All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 10, 2025 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
52:47
Mike Adams & Dr. Kirk Moore: Medical Freedom on Trial — Ethics, AI, and the Future of Medicine
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Did you have any idea of how vicious the state can be when they disagree with your medical decision?
I didn't realize to the extent that they would go through.
I mean, they put me in jail for 34 days just because they disagreed with my opinion.
Two of my co-defendants had the exact same had violated the exact same issues, and those people got let go.
They were using me as an example.
They want to prove a point that, hey, if you go against the government, this is what we're going to do.
This is what we can do to you, and this is what we're going to do to you.
And that's very frightening for all of us.
Welcome to today's Health Freedom interview here on Brighton.com.
I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, and we're joined today by, I call him a medical freedom hero for America.
It's Dr. Kirk Moore, who was dragged through absolute legal hell and was facing a serious criminal prison time for the fact that he was working ethically and morally to save people's lives during what was happening with COVID.
Now, there have been some recent positive developments in his case, and he joins us today to bring us up to speed and talk about what he went through, what it means for our country and our future.
Welcome, Dr. Kirk Moore.
It's just an honor, sir, to have you on here today.
Here's your website.
Can we bring on Dr. Moore?
Hold on.
Okay.
There we go.
There we go.
Welcome, Dr. Moore.
All right.
Well, how are you doing, Mike?
Thanks for having me.
Doing great.
I introduced you and we got your website instead.
But now you're here.
This is awesome.
Welcome.
Again, thanks.
Yeah, so you're in much better spirits now.
We were all watching your court case situation, a lot of drama, high emotions.
You had a tremendous amount of support.
Can you catch us up to the decision and what you went through recently?
Yeah, so, I mean, I don't remember when it was that we spoke the last time, obviously, it was before my trial and everything.
But, you know, kind of what happened is, you know, my kind of quote-unquote appeal to the weaponization workgroup was denied and we ended up going to trial on July 7th.
And then during that trial, well, right before that trial, there was a lot of lead up to it.
Ed Zahl and Matt Scow, Shannon Joy and a bunch of people had me on.
Mary Tally Bowden had me on her podcast.
And so there was a lot of lead up to the trial.
We had July 7th was our first day.
We had jury selection for a couple of days.
And remind me, what were you charged with?
Oh, yeah.
So I was charged with fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, counterfeiting, and destruction of government property, which had a maximum time in jail of 35 years, which essentially for me at 60 years old would have been a life sentence.
But, you know, it probably wouldn't have resulted in 35 years.
There's probably some sort of a chart or something somewhere.
But again, that, you know, fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud, destruction of government property, which was the vaccines.
And, you know, so really interesting, kind of just interesting dynamic, right?
Yeah.
And just to back up, you're a cosmetic surgeon is your practice, correct?
I just want to bring everybody up to speed.
Yeah.
So I'm a plastic surgeon who kind of ventured into the COVID vaccine realm because I just felt that it was an inhumane process and requiring people to get a vaccine and to get a shot.
Well, I don't, I shouldn't call it a vaccine.
It's not.
I've kind of vowed to call it a bioweapon from now on.
So to give people a bioweapon in order to contribute to society, I thought was exceedingly wrong, especially within the medical profession.
Absolutely.
I think our audience agrees with you on that.
Okay, so you were charged with all these criminal violations and you were charged by, was it the state of Utah that charged you?
Or who was it?
Oh, the DOJ.
The guy ran a sting operation on me.
So this was our Department of Justice.
Oh, my.
Okay.
Yeah.
And under Biden, primarily, I would imagine.
Yeah, so I was charged in January of 23.
I had a superseding indictment in January of 25, about five days before Donald Trump was indicted or before he was inaugurated.
And then the trial continued under Pam Bondi.
And then in that middle of July, they finally intervened and dismissed my case.
Okay, so it was Pam Bondi, Trump's DOJ, just filed to dismiss the charges against you.
Yeah.
So, with all of the buildup, like I said, we had some buildup through the course of that week before trial.
And then during trial, we had a couple of rallies.
We had a rally on Monday, another larger rally on Friday.
There was an article that was published midweek by Ed Zahl, which accused Pam Bondi of personally prosecuting me.
And that got picked up by Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massey, who then posted on X that they were going to intervene and they were going to call the DOJ and reverse this process.
Robert F. Kennedy came out as well in my defense for the second time.
First time he came out was in April.
And then Senator Mike Lee from my state came out.
And so I think a combination of all that, the larger rally on Friday on Saturday morning at 8.30, the DOJ under Pam Bondi's direct instructions came out and dismissed my case mid-trial, mid-prosecution.
That's unheard of as far as I know.
And it also brings home the point of why we need people like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massey in Congress, because these are two voices that are even dissenting against the current administration on many issues.
And there's an effort to try to destroy Thomas Massey to primary him and also Marjorie Taylor Greene.
But these are the two people that really came to your defense.
Yeah, you know, Marjorie Taylor Greene probably, and I got this from Tucker Carlson, said that she is probably the single most effective person for the individual person, you know, individual out there, you know, like people like me that are just normal guys running their business and taking care of life, taking care of their kids and, you know, raising their kids and doing the best they can.
And absolutely, she was instrumental.
Thomas Massey is.
You know, RFK is out there, you know, Senator Mike Lee.
But yeah, you know, I was on the Tucker Carlson show when I mentioned those three names.
He was, he said the same thing.
He said, those are my three favorite people.
Yeah.
So I love them too.
And, you know, standing up for just the normal guy.
There's so many, I've heard of so many other cases that are out there right now with wrongful prosecution of people.
And it's just crazy.
You start, you know, the floodgates open when people find out who I am and what happened to me and everything else.
They kind of send me texts and emails and everything else.
Can you help me?
And you just can't imagine what's happening to people out there and what our government is doing to people.
Well, that's my next question.
Did you, before all of this, as a practicing surgeon, did you have any idea of how vicious the state can be when they disagree with your medical decisions?
Well, I had an idea.
I didn't realize to the extent that they would go through.
I mean, they put me in jail for 34 days just because they disagreed with my opinion.
I went to jail for 12 days on one time, 22 days on another, and two of my co-defendants had the exact same, had violated the exact same issues, and those people got let go.
So it's definitely not a system of justice right now, which is targeted towards equal justice for people.
They were coming after me.
They were using me as an example.
They wanted to prove a point that, hey, if you go against the government, this is what we're going to do.
This is what we can do to you.
And this is what we're going to do to you.
And that's very frightening for all of us, which leads me to the question, why do you think the DOJ ultimately decided to dismiss your case?
Was it just going to be too embarrassing for them to prosecute you because of the, I believe, the morality and the ethical foundation of your decisions?
Why do you think they dropped your case?
Well, if I take Pam Bondi at her word, that's exactly what it was.
When I met her on the 16th of July, I believe that was the following Wednesday.
And she was like, I didn't know about your case.
I'm really sorry that you went through all this.
She kind of was shaking her head when I was telling her the story of what I'd been through.
And so if I take her at her word, it's just one of those things where it's just a behemoth and it's a beast.
And it's just kind of like one person can't obviously keep track of everything.
When my file was passed off to her, one of the people in the DOJ said, here, I'm glad that Pam Bondi is finally looking at this.
This gave me heartache.
And, you know, so there are some people that have a heart and there are some people that do believe what it is that we're going through, but they're fighting against a system that is built to not, you know, to not have that kind of humanity in it.
Yeah, exactly.
It's so inhumane.
And In your case, it wasn't just a threat of yanking your medical license, which is a lot of leverage by itself, but then throwing you in prison for up to 35 years, as you said.
Here's a question for you.
Do you think that if Kamala had won the election, would you still be prosecuted?
I probably would have been prosecuted, and I'd probably be facing some sort of sentencing right now and facing jail time.
Absolutely.
So you think that Trump's victory really changed your life in a dramatic way and that Trump saw what, just the injustice of what the Biden administration had done to you?
Well, I certainly don't think that Donald Trump didn't know of my case, at least not on those last few days.
I don't think Pam Bondi would have done this without Donald Trump knowing that he was that she was going to do it.
And I think it's also ironic that I was arrested the day after Trump was elected and put in jail for 22 days.
So I also don't think that it was just coincidental that five days before Donald Trump was inaugurated, they added a charge of destruction of government property to it because I don't know that that would have been able to be added afterwards.
I mean, you know, destruction of government property and wit and evidence tampering is what they were claiming.
And that carries a pretty stiff sentence.
And they were claiming that I had thrown away the vaccines that the government still owned when they were sitting in my fridge here in my office.
And we, during the trial, we actually, I believe, proved that they had no ownership to that product.
So, you know, you asked me earlier, why do I think they threw this case out?
I think that they were losing the case.
And I also think that they were scared of exposure of what was potentially going to happen.
If you read Sasha Latipova's expose on this shortly after my trial, and there was another article published by an organization, Health Independence Alliance, published an article and went online with it on Substack, calling out the government and really kind of like it was going to expose what this whole system was.
This is, you know, it was called Operation Warp Speed.
This means that it was a government quote-unquote operation, a military operation.
Nothing else is called Operation.
You know, you have Operation Candlestick, you have Operation Mockingbird.
Northwoods.
This was a judgment product and it was going to get exposed, at least according to what Sasha believed was happening.
And that's part of the reason why I think they decided to kind of yank the chain on this.
That's really interesting.
So you may be aware that Dr. Benjamin Rush had argued for a health freedom amendment to the Bill of Rights.
And he was a signer of the Declaration of Independence.
And it was believed at that time in the 18th century that it wasn't necessary to have medical rights elucidated in the Bill of Rights because the government would never stop somebody from making their own medical choice.
Well, fast forward, here we are almost 250 years later and the government is throwing people in jail or trying to like you because of exercising medical choice.
Do you think that we now need some kind of medical bill of rights or medical patients' rights legislation?
Oh boy, Mike, that's a tough question for me because I think we already have too much legislation in our system.
I think that if we were to go back to just the structural framework of our Constitution without all of the changes and adaptations and interpretations of it, I don't think that we would need it.
But I guess the short answer to your question, given what's happening and what's going on right now, I think it certainly would be beneficial.
Well, let me clarify that question too, because I also agree with you that we have far too many laws, but most of those laws restrict the rights of individuals and they grant government overarching power over the choices of individuals.
The only kind of new laws I'm really in favor of are those that restrict government power.
For example, laws that prohibit big tech from censoring free speech if it's a public square discussion place.
Like in my opinion, it should be illegal for YouTube to censor videos that are critical of vaccines.
So that's using the power of government to protect the individual rights that are elucidated in the Bill of Rights, such as the First Amendment.
But I just think we need a third amendment or, you know, let's take the current third amendment, which is that the government can't house soldiers in your homes, and let's push that out to the next available amendment number, whatever that is.
Let's make the third amendment the medical freedom amendment.
It should be right up there, one, two, and three.
The right to speak, the right to bear arms, and the right to say no to some kind of toxic injection.
Right.
Well, look, here's the struggle that I have.
Okay.
There were no COVID laws.
Okay.
There were no requirements for anything.
The CDC doesn't have any lawful governmental functions at all.
They're an advisory agency only.
What has happened is our system is somewhat bastardized in that anything that comes out of the CDC gets incorporated as if it were law.
And that's not correct.
Okay.
It's a recommendation.
And so we need to go back to kind of that federalist system where our agencies in our states and our cities and everything else take those recommendations.
And then based upon their own population, they kind of either implement them or don't or implement them partially.
But, you know, that's the thing is, is that that's the struggle that I had all along is the CDC doesn't have any capacity to write laws.
My indictment at least 17 times called for the that I was violating the lawful governmental functions of the CDC.
We even filed a motion to dismiss based upon that wording and the judge ruled against us.
So that's, you know, again, there are no lawful, and we even had them agree to that.
They had a CDC, the guy who was in charge of the CDC, Chris, gosh darn, I can't remember his name.
Anyway, the guy who, their first witness that they brought in was the CDC guy in charge of the whole COVID thing.
And when we got him to admit that the CDC doesn't have any lawful governmental functions, and yet here they were, my indictment was based largely on the lawful government that I violated the lawful governmental functions.
The only law that was violated in all of this was the government.
The government violated their own HIPAA laws that are actually in place there to protect our own privacy.
So why aren't they kind of self-indicting themselves or why aren't they indicting the airline employees that are asking for our personal private medical information or the grocery store clerks that are asking you to show your COVID card as you're walking in the door or the restaurant personnel for all those things?
Those are the only laws that were violated.
And those are laws that were on the books.
There were no COVID laws, period.
Nothing is ever passed by Congress that said you have to get this shot.
And I don't think anything would ever happen and passed by Congress.
The problem is, is that we have these agencies that just take this information and these recommendations and then they implement them as law.
And that's not law.
The fiefdoms of the CDC and the FDA and so on.
But to answer your question, of course, you know, the government allows itself to commit unlimited number of crimes, including money laundering, including human trafficking, weapons trafficking, you name it, right?
The government does it.
And also currency trafficking.
Right?
Drug trafficking, pedophilia.
All of it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So, you know, they're guilty of practically every crime on the books, but they only, of course, you know, direct those, the prosecutions to people like you.
Now, even though the DOJ dropped your case, as you well know, the process is the punishment.
Right.
So dragging you through the process.
Can you describe to us what this was like?
The financial cost.
Surely this must have cost you hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars.
I don't know.
But the stress, the uncertainty, I mean, just the stress alone depletes nutrients.
And, you know, I mean, it's devastating.
It's a kind of torture for them to drag you through that.
What was that like?
It was certainly the most brutal experience I've ever had in my life.
It was certainly the hardest, the most stressful time of my life.
And to my family, my two kids, my mom, my fiancé now kind of stuck through this or stuck with me throughout this whole process.
But the stressful thing, it's an amazing thing.
You don't really realize it.
When I got that phone call saying that Pam Bondi was going to drop my case, the effect that it had on me, I literally collapsed on the floor.
And it's kind of like I just lost control of my legs.
It really had that kind of an effect.
And, you know, it's an amazing feeling.
But then you kind of, then you come back to reality and you realize, okay, now it's time for me to kind of continue.
I wasn't planning on rebuilding my practice and rebuilding my life after this.
The financial loss just from the expenditures was almost a million dollars.
But the financial loss in the growth that I had and the practice that I had built up to is in the millions.
You know, there, there were people, there's, you know, five or six colleagues of mine that I was included in that, in this group, and they got bought out by a venture capital group for millions.
And I was in that until I got indicted.
So the, you know, the opportunity costs and the loss for me is astounding.
And then having to rebuild it now at age 60 is, you know, is kind of an amazing, you know, amazing situation.
Amazing.
I mean, I lack of a better word, a real struggle for us because that's not what I was planning on doing.
Well, tell us about your practice here.
And I want to read from your website, freedomsurgicaluta.com.
And here it is, Dr. Kirk Moore.
So you carry out plastic surgery.
Can you tell us about what kinds of surgical procedures that you carry out?
I mean, you know, sort of what's your practice?
What does it consist of?
Well, my main, I mean, what I've been doing for over 20 years is what I call kind of a rapid recovery breast augmentation procedure, which I've, I don't say, pioneered.
I just, you know, I took bits and pieces of other things.
I'll give John Tebbit's credit down in Dallas.
He wrote an article about it back in 2000, 2001.
There's a couple of other people that, you know, were doing kind of a, you know, a relatively, you know, minimally invasive breast augmentation procedure.
And then I just kind of took what they were doing, you know, massaged it a little bit, changed it a little bit, and, you know, and everything else.
But I do a breast augmentation procedure that gets people back to work the next day, driving their car the next day, doing all, you know, all normal activities pretty much except for going to the gym and trying to kind of make any personal bests.
But, you know, no narcotics, no gases.
You're up and awake.
And, you know, within 20 minutes, you're fully coherent within two hours, going to dinner the same day.
So that's been kind of my bread and butter for the last 20 some odd years.
I do mostly body contouring.
I have a med spa where I do Botox and fillers.
You know, it's your kind of your typical classic, you know, plastic surgery practice.
We've now kind of expanded into doing kind of more of the functional medicine stuff, getting out of the traditional big pharma medical paradigm.
I try to stay away from any narcotics and any medications, try to do things along a more natural base.
I mean, we saw just the evidence just here in the last few months over, you know, Tylenol, which we thought was the safest medication on the face of the earth.
And yet we look at what its effects can be in pregnant mothers and kids and, you know, and everything else.
And we really don't know.
And I truly think that just as Marcia Angel said, I think back in 2000, 2001, she was the ex-chief editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, that the vast majority of the articles and information that gets published in medical journals is actually false.
And I think that's only gotten worse.
So this is really interesting.
And I'll just share with you.
You may or may not already be aware of this, but did you know that the molecule glycerizin, which is found in licorice root, protects the liver from acetaminophen toxicity?
So if anybody ever asked me about Tylenol, I say, hey, if you take Tylenol, always take licorice root first because it protects the liver.
So, you know, liver damage from acetaminophen is extremely common.
And then some people on New Year's Eve, they take Tylenol and they drink alcohol and then they're like, oh, what's wrong?
Well, you know, you just try to rip that headache to the next morning, right?
Yeah, exactly.
But the services that you just mentioned, see, it's really interesting to me and to our audience because you have been practicing in a world that we would not call holistic type of surgical medicine.
But this shift, and I think also this experience of how you have been prosecuted for simply standing your ground, you are beginning to see sort of more and more complementary approaches or natural approaches or ways to minimize the pharmaceutical emphasis, like you said before.
And I think that's really healthy.
I mean, I think that's healthy for society.
I'm really glad that you are widening your viewpoints of possible alternatives or possible complementary approaches to achieving your main business concepts.
Well, look, Mike, I believe that we've been lied to for the last 120 years, at least as far as medicine is concerned.
I started doing natural hormone replacement, bioidentical hormone replacement back in the early 2000s and have continued to do that.
So I've had a bent towards more of a natural approach.
COVID certainly opened up my eyes.
My kids are, my daughter, born in 2003, is only partially vaccinated.
My son isn't vaccinated at all.
And he was born in 2007.
And I haven't had a vaccine since 2011 when I, and I wouldn't have gotten that one, but I had to to go to Ghana for a humanitarian trip.
So, you know, there's, you know, there's a lot of things that I've been doing, but COVID certainly kind of opened my eyes and not only just to medicine in general, but to all kinds of things.
So that's a much longer discussion.
If you want to have me back on, we could go through some of that.
But it's, you know, yes.
And I've always had a bent towards doing that.
And again, this has only accelerated that.
I'm doing a lot of natural, you know, natural peptide replacement, you know, even the kind of the semi-glutide and everything else that everybody else is doing.
If they're going to do it, I'd like, and I don't necessarily agree with it.
I think GLP1s are a very good product.
And they, you know, in general, as a natural form, they are necessary.
And if you can keep that as a general, you know, as in its natural, most natural form as possible.
I've taken people off of synthroid and levothyroxine and put them on armor thyroid or natrothroid just and made a change in their life just by doing that.
It's amazing when you start looking and reading and understanding science and going back to the basics and not have it be kind of jaded by the stuff that we're told in medical school and all the textbooks that are all owned by big harma.
I completely agree.
And this year, actually, I got turned on to peptide therapy.
And I'll just say, I've just been using BPC 157 intranasally, and it enabled me to overcome previous sports injuries to my back to where I'm now able to run 30 minutes a day.
That was inconceivable for me a year ago.
But BPC 157 got me back on my feet jogging.
I gave that to my son on his ACL reconstruction.
Yeah.
Right.
Yeah.
So.
And you know what's great is I think when you combine these very pioneering therapies, you know, like peptide therapy, even for cognition, you know, CMAX and things like that that I've talked about with my audience, but you combine them with really good nutrition and reduction of toxins, reduction of exposure to carcinogens and whatever's in the food, free radicals, et cetera.
You can really have this strong complementary effect with multiple therapies coming together, even for recovery time for your patients, I would imagine.
Right.
Right.
No, we've started actually doing that and implementing either intraoperative IVs or immediately post-operative or even kind of people that come in on their one-day follow-up to try to accelerate the recovery.
So we have a kind of a recovery program that we run people through.
And then we have, you know, other, you know, other kind of therapy programs and things that we can do, weight loss, you know, weight loss programs that don't necessarily involve, you know, kind of the synthetic GLP1s, or at least if they are in a very, very modified, you know, dose level and in, you know, in other, you know, in other ways, let's put it, let's put it that way.
But, you know, I think there's, you know, magnesium is another big one that I think is just completely overlooked, at least as far as brain cognition and everything else.
So, you know, and the right type of vitamin C, you know, high-dose vitamin C. And, you know, and you can't really do high-dose vitamin C as a single dose.
Otherwise, you know, it gives you some GI upset problems.
But you can do it in small incremental doses throughout the course of the day.
So if you want somebody to have 15 grams of IV or sorry, 15 grams of vitamin C and you don't want to use an IV, then you can do that by having them take a thousand milligrams a day while awake or a thousand milligrams an hour while you know during their during their waking hours and it won't have that same GI, you know, GI effect, but you still get some of the benefits as long as it's a good quality vitamin C. Right.
That's a lot of vitamin C, by the way.
I don't, I don't take anywhere near that much and I still get strong benefits from it.
Right.
But I understand you're describing high dose vitamin C, which can be really useful for people, especially in certain situations, or especially people coming off a lot of processed junk food or a lot of pharmaceutical, like a heavy pharmaceutical load, and then they add Tylenol on top of that.
And then they've got exposure to all these fragrance chemicals from their indoor home environment that's toxic.
You know, the liver load is really intense.
Well, the air that we're breathing, you know, with the stuff that gets sprayed in our environment, the food that we get that's been sprayed by chemicals, even, you know, even the, you know, even the chemicals that are supposed, or not chemicals, but even the stuff that's supposed to be coming at us that's organic, you know, the appeal, A-P-E-E-L stuff that, you know, Bill Gates is pushing to put on all food that doesn't have to be even declared, which is a synthetic product.
You know, all this stuff, you know, it gets into your system.
So you have to find some way to detoxify that.
And it's an ongoing battle, Mike, to be honest with you.
Nobody has all the answers.
But in large measure, it's to some degree a trial and error scenario where we just have to really work on what's going to work for this person might not necessarily work for that one.
And that's the whole thing with the COVID thing.
Why is one COVID shot going to help one person and not help everybody else?
Or how is it that one size fits all?
We don't have a one size fits all in everything in this whole world other than in medicine.
And that's, you know, we need to get out of that paradigm.
By the way, we reached out to the legal team representing Appeal and we offered to test their product for metals in our lab and to share the results publicly, whatever they might be, which might vindicate them if they claim that they don't have any heavy metals.
And we heard nothing back.
Yeah.
So it's like, well, hey, the offer is out there.
If they want to send us this, I mean, we'll do it in good faith.
You know, we're not going to fudge results or anything.
We're an ISO-accredited laboratory.
We'll just play it by the book as we always do.
Right.
You know, they're not interested in that.
That's the whole, that's the whole thing.
I guess not.
I don't know.
Just eat it and shut up and stop asking questions.
Okay.
Finally, Dr. Moore, look, this has been an amazing conversation.
We still have a few minutes left, but I want to ask you, how does this change your approach to medicine from here forward?
So, for example, what if there's another pandemic and then there's another big vaccine push?
What are you going to do differently, if anything, surrounding that, if that comes up again?
Well, I won't do anything differently.
I don't believe in pandemics.
I don't think they exist.
I think they're all fake.
I think COVID was.
I think so too, by the way.
Yeah.
I think COVID was invented for the bioweapon, not the other way around.
You know, I believe that was part of the reason why my case was actually dismissed, because if we had gotten exposure to it, I think that all of the information that was in there would have predated 2020, which would have been a total disaster for that jury.
To see that they were negotiating all of this stuff in 2015 through 2019 with the contracts that they had and everything else would have completely, totally blown up the case.
And that's what Sasha Latipova claims is one of the main reasons why they dismissed my case.
So, you know, pandemics don't exist.
You know, whether you want to believe in viruses or not, I'm leaning towards not.
And, you know, and so I just don't think that, you know, any of the stuff that with medicine right now that we're being taught is actually truthful.
I believe that we've been lied to since the early 1900s and it's only gotten worse.
And that's kind of the reasons why I'm leaning towards what it is that I'm doing.
You know, I still do breast augmentation.
Some people say that that's kind of like an oxymoron.
But I still do it because it, you know, unfortunately for me, I don't think it's necessarily bad for you.
Silicone is sand.
Do some people have an effect on it?
Yes, I do.
But, you know, on my other procedures that I do where I do a tummy tuck and I take people's extra skin off early, there is no other option for people that have had a significant amount of weight loss or have, you know, had the, you know, the skin structural breakdown from pregnancies and everything else.
That's, you know, that's something that, you know, we have to correct surgically if they want that corrected.
Does it have to happen?
Probably not.
If we had a better society and better, you know, and better nutrition and we taught people better and we kept them away from a lot of the pharmaceutical things, then I don't think that those side effects would necessarily happen as much.
I don't think a woman needs to gain 50 pounds for an eight-pound baby.
And, you know, and yet that's kind of what we're taught.
So I don't believe a lot of what medicine has taught us.
I think that it's completely pharma-owned.
And, you know, the textbooks are owned.
Our medical schools are owned.
Our journals are owned.
The investigators are owned.
The labs are owned.
And physicians are owned in large measure too, because they're all salaried.
90 plus percent of docs out there are salaried by in some way, shape, or form, either by a hospital organization or a large medical subspecialty group, which in turn is then financed by the insurance corporations, which in turn is financed by big harma.
So exactly.
And I'm glad you talked about the fraud of contagion because, see, this is one of the silver linings of going through COVID, all of us.
And then learning, you know, I've interviewed Drs.
Kaufman and Cowan and learned from them and so many others.
And see, as a, you know, I'm a lab scientist myself.
I'm a published scientist with analytical methods for food analysis and so on.
And I believed everything about virology before COVID.
Right.
And then we started to learn and realize like, holy cow, you know, if this were really a contagion, it wouldn't have stopped in New York City, you know, for one thing.
And, you know, I was so freaked out.
I was like, yeah, we got to have travel bans and stuff.
We've got to look at this.
And now looking back, I realize we were all being hoaxed.
The whole thing was theater.
And it was all designed to get people to be injected with something that harmed and killed tens of millions of people.
Right.
Yeah, I'm fully on board.
This was a bioweapon that was used primarily to depopulate the world, which is what the Bill Gateses and everybody else want to have us do.
They want 500,000 people.
Like Georgia Guidestones told us that, and they want to have 500,000 people on this earth where they can control it.
They want to feed us chemicals.
They want to make lab meat, lab-grown salmon and poison people and control the birth rate.
They've already decreased the birth rate by more than 30%.
We're at, you know, we're at all of the EU, every single country in the EU and now the United States, we are all sub replacement level right now.
So we're going to see population go down over the next couple of generations unless we can reverse this.
Well, and that actually brings me to kind of the last thing I want to talk with you about.
I focus a lot on the rise of AI and the human replacement that's underway.
Of course, we're also using the technology for good.
You know, we have our own AI engine, Brighteon.ai.
It's free for everybody to use, and it's heavily trained on nutrition, alternative medicine, superfoods, phytochemistry.
I mean, actually, this is trained on more than any other mainstream engine in the world by far on these subjects.
But I also think that the globalists, they want to exterminate billions of humans because they realize that both cognition and labor can very shortly be replaced by machines.
And I think that they're using the medical establishment system in order to accelerate that extermination agenda.
And I think we already saw the opening chapter of that, but they're nowhere near finished because they didn't kill a billion people yet.
So they're going to keep trying.
Like, have I gone too far on that?
Or what do you think?
No.
I personally think that they're underestimating the power of the human brain and the power of humanity, not just in numbers per se, but just in innovation.
And if they really think that they're going to be able to do an artificial intelligence based solely on what it is that we have to contribute to a system right now and not have a large swath, billions of input and data points, they're selling themselves short.
And eventually AI is going to burn itself out too.
That's my opinion.
And you need people to contribute to that.
Just like you're saying that you built Brighteon and a certain Brighteon.ai in a certain way, they're doing the same thing.
But you need that innovation.
You need that human innovation.
And that's not going to happen with a computer-generated artificial intelligence.
The difference is that, yeah, the big tech companies are building AI to enslave and exterminate humanity.
I'm building AI to empower and defend humanity.
Well, and that's the way it should be built, right?
It should be done as kind of an ancillary growth and not a parasitic relationship, but a symbiotic relationship where you can use it, where you get on, I get on there, I will type up a letter and then I'll upload it to AI and I'll say, hey, you know, kind of fix this for me so that it sounds better and it gets rid of the typos and I don't have run-on sentences or whatever the scenario is, right?
And that's how I use it.
But I'm not using it as a substitute for my own brain power.
And that's what some people are.
And that's what I think the powers that be right now are trying to do that, to substitute for human ingenuity.
And that's not what it's for.
And I don't think they'll ever get to that point.
And I think eventually that if they do that over the course of the next two, three, four generations, whatever they have, I mean, I don't know if they're going to do it by 2030, which is their agenda.
But if they get to that point, they're going to burn themselves out because then it's just going to be a law of diminishing returns at that point because they want to have that ingenuity in there.
I see that.
Because the powers that be are not that smart as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah, actually, we are smarter than they are.
They just have, they control all the doorways right now.
But I want to ask you about the AI takeover of mainstream medicine.
Like you take a typical GP.
That person, very different from what you do.
A GP is very algorithmic.
They look at symptoms and they prescribe drugs for like 95% of what they do, especially pediatricians, right?
They're just pushing vaccines and prescribing drugs.
Well, because it's so algorithmic and because it's so robotic, that can easily be replaced by AI systems.
And I actually see that that's going to happen in certain areas of medicine very quickly.
Now, you know, it won't be what you're doing or other types, you know, brain surgery and specialty diagnostics and so on.
But for GP type of roles, which are just sort of glorified pill pushing, there's no reason why a machine can't take that over.
And I think it's going to happen.
I think we're going to have a day here.
My prediction is by 2030, AI will write prescriptions that are legally accepted.
You know, you may very well be right.
The struggle that I have with that is I can't tell you the number of times that I've had an interaction with somebody on some social media post where I ask them questions and then I see that they've posted something that you can just tell it's from an AI that they did, whether it's Grok or whether it's Chat GPT or whatever.
But if you go through those answers, and I do this with vaccines all the time, I'm still looking for somebody to give me a vaccine that's had a placebo-controlled study that's currently on our market.
But if you ask Grok or you ask an AI, they will give you six, seven, 10 different examples.
But if you go through those, every single one of them is fraudulent.
But yet, you're right, the GPs will accept that.
I was on one of our medical platforms and there was a psychiatrist when I asked him that same question, posted a list of I think eight or 10 different studies that he claimed were, but it was right from AI.
And I already knew the answer to it because I'd already tested that answer with AI before.
And I already had the answers and I debunked every single one of them one by one by one.
The problem is, Mike, is that when you do that, those people don't believe you.
Right.
They believe the AI instead.
They just, they will argue with you when you say, hey, that's not a placebo-controlled study because they used, they didn't use a placebo.
Well, the title of the article says it was a placebo.
Well, yeah, maybe.
But when you go to the methods and you look in there, what they use for placebo, they used, you know, Prevnar 7 instead of Prevnar 14.
And that's their quote-unquote placebo.
And these people just don't get it.
And that's the struggle that I have: that it's a cult.
And I mean, I'm sure you watched it.
I think I even heard you talking about it.
You know, when on, I think it was September 9th when Ron Johnson ran his discussion that he had with Aaron Siri over vaccines.
And he had on there, God, what was that guy's name that I had at the tip of my tongue?
Dr. Scott.
Oh, man, I should know his name.
It's not, oh, boy.
Anyway, the doctor that was on there was just repeating talking points that he'd just been given.
And he's a Stanford infectious disease doctor.
Okay.
Yeah, and Aaron Siri destroyed him.
In 90 seconds, Aaron Siri tore down every single argument that he had.
And this guy, the only thing that he could throw back was, well, I just, I gave those to you at 3 a.m.
I don't know how you could have had time to kind of go through that, which was part of their tactics, right?
Yeah.
And Aaron Siri's like, well, I've just got a cracked team.
But on top of that, Aaron Siri's already done all the research and he already knows what's out there.
This guy here, God, what was his name?
Scott.
Yeah, I don't recall his name either.
I just completely, I sent him an email and I posted it on my thing.
And every single podcast that I get a chance to bring him up, I usually just, you know, I call him out by name because the guy is a total fraud.
And, you know, I, I don't know.
Well, that's right.
That's okay.
Anyway, go ahead.
Well, let me mention too, then you're not going to find a better engine for vaccine research than our engine, Brighteon.ai.
And I really want to mention this to you and spread the word and use it yourself because we have trained.
We've spent about two years at about $2 million on data pipeline processing to train the model.
It knows more about vaccine dangers than any other AI model in the world.
And so it's a research tool.
And we're finding that there's a lot of guardrails that are being put on ChatGPT or Grok.
Grok is horrible on health freedom and vaccines and medicine.
Absolutely.
It's horrible.
Absolutely.
In fact, when we ran tests on our model versus the others, we had about 94% alignment with natural health principles and the health freedom.
Whereas ChatGPT, I think it was like 12% alignment or something.
I mean, it wasn't even close, right?
So these AI models, they test them on benchmarks for mathematics, advanced physics questions and so on.
Yeah, well, they're going to beat us on that, but we beat them on the things that matter, like, you know, medicine and health and longevity and, you know, nutrition.
So now the battlefield space for censorship has shifted to the AI realm.
Fewer people are using Google, you know, search engines.
Fewer people are reading books.
People are going to AI to get answers for everything.
So now we're seeing big pharma try to take over and control AI to push their narratives.
That's the challenge we're facing now.
Right.
Well, look, I'm glad you told me.
I was just, my office manager, who's also my fiancé, she and I share an upgraded chat GPT AI, and she can't stand it because I ask different questions than what she asks.
And so it kind of gets confused when it starts researching things.
So I will definitely use Brighteon.ai.
I'm glad you, you know, I'm glad you kind of told me about that because that's certainly something that I, you know, that I need and that I definitely will use.
Thanks for telling me.
Jake Scott, by the way, is the guy's name.
Jake Scott ND.
Jake Scott.
And just a note on Brighteon, right now, it emails you the answer, but in a few days, the upgrade's coming.
It's just going to give it to you in real time like ChatGPT.
Okay.
Because we had to build out our own infrastructure.
We have to host it ourselves so that we don't get deplatformed by like Amazon AWS or whatever.
In order for us to function, this is kind of like your practice.
We have to build out so many redundant infrastructure components so that we can't be cut off or deplatformed or whatever.
It's much harder for us who are truth tellers to operate in society compared to everybody else.
Well, yeah.
I mean, you're absolutely right.
And that's, you know, that's the, I think Dan Bongino used to talk about it all the time, building a parallel universe.
And I think that that's absolutely what we do.
There's no changing these people's minds.
They believe that we're in a cult.
We believe that they're in a cult.
And, you know, there's no amount of facts.
Ed Dowd said this in a podcast, I think, with Tucker Carlson, where he said, there's just it doesn't matter what facts you tell these people.
They're just their belief system is going to over, you know, is just going to override any factual data that you give them.
That's right.
And it's really astonishing, especially it's really disturbing and disgusting and disappointing to see that in the medical profession.
We're supposed to be scientists that are basing our stuff on the scientific, you know, the scientific principles.
And you're supposed to be able to kind of adapt to new information that you get.
But these people are just so ingrained in their thought processes that there's nothing that's going to change their mind.
I mean, you could inject somebody right there in front of them and they could die from an injection and they'll say, oh, that's just coincidence.
I don't get it.
I really don't.
Well, they used to call it evidence-based medicine.
And they used to just rub that in our faces and say, well, we have evidence-based medicine.
What you're pushing is woo-woo.
Actually, the evidence is on the side of phytochemistry and nutrition and prevention.
The evidence is on the side of the human immune system, which we saw that the establishment pretended did not exist during COVID.
They actually said that it's a conspiracy theory to suppose that humanity has an immune system.
And it's just like, wow, that they are willing to say anything.
Well, in such a short time, Mike, we went from trying to mimic the natural immunity that we get from our own immune system.
Okay.
That's what vaccines were supposed to be doing, right?
We're supposed to be doing something to enhance or mimic or at least assist our immune system.
And then all of a sudden, like you said, our immune system doesn't matter.
You're going to get it all through a needle.
And the people that, and the people that believe that, and there are people, hundred, look, there are a million doctors in the United States, thereabouts.
Okay.
How many of us push back against this paradigm?
Very few.
Okay.
I mean, what, maybe a thousand?
Okay.
Maybe.
Yeah.
And that's why they prosecuted.
Okay.
But, you know, a thousand people, that's less than one tenth of 1%.
Yeah.
That's nuts.
Yeah, it's wild.
But the public is pushing back harder than ever now.
And the silver lining of COVID is that it really changed the relationship that people have with their doctors.
And more people are finding that they have to be skeptical.
They have to ask questions.
And they can't just wholeheartedly swallow whatever a traditional doctor is telling them.
And I think you would agree that a healthy patient or a healthy customer is someone who is actively involved in their own wellness and their own outcomes and wants to have the best outcome through other supporting methods.
It's not a person that comes into your office and says, hey, I just want to keep eating all the junk foods and I want to keep doing all these horrible habits and using drugs and smoking and whatever.
And you fix me, Doc.
Fix me.
I want a pill.
Give me a shot.
Right.
You don't want that kind of patient anyway.
So, okay.
Well, yeah, no, I mean, you're absolutely right.
I mean, we were, I mean, that's, and we started down that road a little bit earlier.
Same thing.
COVID opened my eyes about all of this stuff.
I mean, I was already kind of on the fringes a little bit anyway.
But, you know, COVID opened my eyes to the extent of the fraud that we've had in our society for the last 200 years.
It's really been incredible.
Well, Dr. Moore, I'm so honored to have you on.
Let me give out your website.
It's freedomsurgicaluta.com.
And your practice is located where in Utah?
So just outside of Salt Lake City, in the sandy midvale area of Salt Lake City.
You know, Utah is the fastest-growing population state of America.
Yeah, and it's the slowest growing infrastructure state, too.
Well, and it's not just everybody reproducing in Utah.
It's also people moving in.
A lot of people are leaving California and coming to Utah, for example.
Right.
And they're bringing their morals and values with them.
Well, we have that Texas.
We have some of that in Texas too.
But we're going to keep Texas, Texas.
It's just no.
If you keep Texas, Texas, then I might be moving down there.
So by the time you get here, it might be the Republic of Texas again.
We'll see.
But anyway, it's always an honor to have you on the show.
Thank you, Dr. Moore.
Thank you for all that you've done.
Thank you for your courage and for taking a stand for morality in medicine.
We appreciate you.
Well, thanks for having me on, Mike.
Anytime.
All right.
We'll have you back and take care.
In the meantime, keep in touch.
And thank all of you for watching.
There's Dr. Kirk Moore there, just a hero for medical freedom in America.
We owe him a lot, and he went through a lot to bring us to this point where the DOJ dropped those charges and really helped set a precedent about, you know, the state shouldn't go after doctors who are making good decisions on behalf of their patients.
And the state shouldn't force jabs into our bodies or anything down our throats.
It should always be a personal choice.
You and your doctor should work together as a team to protect your health.
That is an informed doctor, not just a pill-pushing pharma puppet.
So anyway, thanks for watching.
I'm Mike Adams here, the HealthRanger, Brighteon.com.
And you can check out our AI engine at brightion.ai, ask it anything.
And also new versions coming out in a few days that will give you real-time answers with an expanded data set of knowledge that it draws from.
So really good stuff coming.
Ask it about vaccines.
You'll be stunned.
It's the best engine in the world by far on health freedom issues.
So thanks for watching today and take care.
Power up with Groovy B and Boku Organic Superfuel Blend.
Nine superfoods in one clean plant-based mix.
Glyphosate tested, low in heavy metals.
▲
Export Selection