would imagine that it's very stressful, and you have early morning calls.
I mean, you know, don't you have to get up at 4 a.m.
some days to shoot this?
Sure.
It comes down, Mike, to preparation.
I mean, I've read and read and read, and I've been on courses to study direction with actors, and it all comes down to preparation.
If you go onto the set 80-90% prepared, you know the script, you know what you want, you know the shots you want, you know how you want the inflection to be in the dialogue, you know what adjustments you're going to offer to your actors to try this or try that, then it looks as though you know exactly what you're doing.
You go on set, you say these things, people say, wow, he must have done this before.
You've never done it before in your life.
You're terrified.
You're the most frightened person on set.
You manage to carry it off because you're prepared.
So if I had any advice for young aspiring directors now, it would be preparation.
The other is having the right cast, knowing that you've got people with whom you can work, people who have a great reputation for professionalism, and I was lucky in that.
Also had great producers.
They were wonderful.
A great first assistant director who just keeps the whole set moving forward.
He's rather like the disciplinarian.
I think I met that person.
He was very much in charge of the floor.
It was, you'll be here and you'll be here.
That's right.
It's like, fine.
That's great.
We need a coordinator who knows what they're doing.
Let me ask you, at what point, the website is protocol7.movie, and that's the numeral 7, by the way, protocol7.movie.
At what point will people be able to purchase it digitally or stream it online?
Well, in the contracts that we have for theatrical screening, they want a 30-day window.
So once we start in mid-July, you can predict that sometime around 30 days beyond that, it'll be out online, and it'll be out online.
I think, you know, you go to protocol7.movie and you'll be able to stream it from there.
Okay.
Okay, great.
So we'll look for some time in August for maybe that to occur.
Is it possible that other theatrical chains might also pick this up after you mentioned a couple there?
Any more that you're looking at?
Oh, yes.
I have both small sort of Theater groups like the Alamo Draft House, we're approaching them, for example, Lemley in Southern California.
And because we've got a non-exclusive contract, then, yes, any number of different theaters, small or large theater chains can pick it up.
Okay.
So here's a question.
The movie specifically talks about, I believe, Merck or Pfizer.
I mean, does it mention Pfizer or is it mostly focused on Merck?
It's Merck.
This story is...
It's all Merck.
Okay, I'm sorry.
I haven't seen the full film yet.
I've only watched the trailer.
Given that you're naming the pharmaceutical company Merck, how closely does this script follow...
Sort of the factual events that you can prove versus how much is a dramatization if you can address that?
Right, no, sure.
It's obviously an inherent risk in naming names.
You know, you've got a small production company versus a huge multinational pharmaceutical industry and that's taking a risk.
We had A number of documents upon which the film was based.
It is based in fact.
There were elements of the fraud that were committed by Merck that we were confident could stand up to scrutiny if we were ever threatened with litigation for, for example, defamation.
Nonetheless, the court case is still going on and there were thousands and thousands of pages of documents To which we did not have access.
They were sealed by the court.
Sealed until very recently.
And so we had to...
And the other thing is we could not be in that meeting in Merck where they were discussing the fate of this vaccine or in the deposition hearing room where this interchange was taking place.
And so that's where the dramatic license fell.
And when we came to...
Because we had to...
It's to read all of those thousands of documents as they became available.
The fear is, well, this is going to completely undermine the integrity of the film.
We're going to be guilty of defamation and we'll be sued if we release this film.
But quite the opposite happened.
What in fact happened is that we realized that when reading the expert reports from, for example, the ex-head of the FDA, Dr.
Kessler, at that time, who was testifying on behalf of the whistleblowers, the whistleblowers, then he was even more damning of Merck's behavior than we portrayed in the film.
Wow.
So, you know, you could argue that Merck are getting off lightly in this movie.
We'll see where they go with that.
This is the good version of Merck depicted in your film.
That's not the good.
That's the reality.
Okay.
That's really fascinating.
So, ultimately, there's been a lot of documentary support for the narrative in your film.
But I also think, from a legal perspective, if Merck were to sue you to try to stop the film, the Streisand effect, you couldn't have better marketing if that were to happen.
You know what I'm saying?
Like, please, don't throw me in that briar patch.
Right?
Yes, it's right.
It could be like our film Vaxxed with De Niro at Tribeca.
Having it censored from Tribeca.
Right.
Got it global publicity.
And I think they'll try and avoid that.
The least of which is if they do come after me, then we have access to all of those documents.
That discovery that they perhaps have been trying to keep out of the public eye.
That's right.
It becomes a very, very public case.
And the question is...
Do Merck and their lawyers want that to happen?
Especially given that you can make more films.
Yes.
Will there be a sequel?
Right.
Okay.
Well, that's one of my questions for you, actually, today, is what do you have in the works next, if it's not too early to ask that question?
No, we have a slate of films.
In fact, what I'm going to do, I said I would never write a movie about COVID. Why?
Because there are 2,000 screenwriters in Hollywood and elsewhere doing exactly that at the moment.
However, we do have access to a compelling and most unusual aspect of that story, which we're going to make a movie about.
Then, after that, we have Another movie which is very, very dear to my heart.
I won't say too much about it now, but it's about another aspect, a critical aspect of the autism crisis that we face at the moment.
And then, Mike, I'm going to make a rom-com.
You say a rom-com, and the answer is yes, because everything I've done for the last 30 years has been so dark and so sort of sinister and such a reflection of the bad side I'm going to write a rom-com.
No kidding.
I mean, okay, so that's a whole different genre to pull off effectively.
I mean, you know how critical timing is in documentaries, but in comedies, the movie fails or succeeds on timing alone, it seems, right?
That's right.
It's a challenge, right?
It's a challenge, but I love a challenge.
You do indeed.
Alright, well, I think myself and our audience, we're open to any creative works that you're planning on putting out.
We'd love to have you back to talk about all of those.
So, getting back to Protocol 7, again, let me remind the viewers.
Protocol7.movie, is there anything that viewers can do to try to sort of request that local theaters carry the movie?
Is that an effective strategy to, you know, grassroots support?
Grassroots is going to be absolutely essential to the success of this film.
We've done our bit, we'll continue to work hard on it, but please, please, please, everyone who sees it, if you feel this film has merit, if it means something to you, bring 10 people to the next screening.
Bring those 10 people, and if they like it, get each of them to bring 10 people, that multiplier effect.
Bring those people who've Agreed with you, who disagreed with you, the people, the family members you fought with over Thanksgiving's dinner about, you know, whether we should vaccinate or not vaccinate, whether it's all conspiracy theory and made up.
Bring them to see this film.
And when you do, don't say I told you so.
Just say I've seen this film.
It's very interesting.
I would value your opinion.
Would you come and watch it?
So please, pack the theatres out.
That will drive people back to the movie theatres.
It's a wonderful collective experience because so many people in this arena have felt for many years, and we saw this with Vax, have felt that they're alone.
They're completely alone.
When they came to that theatre, they realized that they were among friends.
They spoke the same language.
They had suffered in the same way, and they were fighting back.
In the same way so please do that and yes there is a way and that is you can have theatrical on demand and if you go to the website you scroll down it says how to book a screening and you click on that button and it will take you through how to have a screening in your town.
If you're a small town and maybe you don't have a major theatre chain there You can still get a screening in your town, and it won't cost you anything.
It's all laid out there for you to do.
So theatrical on demand.
Here it is.
Host a screening, sign up, pick a theater, invite and earn.
Yep.
Okay, great.
Book here now.
And then you also have a pay it forward button on the site here.
Pay it forward, buy a ticket, gift a ticket.
How does this work?
Well, this is something we were inspired by watching Sound of Freedom.
And when the Sound of Freedom did this, they said, look, you know, for people who can't afford to go to this movie or might not otherwise be inclined to go to this movie, buy them a ticket.
If you've seen it and you've enjoyed it, put some money into this pool that will allow us to provide tickets to those people, as I say, who might not be able to afford it at that time or anything.
Might not have been inclined to watch it.
And they did that and it seemed to be a great success.
So we've tried the same option.
Okay, well, I will check this out myself, just to see if I can contribute to help people get tickets who otherwise may not be able to afford to go see it themselves.
But I'll check that out after this interview.
Now, I noticed that the film is rated R over language, apparently.
Now, Andy, if you had only made a cartoon transgender demon film trafficking human children, that would be G, right?
But apparently you've got some bad language in this film.
How did it get an R rating?
For language.
And this is such an important point because people ask me about this, is that filmmaking is about the faithful replication of human behavior.
That's what we do as filmmakers.
The faithful and authentic replication of human behavior, often under the most extreme circumstances.
So you take a family, they can't have a child, they adopt a child, the child is vaccine injured, and their life falls apart, their marriage falls apart.
And people are then put in extreme situations, which most people in the world have never Fortunately experienced.
Under those circumstances, it is essential for the filmmaker, the writer, and the director to reflect their sincere, authentic behavior.
How would people behave under these extreme circumstances?
And sometimes people curse.
And it would be hypocrisy to say that Any of us have not, under extreme stress, cursed.
So my job as the filmmaker is to appropriately and in context place language that reflects the extreme situation in which those people, those actors Well, I love the way you just explained that.
That is the best explanation I've ever heard of the use of profanity in film.
And if you don't do that, Mike, here's the thing.
Audiences are very intelligent.
And if you avoid that because it may offend 5%, whatever it does, then people say, that's not honest.
The audience is not.
That doesn't ring true.
Even though, you know, they may not say it, they may not articulate it, but they just think, no, no, that doesn't work for me.
And it is my job to be honest with people.
Yeah, you can't have a line where the father's speaking to his wife and their child is vaccine-injured, autistic now.
They just discovered that.
And the father says, oh, those gosh-darn knucklehead vaccine doctors.
Exactly.
You're like, no, come on.
That's not what you're going to say.
No, it doesn't work.
And so you have to be honest with your audience.
Well, it's funny that we're having this conversation because there's something, of course, our world is becoming more intense.
Lives are at stake now in ways that are absolutely more ferocious and more emotionally charged than ever before.
It's not only happening with vaccines and COVID, but also war and other things.
And I'm finding it increasingly difficult in my own podcast to avoid profanity.
And sometimes, occasionally, I just use it where I feel like it's necessary.
And is that also your sense about what's happening in the world?
Do you see people who maybe never use profanity, now it's way more appropriate to use it because of what's happening?
Or is that just in my mind?
No, I think it's true.
I think that it's manifest in a number of different behaviors.
So profanity is perhaps the lesser end of the spectrum.
Sort of meltdowns that you have.
You see people on social media having extreme meltdowns, whether they're on an aircraft or they're put in a stressful situation on top of all the other stresses that occupy their lives, and suddenly they can no longer cope.
And at the sort of worst end of the spectrum, that may manifest as violent behaviors.
And of course, none of this has helped I completely agree with you.
Well, I want to ask you about the trends of autism.
But just a comment to what you just said.
I have seen video clips of people losing their minds on airplanes, like you mentioned.
I saw one clip of one woman that was screaming crazy.
I thought she was going to crawl on the ceiling and the captain was going to come on and say, do we have an exorcist on board or something?
It was that insane.
Like, what is going on in this world?
But there is a lot of neurological damage.
I'm not saying that's the cause of that particular incident, but there's neurological damage.
Autism is one of the presentations of a certain type of neurological damage.
There are other forms of, obviously, neurodamage and exposure to chemicals and environmental pesticides and organophosphates and so on.
But tell us about autism.
How much worse is it getting in terms of the trends?
Because we used to say a few years ago it was like 1 in 50 children.
It's not that anymore, is it?
When I was in medical school, it was one in 10,000 as an estimate.
When it's that rare, it even becomes difficult to provide an accurate estimate because there's no system of ascertainment.
They're just occasional cases.
But it was so rare that it did not appear in textbooks of childhood developmental normality and disorders.
Then it came on the scene as a new disease and has accelerated dramatically dramatically.
In the last 50, 60 years.
And this has paralleled the increase in the childhood vaccine schedule.
Is that coincidence or is that actually a causal relationship?
And I have every reason to believe it's a causal relationship and we can go into that.
But the numbers that we approach now, if you look at the latest data from Northern Ireland, from Scotland, from England, Then we're talking about 1 in 20 to 1 in 25 children in the US. The numbers are very similar in New Jersey.
And you say, well, is New Jersey unique?
Is it just a toxic wasteland?
And the answer is no.
I don't believe that.
I think that New Jersey has had the same system of ascertainment in place using the same diagnostic criteria, the same people making those diagnoses for a length of time.
And what that does is lead to an accurate record of the rise in autism over time.
So I think that other states are very similar.
It's just that their system of ascertainment is not as sophisticated as that in New Jersey.
So we're looking at an extraordinary number.
When you bear in mind it's four to five boys to every girl, that's a huge number of the male population of developed countries.
That number shows no sign in slowing down and so it will approach 1 in 2 by 2032 has been predicted.
I don't know how accurate that will turn out to be and that will depend upon clearly what we decide to do and other factors like the introduction of recommended COVID shots for children.
What is that going to do to this extraordinary number?
No country can sustain that level of injury to its children any longer.
It is absolutely extraordinary.
Sorry, Mike, go ahead.
No, I get the sense from many of the guests I've interviewed and also from our reader base and fan base, I believe we're approaching a time of the end of Western medicine as the institutions of Western medicine.
And I think COVID was a pivot point where so many people are now opening their eyes and seeing the harms of Western medicine and the failure of it.
And we even have admissions now that the COVID vaccines, which to our audience recall, they were initially not approved by the FDA.
They were emergency use authorization only EUA, which is not the same as clinical trials, long term trials and risk assessment studies.
But we even have now, Andy, the weaponization, I would call it, of the vaccine industry against parents.
We have SIDS, sudden infant death syndrome.
In some cases, moms or parents have been charged with murder for a child that was clearly, in my mind, vaccine injured or killed by vaccines.
We have parents being victimized when the child has a vaccine injury and they attempt to share that knowledge, then they are called anti-vaxxers and they are victimized and censored.
So we're starting to see more and more this weaponization of the system against parents.
What are your thoughts?
Yes, they've become so desperate that they've had to turn it into a weapon to use threats, to use force, to coerce.
When you do that, Mike, you've reached the end of your sort of legitimate lifetime.
You've got nowhere else to go because people don't trust or believe you anymore.
And that has happened par excellence.
The example of COVID is...
We're safe and effective.
No, it's absolutely not.
It's there to generate a huge profit for people who will never be held accountable.
And it is dangerous and it's dangerous in the long term.
And as you point out, those studies of safety were never done.
So the idea that it's safe and effective is a lie.
It was a lie.
They've only got themselves to blame.
They've only got themselves to blame for the attrition of public confidence in public health and the pharmaceutical industry.
They have only got themselves to blame.
And now they're in this parlour situation where they're having to use coercion threats, taking the child away, bringing in CPR, whatever it may be.
It's on a road to nowhere.
It will fail.
It's just a question of helping it fail.
Do you have any comments on SIDS, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome?
Yes, indeed.
I mean, I looked at this many years ago, and I looked at it with that Australian lady who brought it out, the researcher.
She presented on this a very long time ago, showing she did sleep studies.
You'll know all about this, Mike.
She and her husband, nothing to do with vaccines at all.
She did sleep studies in babies to look at sort of were there any predictors of abnormality that might prevent And what they found, quite to their surprise, was that there was this effect, this apneic effect, this effect on breathing after the DPT vaccine that was so consistent that ultimately she reported it to her bosses and lost her job as a consequence, became a pariah.
We're all used to this now.
We know how that manifests and became a sort of voice in the wilderness for many years.
But I have absolutely no doubt that What she was reporting was not only a sincere and honest, but genuine reaction.
I don't recall the actual study, but there was a piece of news just recently of a university that Under tremendous pressure, forced its researchers to retract a paper that had shown an increased risk of fatality after taking the COVID vaccine versus those who did not take it.
And when I saw the story, I thought, okay, business as usual.
They will force retract the studies that they don't want the public to see.
But they will never scrutinize the atrociously structured fake studies that they do want the public to see.
I'd like to have your comments on just in a general sense.
Throughout COVID, and you saw some of the studies, one study pushed out on, I think, hydroxychloroquine saying that it would damage the heart.
And it turns out the data set was a fictitious, made-up group of people.
From a company run by an adult entertainment person and a fiction writer or something.
The stories sound insane, but this is what passes as peer-reviewed science in many journals today.
What are your thoughts?
Well, it's interesting.
When I started this, Mike, 30 years ago or so, and I lost my job, it was a kind of one-off.
Who is this guy?
We're huge.
We're We're the drug companies and we're the World Health Organization and the governments of America and the UK and the American Academy of PDA. We can dispense with this person very, very easily.
And that was easy.
But now it's not.
Now there are many, many doctors standing up against it.
And many, many people like Peter McCullough, an extraordinary physician, published over 750 papers, the most published, the most experienced cardiologist in the world without parallel.
And He comes out against COVID and says, no, this is not what it appears to be.
And of course, he loses his job.
You can only do that so many times.
And then those who know him, those who his colleagues saying, hang on, I know this guy.
And no, you're wrong.
But it's happened to a lot of us.
But it's happened to so many of us now that we're a band of brothers.
We come together and offer a A perfectly plausible scientific explanation for what's happening, and the public are beginning to believe it in vast numbers.
So if you look at when I got involved in this, there were a handful of people worldwide prepared to discuss the thorny issue of vaccine safety.
Now it's more than half the adult population of the world, I would suggest, are reluctant to get the Next booster, and the next booster, and the next booster, and therefore are, in the words of the mainstream media, anti-vaxxers.
Are the anti-vaxxers now really the majority?
If they are, then you as the industry and you as the regulators only have yourselves to blame.
Let me expand that and ask you a question that I know is beyond the normal topics upon which you focus, but I'm going to ask you about national security.
And military readiness, given that all of these vaccines are mandatory for military personnel, not just in the United States, but also in Britain, in France, in Germany, and so on.
Most of the NATO countries, not all, but most of them mandate these vaccines.
Whereas in Russia, and of course NATO is at war with Russia right now in Ukraine, in Russia they have different vaccines, not the same ones that we are using.
In China they have different vaccines.
Do you believe that the vaccines that have been pushed on, especially U.S. military personnel, have inflicted a readiness cost that will affect our national security?
Without a shadow of a doubt, yes.
I think that firstly the military are first in line as the sort of experimental model, the lab rat for any number of vaccines.
I've spoken to so many people in the military who say we are simply lined up, soldier, put your arm out, and it's one vaccine after another.
No knowing what they've had, what dose they've had, what they're getting at the same time, what mixtures they're getting, and they're getting very, very sick.
And I know, you know, you know that when you're ill, you're not combat ready.
You've got influenza.
You're not combat ready.
There's no way you can...
You can fight at all.
You can barely think.
You certainly can't get out of bed.
So I think that there's no doubt that we've impacted our military in that way.
And the other thing is that when one in 20 or one in two children are affected by a serious neurodevelopmental disorder like autism, and that is for the most part boys, you don't have an armed force anymore.
You don't have a police force.
Well, this is why the U.S. military cannot meet its recruiting goals at all right now.
Because they cannot meet, the applicants cannot cognitively achieve the levels that are necessary to come in even at the most basic level of private in the army.
So that's deeply, deeply worrying.
Wow.
I mean, you really hit upon a critical point there, because the ability to defend your nation in this very kinetic world right now does depend on the viability of your, especially your young male population.
I don't know if you heard this, but in the UK there's talk now of mandatory conscription of 18-year-olds.
And across other EU countries, in Germany, there's talk of activating reservists, mostly young men.
And all of these young European men are supposed to go fight Russia, apparently, is what we're being told.
And they're all going to be vaccinated as part of that.
First, it's like, here, take all these vaccines, then we'll send you to the front line.
If you survive the vaccines, well, then there's Russian artillery there.
This seems like a suicide pact, in my view.
It does.
You become very alarmed when you realize that, way back to the story with the smallpox vaccine and the military, that the commander-in-chief or one of the senior military commanders, generals, was actually a stockholder and sat on the board of the company that made the vaccine.
When you see that kind of conflict of interest, it really makes you begin to doubt the sanity of Of who's calling the shots here?
Yes.
How do you maintain your relative calm and a sense of sanity?
And also, actually, you have a sense of good humor.
I know you personally, you know, you and I can chat and chuckle about things, but how do you maintain that, given that the world appears to be falling apart?
I've asked myself this question many times.
I mean, there have been times, Mike, along the way, along the last 30 years when it's been very difficult, very difficult, particularly difficult on my family.
A lot of time spent away.
But whenever I sort of get into those doldrums, I reflect upon the fact that I'm fine.
You know, the children affected by this disorder had no voice.
It's up to me and people like me to give them a voice.
So stop complaining.
Stop sulking.
Get over it.
Get on with the job.
And when you take yourself out of the equation, it becomes actually very much easier.
It's a huge weight taken off your shoulders because it's not about me.
It doesn't matter whether the attacks look like they're focused on me as an individual, as a person.
They're not.
I mean, these people don't know me.
They don't know me at all.
And they don't know what motivates me.
And so I tend to I tend to think, you know, this child has a problem.
Your job is to act on his behalf since that ability has been taken away from him.
Let me ask you about coordinated government and big tech censorship.
You probably are not aware of this, but on Memorial Day, we filed a major lawsuit against the Department of Defense, Homeland Security.
State Department, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and so on.
And it also names some overseas NGOs, some out of the UK, by the way, and they're engaged in censorship laundering in order to silence certain voices.
As you know, one of the key issues that's targeted for censorship is anyone criticizing vaccines.
How do you think, and the trends of censorship are worsening.
More government collusion with big tech to silence anybody who disagrees on several key points including vaccines or climate change or elections being stolen or any of these issues.
What are your thoughts on this worsening censorship and how it will impact how it will ultimately, if you agree with this, harm more children by preventing an honest debate?
Censorship is a measure of how much they're losing.
They need to censor because they are losing in every other domain of this particular debate, this argument, this discussion, this issue around vaccines, which is the one that I know and understand perhaps better than any other issue.
But it is a measure of the fact that they're losing.
And I want you to try and imagine what it's like in those expensive offices on K Street in Washington, D.C., where they're sitting around This table and their job is to represent in the media and in public relations and everything else, the pharmaceutical companies making these vaccines.
They're in total and utter chaos.
They're saying to themselves, we're putting all this money out there, we're putting all this information out there, and people don't believe us.
Why do they not believe us?
They don't believe you, sir, madam, because you're not telling the truth.
You're not being honest.
And so when you are losing, you have to It's rather like coercion and threatening of parents and bullying and mandatory this and mandatory that.
You have to censor because you have no other way of dealing with the honest message.
And so it's a painful issue to deal with in the short term because, as you say, it's accelerating in pace and affects all of us.
It affects you, it affects me.
But in the end, it is a measure of how Destitute, how redundant, and how utterly worthless their arguments are.
And what an extraordinary violation of the First Amendment.
And I think that's becoming manifestly obvious to people as well.
Well stated there, Andy.
And as we're wrapping this up today, I just want to thank you for your contributions to humanity.
I think in the hearts and minds of our viewers, and I share this, you're more than a filmmaker.
You're more than a doctor in the classical sense of a teacher, of a healer, someone who empowers people to heal themselves, because you're humbled.
In this role that you've taken on, but you are a true treasure to this world, and I just want to thank you for all that you've done, including this latest film.
Make you very kind.
Pleasure to be on.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
And the film website, folks, is protocol7.movie.
Be sure to go there, watch the trailer, and you can request it in local theaters.
You can buy a ticket for others.
You can pay it forward.
You can spread the word.
You can bring people with you to the local theaters.
But get the word out because this can change history.
And Andy Wakefield has put years of his effort, time, money, and expertise into making this film so that we would have something to share with others.
So again, God bless you, Andy Wakefield, and thank you for your time today.
We appreciate you.
Thank you, Mike.
All right.
Take care.
And for those of you watching, thank you for watching.
Wow, what a powerful interview.
What an incredible human being.
We're just privileged to have Andy here on the show with us today.
And be sure to watch his film.
It will change your life, and it may change the lives of others around you.
Feel free to repost this interview on other channels and platforms.
You have our permission to do so.
Just link back to protocol7.movie.
Back in stock at the Health Ranger store, we now have the Elderberry Echinacea Tincture Combo, which is outstanding for the immune system.
That's in the middle there.
Back in stock.
We've also got Quercetin available, which is a very popular item, as everybody's learning about the supportive benefits of Quercetin.
We have broccoli sprout powder in capsules now back in stock.
We also have a little bit of the actual powder as it's shown there in that canister.
All these available at healthrangerstore.com.
Go to the website, find out what we have there.
We've got a lot of new products, a lot of products back in stock.
And then also we have the pea protein back in stock.
Now, for those who like plant-based proteins, pea protein, it's very smooth.
The texture here is very smooth.
It's also one of the cleanest, well, I think the cleanest plant-based protein you can get in terms of lab test results.
Whereas rice protein sometimes, depending on the source, can have arsenic in it.
We've seen that in rice protein, some lead, some cadmium.
But pea protein is very, very clean.
Some people prefer a whey protein taste, but if you're used to doing vegan proteins, then pea protein is more in your diet.
Like wheelhouse of what it's supposed to taste like.
And that's a really great, clean, smooth product right there.
That's back in stock at our store.
But check out our hundreds of other products at healthrangerstore.com.
And remember that every purchase helps us with our big lawsuit that we filed.
We're suing Google, Meta.
We're suing Twitter or X. We're suing the Department of Defense.
We're also suing Homeland Security News Guard and various NGOs for censorship collusion.
In our lawsuit, we're exposing the censorship industrial complex and we're working to dismantle it, to compel the court to actually dismantle this censorship complex so that the free speech rights of the American people can be restored, as is supposed to be guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Bill of as is supposed to be guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights under But we have to fight for it and we need your support in order to carry out and fund that fight.
So shop at HealthRangerStore.com and help us take this fight to the censors to dismantle the censorship industrial complex while at the same time enhancing your health and nutrition with laboratory tested, certified, organic, ultra clean products that we offer.
Again, healthrangerstore.com.
Thank you for your support.
A global reset is coming.
And that's why I've recorded a new nine-hour audiobook.
It's called The Global Reset Survival Guide.
You can download it for free by subscribing to the naturalnews.com email newsletter, which is also free.
I'll describe how the monetary system fails.
I also cover emergency medicine and first aid and what to buy to help you avoid infections.
So download this guide.
It's free.
▲
Export Selection