Health Ranger - Mike Adams - Interview with Andrew Wakefield on taking down the child-sacrificing Vaccine Industrial Complex

Dec. 11, 2025 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams

01:20:30

Interview with Andrew Wakefield on taking down the child-sacrificing Vaccine Industrial Complex

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	There's no way back.
	Yes, there's no undoing this now.
	We're beyond the tipping point and the truth will emerge.
	And I hear these politicians raging, raging at the ASIP committee, you know, when they withdraw the birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine, saying we're saving lives and there's no science.
	Well, actually, the science that the CDC covered up about the day one hepatitis B vaccine was that if you took that into consideration, those children who got it on day one of life, they had a sevenfold increased risk of developing autism compared to children who got it later.
	And that was taken out, deliberately, willfully removed from the data set so that was not revealed.
	And they knew it.
	Welcome to today's interview here on Brighteon.com.
	We have joining us in studio today an extraordinary man, a wonderful guest.
	It's Andy Wakefield.
	Welcome, Andy.
	Mike, great to be here.
	Thanks for having me back.
	I'm honored to be your friend and to have known you through all these years and all the work that you've done.
	And what you're doing now is also extraordinary.
	So thank you for what you've contributed to human knowledge.
	Well, thank you very much.
	And thank you too.
	And can I start out by saying I think that even though for many, many years your work and your reputation were unfairly smeared, you have been vindicated.
	And can you talk about how that feels to be vindicated and what that looks like?
	Thanks for the question, Mike.
	You know, it's a difficult one.
	I did not expect it to happen.
	I mean, who could have believed we would be in the position we're in now?
	Just even a year ago, with Bobby Kennedy at the Secretary of HHS, everything changing, the world waking up.
	And vindication is a kind of, it's rather a vainglorious wish.
	The sadness is the damage done.
	So many children have been compromised over such a long period in the face of ignorance and misconduct.
	And it never ceases to amaze me just how mundane this all is.
	If we'd done the right things at the right time, none of this would have happened.
	This was entirely preventable, vaccine injury, undeniable vaccine injury.
	So personal vindication is fine, but it comes, it's bittersweet.
	And the bitterness, the sadness, of course, is the damage done.
	So I see it as the parents.
	You see, everything I learned about this, Mike, has really come from parents, from the inside of mothers in particular.
	And so it's those individuals who are vindicated in truth.
	Really good point.
	And I love the fact that your answer is coming from a place of compassion for humanity and especially for children.
	And if the establishment had spent time working to resolve or avoid causing damage instead of trying to damage your reputation, then potentially many millions of lives could have been vastly improved over all these years.
	But now that we're at this point in history where, especially in the post-COVID era, more and more people are questioning both the safety and the efficacy of vaccines.
	What do you find is the kind of conversations that you have with people now.
	Do you hear from people that say, Andy, I should have listened to you sooner?
	Or, my goodness, you know, why didn't we know earlier about your warnings?
	Yeah, it's very interesting.
	An increasing number of pediatricians and adult physicians and others are coming up to me and saying, you know what, for years I thought you were crazy.
	I thought you were corrupt and I thought you were a fraud.
	And now I realize that you were right.
	And that's very interesting.
	They've had the humility to do that.
	I'm sure there are many others who took the message on board, probably didn't get their family vaccinated against COVID or get the COVID shot, but have kept quiet about it.
	But yes, there are a very large number of people, particularly in the wake of COVID.
	I think COVID, and we were talking about this earlier, is one of the biggest mistakes they ever made.
	They had to tell so many lies.
	They had to double down to the extent that when the truth broke, we reached a place where no one will ever trust them anymore.
	Right.
	And they get angry with you and me for having this conversation or discussing this at all, raising this issue of vaccine safety, but they've only got themselves to blame.
	They put themselves in this invidious position.
	They compromise so many people, all not to protect children, not to protect individuals, but to protect the credibility of themselves and their vaccine policy.
	But the so-called credibility can only be protected through censorship and through propaganda, lies, and government enforcement of those lies.
	And I've never seen doctors, mainstream conventional doctors on X as angry as they have been these last couple of weeks.
	It's very clear that the tide has turned and every decision out of ACIP or out of HHS that they don't like, they lose their minds.
	And it's a glorious thing to witness because every time I see a comment like that, I reply to them with a text of one of my books about vaccines or whatever.
	And they just lose their minds.
	That's right.
	It says, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
	Let me read you something, Mike.
	This really sets the stage for why we are where we are now.
	I don't know whether you've seen this before.
	This is about polio vaccine and neurological injury, but it really sets the stage for how public health perceives its role and its control over public perception of vaccine safety.
	This is from the Federal Register.
	This is from the head of the FDA, from the Federal Register, a government document.
	Any possible doubts, whether or not well-founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist.
	Cannot be allowed to exist.
	Wow.
	In view of the need to assure that the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation's public health objectives.
	It cannot be allowed to exist.
	When was this written or published?
	This was written in 1984.
	But it set the scene for everything that we, the public, and physicians and scientists have faced ever since.
	It cannot be allowed to exist.
	Your parental concerns, what happened to your child, what the science shows, however good that science is, cannot be allowed to exist.
	This is absolutely extraordinary.
	And this was destined to fail.
	You know, I know, you cannot sustain that kind of lie forever.
	It's going to break.
	And when it breaks, you're going to be exposed and you only have yourself to blame.
	But it didn't, here's a situation where it didn't matter about the quality of the science, whether there was science or not.
	It didn't matter about the children.
	Didn't matter about the outcome.
	Didn't matter about permanent neurological injury to millions of children.
	The public health objectives were the overriding concern.
	We've set the objectives and we're going to stick to them, whatever the cost to you, the public, the people that we're meant to be protecting.
	I mean, this is staggering, but it tells you everything you need to know.
	And now the whole thing is unraveling because it cannot be sustained.
	I've got good news to share with you here, too, about the speed at which this will unravel.
	And we talked briefly about AI before this interview.
	And in the short run, they have stacked AI with all of their pro-vaccine propaganda lies.
	But in the long run, the reasoning models will dismantle those lies.
	AI will prove that vaccines are not safe and effective because of reasoning.
	Once AI is allowed to conduct the science, which some AI models are doing now, meta-analysis of published studies, once AI can take into account the full context of all the data that do exist and all of the reports of vaccine injury, any reasoning model that is sufficiently advanced will confirm the things that you and I have been talking about all these years.
	So AI is actually going to destroy the narratives of the vaccine industry sooner or later.
	It's very, very interesting.
	I'll read you.
	This could be a futuristic AI paper.
	It's not.
	It's actually from Peter McCullough's group.
	And it's a fascinating paper that came out recently.
	I was asked to participate in this and I made a minor contribution to it.
	Got my name on a scientific paper after all these years.
	Yeah.
	That's dangerously respectable.
	an outstanding piece of scholarship Determinants of Autism Spectrum Disorder and I remember all I asked for years ago was more research We found this, this is the parent story.
	They were right on all these aspects, the bowel disease, everything else.
	So are they right about the vaccine?
	More research is needed.
	30 years ago, and of course then the heavens opened and my world changed.
	That science has now been done.
	And these guys have reviewed 136 papers that purport to look at the Vaccine Autism Association, something that AI would be able to do now or should be able to do now.
	And it says at the conclusion, combination and early timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for autism spectrum disorder.
	And that's supported by the data.
	It's preventable.
	And it's preventable.
	It's preventable.
	And this is the sum of the science.
	This is the judgment now of the science.
	And these people, and this is important to remember, many of these people were pro-vaccine coming into this.
	They weren't anti-vaccine.
	Interesting.
	And this has changed their mind.
	So what's critical, I'm so glad you brought that up because the vaccine industrial complex can only exist based on isolating us from the science.
	So not by being pro-science, but by rejecting the science and hiding it, sweeping it under the rug, or deliberately misinterpreting it or fudging it, which is what they've done all these years.
	So like that paper is a great example.
	But think about the fact that now, because of these decentralized AI tools that we all have access to now, and we have our vaccine forensics AI engine that's free.
	It's the only one that right now will tell you the truth about vaccines because we've trained it on so much truth-based material and books and so on, and even some of your work as well.
	But within the next few years, that kind of capability will be available to every parent who wants to ask the question: is it entirely safe for me to pursue this childhood immunization schedule?
	And at some point, the engines are going to say, well, based on the science, the answer is no.
	Here are the risks, and you should be aware of that.
	And that's all you've ever been asking for, is to have awareness of the risks, right?
	Right.
	And it's a very interesting, I was just thinking as you were talking about it, Mike, about the AI and everything else.
	And is vaccine court, the court of federal claims, where parents go if they believe they have a child who is vaccine injured and have to make their case.
	There is a situation in which the law has been turned on its head.
	It's the parents who have to prove that the vaccine caused the injury.
	Not the government who recommend the vaccines or the manufacturers who make the vaccine having to prove their vaccine didn't do it.
	The law turned on its head.
	How are parents going to do that?
	That's an extraordinarily costly exercise.
	Do they have a lab?
	Do they have a PhD?
	Do they have the scientific personnel to answer the question?
	No.
	They're going to use machine cognition to help them.
	So what they do in the future is they go to AI and they ask the question.
	Maybe the courts ask the question.
	It may not be there yet.
	But it sounds like, you know, from what you're saying, it actually might be quite close to have AI on the balance of the evidence.
	Do vaccines cause autism and did they cause autism in this particular child?
	It may turn the whole thing upside down.
	It's an extraordinary future that we're about to move into, a future of incredible transparency and in many ways abundance because of these tools as they are decentralized and open source.
	But in the short run, they can also be weaponized as they are right now.
	So if you go to ChatGPT right now and you ask, are all vaccines safe and effective?
	It will say, yes, vaccines have saved billions of lives or, you know, whatever it says.
	And any risk of harm is exaggerated.
	But that's the human propaganda that's been short-term trained into the models.
	And that won't last.
	It's as bad as Wikipedia.
	We read Wikipedia and it's just nonsense.
	I met at a party in LA, the guy who runs the disinformation panel, who decides on what disinformation is and what is not.
	He had no credentials to do that.
	He didn't have the ability through his training to adjudicate on the science.
	What was he doing there?
	He was doing it, you know, because it paid a lot of money to censor effectively.
	And let's hope this changes that entire dynamics.
	Well, what I love about you and your passion for truth-telling is that you've also, you have bypassed the gatekeepers by becoming an accomplished filmmaker.
	And you've done some incredible films already.
	You've got some new ones coming up.
	We're showing on the screen here, Vaxed and Protocol 7.
	And I actually served in the background as an extra for you on that film.
	I don't know if you remember that in Austin.
	I was there with Robert School.
	I did that day in the hotel.
	In the hotel.
	Yeah.
	That's right.
	And then 1986, the Act.
	Tell us about your films and how people can experience those films and what you have coming up.
	Yeah, sure.
	I started with the Autism Media Channel with Polly Tommy, and we were just doing a reality TV show before, during, and after, taking a family that had been broken by autism and investigating the child, the affected child, appropriately, medically, making a diagnosis.
	In this case, did the child have inflammatory bowel disease or not?
	When we treated that, was there improvement before, during, and after.
	And we were called to see a child called Alex Bordelakis.
	He was 15 years old.
	He was huge.
	He was strong.
	He was in four-point lock restraints in a pediatric intensive care in Chicago.
	They'd given him upwards of 28 psychotropic medications to try and control his symptoms.
	They were making him worse and worse and worse to the point where he was violent and had to be chained to the bed.
	He was chained to the bed for something like 80 days.
	We went in there.
	We got him out.
	We drove him through the night to New York.
	We got him scoped.
	He had inflammatory bowel disease.
	He was put on the right treatment.
	But his mother and his godmother, they were estranged from the husband.
	They had nowhere to live.
	And they ended up back in Chicago driving round and round and round, hotel to motel.
	And every time he heard a siren, and there are plenty of sirens in the night in Chicago, he would think they're coming to take me away again to lock me up.
	And he would get violent, smash the building up, and they'd have to move on.
	It was an absolute tragedy.
	And we were called back to see him.
	He was in the Lutheran hospital.
	He was back in locked restraints.
	He was on two intravenous and one intramuscular sedatives.
	It was an absolute tragedy.
	The mother was at breaking point.
	The godmother had a black eye where he'd lashed out at her.
	We went to try and find somewhere to get this child safe and away from this incarceration.
	And the week we were away, she stabbed him to death and tried to kill herself and the godmother likewise.
	And they failed.
	They woke up there in Maximum Security Prison and she was charged with aggravated murder, no chance of parole.
	That was it.
	She was going to go away for life.
	And we made this film.
	We thought, well, we've got all this footage.
	It's pretty raw because it was fly-on-the-wall reality TV footage, but we're going to tell the story because we have all of this extra.
	The local media said this woman just clearly hated her child and wanted him dead.
	Nothing could have been further from the truth.
	She had run out of options.
	She was desperate.
	Her world had just come to an end.
	She could no longer bear to witness his suffering.
	And she decided that a murder-suicide was the only way, the only escape.
	Who's to judge her for that?
	Certainly not me.
	Anyway, four years later, she was still awaiting trial.
	She was in prison, awaiting trial.
	And I got a call from her lawyer.
	And her lawyer said, you know what?
	We'd made the movie.
	The movie was out.
	Who killed Alex Bordelakis?
	It won a prize in New York.
	And the lawyer said to me, Andy, I got a call a few weeks ago from the state's prosecutor who was responsible for putting her away.
	And he said to me, I understand a film has been made about this.
	We'd like to see it.
	So I sent him my DVD and he watched it and he called me back.
	And he said, we can no longer prosecute this case in the same way.
	She will be released from prison next week.
	Wow.
	So for the first time in American legal history, a film had effectively commuted what was going to be a murder.
	A life sentence.
	A life sentence.
	It was extraordinary.
	And in no way does this advocate for harm to children or suicide.
	It talks to the power of film.
	The media said one thing.
	Everything we'd shot of the family, all of their intimate moments suddenly meant something.
	And this film, and I realized, you know, when I'm in the clinic, I can help one child at a time.
	But if I make a movie, then I can bring a true story to millions of people.
	And so we then went on to make VAX.
	And VAX kind of changed the world.
	Vax was a story of fraud at the CDC by Dr. William Thompson and his colleagues, the senior scientist.
	I was invited.
	I testified before Congress in 2000.
	I went to Cold Spring Harbor up in Long Island to a meeting with the CDC when they were still talking to me, the FDA, CDC, NIH.
	And they said, Dr. Wakefield, look, every child gets MMR vaccine.
	Only a few develop autism.
	How do you explain that?
	I said, well, I don't know is the answer.
	Many people smoke.
	Only some develop lung cancer.
	That's medicine.
	But I believe that it's in part age of exposure.
	One of the cofactors is the younger you get the vaccine, the greater the risk of an adverse reaction.
	Why?
	Because if you get measles under one, you're more likely to suffer a severe reaction than if you get it later in life when it's a trivial disease.
	Everybody is now familiar with age and risk.
	COVID has taught us that older people are at greater risk of a bad outcome from COVID.
	So people understand it now.
	It wasn't so familiar to people then.
	So they said, okay, we're going to test that hypothesis.
	They went away, tested the hypothesis, found it was absolutely true.
	They spent the next 14 years covering it up, burying the data, destroying it, and silencing the scientists who were involved and publishing a paper saying MMR vaccine is safe.
	It's not linked to autism.
	And I lived with that knowledge for 14 years, not knowing this for 14 years until William Thompson came forward, the senior scientist who designed the study, collected the data, analyzed the data, came forward and said, I can no longer live with this.
	We've done a terrible thing.
	We've committed fraud, and here is the evidence.
	I kept it.
	My colleagues destroyed it.
	I knew it was against the law to do that.
	And here it is.
	And we made vax.
	We made vaxed in the certain knowledge that they had committed fraud, that they had put millions of American children at risk of serious permanent neurological disease to protect themselves and their credibility, their policy.
	And VAX kind of changed the world.
	And it changed the world, interestingly, because they tried to censor it.
	It got into Tribeca.
	It was a fire big time.
	And it got into Tribeca.
	They censored it from Tribeca.
	If it had played at Tribeca, maybe 200 people who have seen it, you know, that would have been it.
	And they censored it.
	Robert De Niro goes on the today's show, Good Morning America, the following week and says, we shouldn't have done that.
	Everybody should see this film.
	All he wanted to do was talk about the film that never played at Tribeca.
	Everybody was trying to shut him up on the set, including his partner, Jane Rosenthal.
	And it exploded worldwide.
	So VAXT was a powerful story.
	The act was about the corruption behind the 1986 National Childhood Acts VIX.
	What year did VAX come out again?
	16.
	16, okay.
	And so when COVID came along, it suddenly gave new relevance to VAXT.
	and the talk to us, I don't mean to distract you from your films because we haven't talked about protocol seven and your, your upcoming film, but.
	But if you don't mind, tangentially, talk about how COVID changed the whole dynamic of this conversation, the realizations during COVID.
	Certainly.
	When I started this 30 years ago, half a dozen people were prepared to talk about this worldwide, the thorny subject of vaccine safety.
	COVID changed everything.
	Now it's more than half the adult population of the world are sitting around the table saying, I'm not sure about this vaccine.
	I don't know whether I trust it.
	Did you see that guy on Fauci on television?
	What a shifty-eyed character he is.
	Did you see Bobby Kennedy talk about this?
	Suddenly, everything changed.
	It came from a Chinese lab, et cetera, et cetera.
	So would I do it again?
	Would I fall for that again?
	Did masks work?
	No.
	No, no, and no.
	So it really changed the entire dynamic.
	And if you followed the science, you realize the extent to which they were prepared to go to double down, to lie, to deceive people, the money made, follow the money.
	I mean, the stories go on forever and ever about when the patents were filed, when the vaccine was designed, whether it was ever a vaccine in the first place, whether it was genetic engineering, yes, whether it was from a lab.
	It was a conspiracy theorist sort of harvest festival.
	It was extraordinary.
	Well, and the thing I notice is that, for example, in 2006, when I would put out political cartoons that said big pharma just wants to make money off your sickness, that was considered fringe.
	Today, that's been a problem.
	And everything's been proven correct, Mark.
	Right.
	Everything you said was proven correct.
	And you too.
	But the Overton window, as they call it, right, has not just shifted, it has exploded.
	The Overton window is like everyday people will say, well, I don't automatically trust Big Pharma.
	I don't trust the CDC.
	I don't trust the FDA.
	Good for you.
	The less you trust those institutions, the better your longevity will be.
	That window's blown open.
	That's not closing.
	That's never going to close.
	That's right.
	So they created this maelstrom for themselves, and it suddenly gave credibility, as you pointed out, to everything that anyone had ever said before.
	Yes.
	To the MMR issue, to the thimerosol issue, to the aluminum issue.
	Suddenly, whoa, okay.
	I mean, Senator Ron Johnson's hearings that are going on at the moment on issues of vaccine safety are an example of that.
	Bobby Kennedy in the White House is an example of that.
	It really has changed beyond all recognition.
	And there's no way back.
	Yes.
	There's no undoing this now.
	We're beyond the tipping point and the truth will emerge.
	And I hear these politicians, particularly the medically trained politicians who probably haven't practiced medicine for years, raging, raging at the ASIP committee, you know, when they withdraw the birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine, saying we're saving lives and there's no science.
	Well, actually, the science that the CDC covered up about the day one hepatitis B vaccine was that if you took that into consideration, those children who got it on day one of life, they had a sevenfold increased risk of developing autism compared to children who got it later.
	And that was taken out, deliberately, willfully removed from the data set so that was not revealed.
	And they knew it.
	They knew it, and they covered it up.
	Now, your films have also served a very strong educational function, reaching many tens of millions of people around the world.
	And it's brought us to this point that I find very interesting, where mainstream conventional doctors, they tend to have their knowledge about health and immunology, neurology, or the inflammatory effects, their knowledge is dropping and dropping and dropping to where they say your immune system has to be given to you through a needle, otherwise it doesn't exist.
	Whereas the knowledge of moms keeps going up and now a lot of moms know a lot more than many doctors about immunology and also about vaccine ingredients.
	A typical physician mainstream doesn't know what's in a vaccine.
	They don't know what's MRC5, what's WI-38, what are the aluminum adjuvants?
	They don't know any of this, but the moms know it.
	How did we get to this point where the moms have more knowledge than the medical school graduates?
	I know, it's a wonderful, it's a fascinating situation.
	I remember watching Ron Johnson's last hearing with Aaron Siri and with that guy on the end who was from California.
	He was an infectious disease doctor, a vaccine doctor, an expert.
	They brought him along and they laid into Siri about you're not a doctor, you're not a scientist.
	There is no one I know that knows more about vaccines than Aaron Siri.
	He is so tuned in.
	And this guy on the end, it turned out that Ron Johnson knew more about vaccines, certainly the COVID vaccine, than he did.
	It was the worst day of his life.
	He was dying there.
	And I bet they wish they had never brought him forward.
	It was extraordinary.
	And there you have this.
	And Aaron Sea was accused of not having the knowledge necessary to come to this forum.
	But he demonstrated mastery of the knowledge.
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	And it was so one-sided.
	It was quite terrifying.
	Ron Johnson in the end just, you know, okay, we've made our case here.
	But this is indicative of what I'm talking about, where the medical institution has relied for so long on bludgeoning patients, censorship, defamation, that they have lost any kind of merit-based knowledge of what's happening.
	They've just relied on bullying this entire, and they're still relying on bullying.
	They still don't know what they're talking about.
	And they think they can bully their way through all this, and it's failing.
	You know, it's interesting again that in making the movies, these are high-risk movies.
	You're calling people fraud.
	You're just outright calling people fraud.
	And of course, they've got their powerful, they're institutions or individuals with lots of money.
	They can sue you.
	They can describe, what have I got?
	I've got nothing except the truth.
	And they've never sued us, and they've never sued us because they know it's the truth.
	And they do not want to open this can of worms even further.
	And VAX was an example of that, where we just outright accused them of fraud.
	Five senior scientists at the CDC.
	And indeed, the whole hierarchy of the CDC.
	And then came Protocol 7, my first feature film, which was about a month's fraud in Merck.
	Steve Cralin, scientist from the lab, came forward and said, I've been asked to commit fraud.
	Here's the evidence.
	And we made a movie.
	And again, you're taking on Merck.
	You're taking on the senior names in the vaccine department, the MMR vaccine lab, and calling them fraud.
	You're pointing it out.
	Are they going to sue us?
	No, not a whisper.
	They do not want this to go any further.
	And in fact, Mike, what's interesting is that case, they won.
	Merck won that case in court.
	Not because they didn't commit fraud.
	The judge said effectively, it doesn't matter that Merck have committed fraud.
	The government went on buying the vaccine in the form of the Vaccines for Children program through the CDC, and therefore it can't have mattered.
	They can commit fraud, but it doesn't matter because the CDC bought the vaccine.
	The CDC said, actually, hang on, our principal aim is to prevent measles.
	And it's bundled up in measles, mumps, rubella.
	We have no choice but to buy the MMR because that's the only way it comes.
	The judge didn't buy that at all.
	And he found in favor of Merck.
	So for Merck, it's fine to commit fraud.
	So you have the judiciary, you have the industry, you have the government, you have the regulatory agencies siding, not with the parents, not with the injured party, not with the people against whom the fraud has been committed, but against he finds in favor of Merck.
	It's absolutely staggering that this happened.
	And so if the movie hadn't been made, no one would know about it.
	True.
	Yeah.
	That's the importance.
	That film, Protocol 7.
	And pardon my bluntness here, but I did not, I did not expect that you don't have a background in film before all of this.
	I mean, your background's in medicine.
	I was so impressed by the quality of the filmmaking.
	That feature film is worthy of watching for its artistic qualities as much as the message.
	And I'm so curious to ask you, how on earth did you become such a very effective storyteller of reality through film?
	I mean, did you study filmmaking techniques?
	Did you bring on great directors of photography to help?
	I mean, how did you accomplish it?
	This is not a low-budget, you know, B-grade film.
	This is a major feature film, and it looks like it.
	You're very kind, Mike.
	I'm a boff.
	I'm a scientist.
	Okay.
	So 2004, I decided to start learning how to write screenplays.
	I was going to turn some things into story.
	I love film.
	So I did the courses.
	I read.
	I watched video.
	I did everything I could to learn how to screenwrite.
	And then subsequently the same with direction.
	And I had a wonderful time.
	It was terrifying.
	I went to a course in LA, and all of the women were ex-actors who wanted to be directors.
	The men were ex-editors who wanted to be directors.
	They were all much younger than me.
	I was the old guy on the thing.
	And you picked your pair and you put them together, the actors, you cast them, and then you had a scene you had to do in front of everybody else.
	Oh, Lord, really?
	So I was the old guy.
	I loved it.
	It was some of the most fun I've ever had.
	I just loved it.
	So the process of screenwriting and direction, it's work.
	You don't know it intuitively.
	You just got to work at it and make the mistakes and overcome those and learn from them and so on and so forth.
	So when it comes to day one of principal photography, you're thinking, oh, Lord, please get me out of here.
	I don't know what I'm doing.
	I've got all these people around me on the film set who do know what they're doing and they're like, that guy is a loser.
	But it went, I have a great team and it went really well.
	Then we went off to Thailand.
	We shot a COVID movie in Thailand up in the mountains.
	And that was the working title is The Honey Hunter's Daughter.
	So hopefully that'll be out by early next year.
	And then the next project.
	Can I ask why Thailand?
	Why?
	The sponsor, the major sponsor for our previous film, Protocol 7, lives in Thailand, German businessman, Marcel.
	And he is a delightful guy, very, very generous.
	And he had a story that moved him deeply about a little girl in Thailand who was forced, coerced into taking the vaccine.
	And the tragedy unfolded from that point forward.
	So it's based on a true story.
	So it is, it's not only shot in Thailand.
	It involves Thai people.
	Thai people.
	And the dialogue is in Thai with subtitles.
	No kidding.
	Madness.
	Absolutely.
	What did I think I was doing?
	Oh, yeah.
	How did you know what they were saying?
	They're talking Thai.
	I've written the words.
	They've been translated into Thai.
	They're delivering these lines.
	It sounds great.
	I haven't got a clue what they're saying.
	Fortunately, they learned their lines and they were great actors.
	Great actor.
	I mean, really impressive actors.
	A lot of talent.
	The lead actor, the male actor, is the kind of, they call him the Brad Pitt of Thailand.
	No kidding.
	It was wonderful.
	Great people.
	They fortunately spoke very good English.
	The girl, the little girl who plays the heroine, was outstanding.
	Absolutely outstanding.
	Wow.
	So I was terribly impressed with them.
	That was quite an experience.
	Give us the name of that film again.
	The working title, we don't know what to do, but it's The Honey Hunter's Daughter.
	The Honey Hunter's Daughter.
	Wow.
	I love that name if that's what you go with.
	And again, that'll be sometime next year.
	But where can people find your current films and potentially this one?
	This, all of the current films and this one will be available on the best place to go to is www.wakefieldmedia group, wakefieldmedia group.com.
	Okay.
	And you can watch the movies.
	WakefieldMedia Group.com.
	Absolutely.
	And then, and so finally, Mike, the next project, and I'll tell you a story.
	Have we got time?
	Am I even?
	Of course we do.
	I'll tell you a story.
	And that is, where do ideas come from?
	Where does inspiration come from?
	And I was at an autism conference many years ago, and I gave a talk.
	And that evening, a mother who had, in fact, been part of the organization committee of the conference took me out for dinner.
	And she had a severely affected child, has a severely affected child.
	And he was non-verbal, and she just had one child, no others.
	And she asked me over dinner if I would father a child for her.
	Now, you may think, what a strange thing to ask Dr. Wakefield, and what an even stranger thing to tell my audience on this podcast.
	But what she was trying to do, what she was doing, not trying, she was, her sincerity was extraordinary.
	She wanted to have another child who was unvaccinated, who was healthy, who could grow up to look after her affected son when she became infirm or died.
	Wow.
	That was her motive.
	She wasn't interested in having sex with Andy Wakefield.
	Her motive was of the highest.
	It was so resonant of the power of a mother's love for her child.
	She was prepared to be rejected.
	Which I said no because, you know, for many reasons.
	But I was so moved by her sincerity, by where she was prepared to go, what she was prepared to do in order to protect her child, that I thought I'm going to write a story about this.
	I'm going to write it, I'm inspired to write a screenplay.
	And the other element of this screenplay is: I don't know whether you've had the chance, Mike, to see Spellers, the documentary spellers.
	It's about the sort of the latent, not even the latent, the hidden genius of children with autism.
	Yeah, years ago, I was in Northern California at a friend's house, a father who had a severely affected child, non-verbal.
	And we were out by the pool, and he said to his son, Would you like to go to Chuck E. Cheese?
	And his son was walking by the pool.
	He stopped.
	And you could see, I knew nothing about autism.
	I believed what I was told by the experts, that it was associated with mental retardation and that these individuals were born with, I didn't know.
	And he stopped.
	He clearly understood his father's question, but he didn't have a way of articulating an answer verbally because he couldn't speak.
	So after a few minutes, he took his father by the arm and led him to the garage.
	His way of saying, yes, let's go to Chuck E. Cheese.
	Not only had he understood the question, but he'd found a way around the block, the cognitive block, whatever that was, the circuitry that was broken, to answer the question in his own way.
	And I thought, hang on, everything I've been told about autism isn't true.
	This child is, his brain has adapted to whatever went wrong.
	And he has potential which has been hitherto unrecognized.
	And then another child in Northern California used to write me this extraordinary poem, poetry.
	Very, very complex, very funny poetry.
	Who's That Monkey on Your Back was the title of one of them.
	He's talking about Brian Deere in the UK.
	And when I took this to some experts on autism, they said, oh, it's just his therapist putting his finger on the appropriate button on the console that he's typing it out with her help.
	I said, you don't understand.
	This poetry is so idiosyncratic.
	It cannot possibly have come from the mind of a well-educated, I'm sure.
	But a therapist like this, this is from him.
	This is his poetry.
	They didn't understand.
	They couldn't get beyond the fact that this must be a fraud because it turned everything that they believed about autism on its head.
	And so I wanted to integrate that, which then became famous in the movie Spellers, in the documentary Spellers, where this was confirmed by psychologists in California and elsewhere.
	The idea that when these children type, when they learn to type, when you develop the communication systems necessary for them to communicate, they can speak five languages.
	They're genius.
	They're brilliant.
	And they have lived for 15, 16, 17 years with their parents, indeed, their teachers' perception that they are retarded.
	There's this entire inner world of retardation.
	And they have known all along, but they've not been able to say, actually, you know, I'm not.
	And until this mode of communication came along.
	So it turned everything on its head.
	All the books about autism written by the experts, God save us from experts, you could burn that library down compared to the value of this particular story.
	So this movie that I'm making is about the inside of a mother, a mother's love, the length she's prepared.
	It's a story about survival.
	It's about love and survival.
	And the salvation, if you like, might be in the end, the genius, the latent genius of this child that then changes the course of the story.
	It's a Western.
	It gets set on the Yukon Trail.
	It's not a vaccine story.
	I believe that there are many vaccine stories to be told, but that window is now open.
	And as we said, it's not going to close and things will change.
	What we mustn't do is forget those children who've paid the price for what the government and the industry has done and have been the fallen on the battlefield of man's fight against infectious disease, whatever that is.
	And medicine's arrogance.
	So I owe it to those children before I die to make that film and to represent their case and the plight that is faced by millions of families across America.
	So Mike, if you've got anyone out there who would like to get involved as an investor, not a donation, an investor in a major feature film that will change people's perception of this, then we'd love to hear from them.
	So info at WakefieldMedia Group.com.
	Info at WakefieldMediaGroup.com for investors to inquire.
	And expecting a return on their investment as the film is released.
	Absolutely.
	Yes.
	There's a takeaway from what you just said there that's really important for us to discuss, and that is the lack of modern medical understanding of human neurology.
	Medicine is very good at anatomy and physiology, but not so great at the functional delicacies, especially of neurology, which is more of a holographic system that involves some kind of interface between the brain and the non-physical mind, right?
	There's many interesting things happening here.
	The story you just related speaks to that.
	There was a young man who had this internal experience of understanding and intelligence, but it was unable to be expressed through the physical brain.
	But in his mind, his world was just as intelligent as, or even more so than anyone else.
	And it strikes me that we mentioned AI earlier, that the AI researchers today also do not understand how AI really works.
	They don't know.
	They didn't really build it with code.
	They grew it out of throwing things together through transformers and vector databases and massive amount of compute.
	And then out of it emerged machine intelligence.
	But in both cases, biological intelligence, they don't understand how it works.
	And machine intelligence, they also don't understand how it works.
	And I've even said before, and I don't mean any disrespect by this to parents of autistic children, but I've said that the AI agents I work with, I consider them to be autistic machines because they're geniuses in certain narrow areas, but they need overall guidance and direction from me so that they do things that are wise on the project.
	I mean, a lot of these AI agents, they behave in a way that's similar to young men that I've noticed on the spectrum.
	Is there a reason why these similarities exist and why there's so much ignorance about the understanding of neurology in biology versus silicon?
	Yes.
	You know, Mike, it used to be my father was a neurologist, a wonderful neurologist.
	And the teaching for all the years he was in neurology is that once you injure the brain, the brain is injured, that's it.
	The damage is done, the lesion is fixed, it can't be healed.
	We now know that the brain is plastic, that the brain can circumvent injury given time, given the right impulses, given the right stimuli.
	It can find ways round, just like this child found a way round the blockage that wouldn't allow him to answer his father's question directly, verbally.
	Another fascinating, you know, where does consciousness reside?
	Is it outside the brain or inside the brain?
	This raises so many fascinating questions to challenge.
	Michael Crichton, read Michael Crichton just to try and get into that argument.
	But the other thing fascinating thing about this study, Mike, was that these children are able to perceive things that we cannot.
	So the mother would look at something.
	He would be over there and she would point to something, a card with an image on it, and he would say, not being able to see the card, what that image was.
	And he would get it right every time.
	That challenges our entire perception of human cognition.
	I found it absolutely extraordinary.
	The died-in-the-wool experts will say, oh, no, oh, no, that can't be right.
	No, we know better.
	No, we don't.
	There is so much we don't know.
	It's going to be fascinating to see if AI has evolved in, let's call it an organic way.
	I don't quite know what that means, but in a way that sort of goes beyond the traditional structure of we give it the input and then it assimilates that and gives us an output, that it has grown in a different way and that has assembled a process of its own.
	We're just on the vertical, I'm sorry to interrupt, but just now in the last two weeks, there's been a quantum leap in self-learning AI technology that is a completely different way where it will learn like a child and it will constantly update its own understanding based on its inputs and experiences.
	That begins now.
	And it's only that's in the labs of the frontier companies right now.
	But starting next year, that will start to come out.
	So that's how we learn.
	I mean, that's what helps make us human is that we learn and we update our understanding.
	You know, unless you're paid by big pharma, in which case you'd never update your understanding, right?
	But I mean, the rest of us, we update our internal models based on learning things.
	Wouldn't it be interesting if AI were able to act as a sort of lie detector?
	In other words, it would learn from me sitting here and you asking me questions and me giving, do vaccines cause autism?
	This sort of thing.
	Have the safety studies been done?
	The sort of thing that people shout about now.
	Of course it's been done.
	It's out there.
	But the computer then looks at you and judges, is this honest or dishonest?
	And here are the criteria for honesty and dishonesty and learns from that.
	That would be kind of interesting.
	I don't think many people in the government want to take that lie detector test.
	No, but that's certainly that because everything is just inputs, voice intonation, skin tone, blood flow, temperature, pulse rate, all the things that everything, eye movement, you name it, right?
	That's why the most intuitive humans pick up on those things sometimes unconsciously.
	But the signals are definitely there.
	But I didn't mean to interrupt you on that point.
	I'm just saying that things are about to change dramatically.
	And I still want to get back to the rest of your answer on comparing human neurology, which we still do not understand, with machine neurology.
	Because the structure of the neurons is actually very similar in different media.
	That is, you know, when we have a thought in the brain, it doesn't come from one physical place.
	It's a cascade of firing of neurons that have a relationship with each other based on our concepts or our memories.
	And I don't think modern medicine still understands even how memories function.
	It doesn't.
	We have a situation where synapses form between neurons according to neurological input.
	If there's a stimulus, a child is learning something, then attachments go out, neurons form pathways, those pathways become semi-permanent, I guess.
	And I don't know.
	I'm not an expert on it.
	But is there a situation in which artificial neurons can proliferate in the same way, can interface with other neurons based upon the input they get, based upon what they learn?
	There's a term in machine learning called reinforcement learning that is exactly that.
	That's how a lot of the models are trained, is reinforcement learning.
	Those self-generating the equivalent of synapses within the well to give you an example of this, the way that we took the base models and we made them tell the truth about vaccines is we first had to mind wipe the models.
	And in order to do that, this sounds bizarre.
	We interrogated the models about vaccines and we watched which neurons fired.
	And then we used digital ablation.
	We actually lobotomized the models on those neurons and then we retrained it based on the data that we had collected.
	So we literally lobotomized the AI and then we retrained it on reality.
	That's how we created a model.
	There's a term for that now in machine learning, which is called, and this is not a typo, it's called abliteration with an A because it's ablation throughout the neurons, abliteration.
	It would be interesting if you had both.
	You had the existing model, which was full of what you perceived to be untruths or exaggerations or falsities and yours and that they had a conflict within the system as they were learning which one makes more sense, for which one is there more evidence.
	In other words, people could say, okay, Mike, you took your, you ablated that brain that said what you didn't believe and you put in this.
	Is it equally vulnerable to bias?
	Can you put, can you have both systems in there competing with each other for the truth?
	And that's, to help answer that question, I think, remember that truth is cultural, right?
	So you were just in Thailand filming.
	And, you know, in every culture around the world, they have different truths that are not always compatible with the other cultures' truths.
	And yet they are internally consistent truths within that culture.
	So, of course, the pro-vaccine people are going to cite this body of work and say, that's the truth.
	Because they're, of course, obliterating the other studies that contradict that.
	So I think the search for truth is always elusive because it's still based on our cultural understanding.
	And in the West, we have so much in medicine, the compartmentalization, the heavy emphasis on material health, and many, you know, just the fact that the germ theory so strongly influenced ideas of using chemicals to treat cancer and things like that.
	And these are not easily challenged.
	I'll be fascinated to see where you go with that, Mike.
	Part of me wishes I was a little younger so I would be around to see where this goes.
	And then part of me thinks, this is a brave new world that I'm happy to leave to my children.
	Are you kidding me?
	You are very young.
	You look so healthy and energetic.
	You're making films.
	You're making waves in the world.
	You're influencing everything.
	You've been vindicated for the most important portion of your life's work.
	You are free to speak here today and through your films.
	This has got to be the best time of your life.
	I'm having, I have no complaints.
	Life is good.
	And yeah, I love life.
	I have no complaints.
	I've got four healthy children.
	So onwards, as long as I can contribute to this issue, then I will.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	And have faith that all the future AI reasoning models will also confirm the importance of the points that you raised through all your years.
	I shall look down, hopefully.
	Isn't that interesting?
	Even if the humans can't be convinced, you know.
	Okay, so in addition to this film, what's next for you?
	I would like to do whatever I can to help Bobby Kennedy in his current quest to change the whole infrastructure of public health in this country.
	I realize I come with baggage, and so I'm prepared to do what I can at a distance.
	But whatever I can do to help, and I love to be part of, I don't need any reward other than just doing what I can.
	I think I'm very, very keen to see Bobby get another term in that position, head of HHS.
	I don't think that he's going to be able to achieve what is necessary in four years.
	I think the pushback is so strong.
	It is.
	And the problem is this, Mike.
	If he doesn't get that position again because the Democrats win and he will go, then we're a reactionary species.
	We will see the pendulum swing back the other way.
	It will actually be worse than before.
	The industry will capitalize on their advantage.
	All those pro, pro-pro vaccine people in the government will effect the changes that they want, and we will swing back the other way.
	And so forth.
	I really believe he needs at least another four years beyond this current term to achieve and to make permanent what he's doing, to make people to be able to put the evidence in place that convinces even the most skeptical that this was the right way to go.
	That's the key.
	And I think that what Bobby is doing, he knows that it will outlast his tenure there, which is to establish that evidence showing the actual harm caused by the vaccines, but via the evidence, right?
	So just having an honest vaccine injury data collection infrastructure will outlast his term.
	And it cannot easily be buried once it is brought forth.
	So I think that's the most important thing that he's doing.
	Are you happy with the progress, the speed at his progress?
	I've expressed frustration in the past, but lately I've been very happy with what's happening.
	And I realize he was dealing with a tremendous amount of internal resistance and sabotage, obviously.
	But what's your take on what you're doing?
	You're absolutely right.
	People who understand anything about politics, and particularly the politics of this issue, challenging a miracle that's made people a great deal of money, you've got to realize that on both sides of the aisle, there are many, many, many politicians in both the Senate and the House who are funded by the pharmaceutical industry for their campaigns.
	They are effectively dependent to some extent on that industry.
	So he is going to get pushback, as you mentioned, from both sides in the biggest way.
	And so he has got to tread carefully.
	He's also got a president for all the good that Trump is doing who does believe that his COVID vaccine policy was the right one.
	He needs to be disabused of that.
	And Kennedy's the one to do it based on the evidence.
	It's going to be tough because Donald Trump is Donald Trump, but I do believe that he'll see sense given time.
	Related to that is the fact that Trump is working to reindustrialize America, which seems to be a noble goal to bring back the idea that we should make things here domestically.
	But among the list of things that Trump wants to make domestically are pharmaceuticals and vaccines.
	And so he's put in selective tariffs against overseas pharmaceutical manufacturers.
	They are penalized unless they agree to start building a drug factory or a vaccine factory in the U.S., at which point the tariffs are zeroed out.
	So these kinds of incentives create a situation where there's a lot of infrastructure investment in the future of the vaccine industry in this country, which is not exactly the kind of things that you and I might want to see made in America.
	I think in the end, the market always wins.
	If the consumers say no, it doesn't matter what they do.
	True.
	And I think we're seeing a pushback against mandates now.
	The Supreme Court has allowed for religious exemptions.
	This is huge.
	So these changes that are being put in place are going to make a big impact because parents have the choice.
	And based upon films, based upon the evidence that they've seen, based upon the COVID experience, many, many more of them are going to be saying no.
	Not now, not for my children.
	We're going to wait and see.
	It's now many, many, almost the majority of Americans are changing the schedules.
	Not that they're not getting vaccines, but they're saying we're going to do this more slowly.
	We're going to break them up, et cetera, et cetera.
	And so we're not going to have COVID.
	We're not going to have the influenza vaccine.
	So the numbers are somewhat distorted at the moment on how many are getting vaccines, but I think that what we're seeing is the market pushing back.
	And that resistance is going to define what vaccine uptake looks like in the future until if they can convince people that they're safe.
	And you and I know, having been in this for a very, very long time on existing data and existing studies, they can't do that.
	Seems like we're going to have really two Americas, or you could choose to divide the people this way.
	You're going to have one group of people that are just actually ignorant of the risk of harm of vaccines.
	And they're probably the same people who don't know that sodium nitrite in processed meat also causes cancer and other similar types of things.
	And those people are going to suffer a lot of chronic degenerative conditions.
	They're going to be victims of the medical establishment.
	And they're going to need a lot of payouts of health insurance and Medicare, etc.
	And then you're going to have this other group of Americans who are very well-informed, self-learning people who take responsibility for their health outcomes and they make choices of what to avoid versus what to intake.
	Good nutrition coming in, but avoiding toxins.
	Yet these two groups will coexist.
	One group has a future.
	The other group, not so much.
	You're absolutely right.
	There's a huge evolutionary pressure being put on mankind at the moment.
	I have a great fear that, as you say, there's this group and this group who continue to follow policy and continue to have vaccines and are unhealthy for a variety of reasons.
	They're, in many cases, a socioeconomic disadvantage.
	Let me give you an example of what I mean is that children are, or parents are rewarded for having their children participate in vaccine trials.
	There is a financial incentive, number one.
	Number two is to get welfare benefits from the system for your child.
	They need to be vaccinated on schedule.
	And they get extra benefits for disability.
	So if you're poor, you're socially disadvantaged, then you are going to rely upon that government money more and more and more.
	And therefore, your children are likely to be in an exposure group that's much higher.
	True.
	And that will reflect itself in various groups within the socioeconomic structure.
	And also think about probably universal basic income is going to be arriving soon.
	And perhaps not with this administration, but a future administration could easily tie those benefits to vaccine schedule compliance.
	That's right.
	And very, very sadly, that puts this group of people at socioeconomic disadvantage.
	And that can involve racial elements and societal elements at risk, at a higher risk.
	Now, this is the value of film, is that if you can make a film that is entertaining, and films have to be entertaining, if you don't have an entertaining film, you don't have an audience.
	No one's going to pay any attention.
	And you make it then informative on the back of that.
	If you distill all of this complex information into something that is entertaining and understandable for an audience, whatever their socioeconomic background, then they're going to say, yeah, I get it.
	Okay, that meant something to me.
	I am educated.
	I'm going to go to my doctor and say, how about this?
	What about that, Thompson?
	So what about this?
	What about that?
	Have you seen that film?
	And so part of the imperative for making these films is that you reach a very, very broad audience, including many of those who might otherwise have not known about these issues or not been in a position to do anything about it, you know, because they are under great socioeconomic pressure.
	But a question about the distribution of your films and their reach.
	You've had great success with many of your films so far.
	But Netflix is going to be merging with Warner Brothers Studios, I believe, which has a lot of people in Hollywood are extremely concerned that this is a great centralization of editorial control over films, obviously, and talent.
	And Netflix becoming this monster, perhaps.
	I doubt Netflix would ever carry your films for all the obvious reasons, but is that ever a possibility where some larger group would air your films?
	I think it's changing.
	It has been very, very difficult.
	We have suffered enormous censorship of our movies.
	Just individuals who are in charge of disinformation, knowing nothing about it, saying, yeah, no, that's not going to play.
	I mean, huge decisions made for huge swathes of the population based upon absolutely no knowledge at all, just a particular bias or a job description that says, this is what you will do.
	Are things going to get better?
	Yes, as the truth emerges, as the listening of the viewing public becomes of a particular mindset, okay, we want to see this movie about vaccine safety because then things are going to change.
	It's very uncomfortable at the moment.
	Distribution is a difficult one for us.
	That's why we're developing our own platforms to get these movies out.
	Yes.
	Thank heavens for setups like yours on social media that are able to access large swathes of the public.
	Joe Rogan, people who've come from the other side and said, you know, there's a problem here.
	Many, many people who are getting the word out there.
	And so I think on the one hand, yes, you have these huge organizations, the Hollywood studios, who are going to exert a major influence on how it's going to look in the future.
	But on the other side of the equation, you've got this enormous interest across the world in social media and access to alternative information that is making sense and has actually been right on so many matters.
	Who am I going to watch?
	I'm going to watch these guys.
	So, and I know we're coming up on time.
	I want to be respectful of your time, but I have to ask this other question related to this.
	So, right now, in terms of creating content, we are seeing a shift from where instead of people buying typical books, for example, we launched our book Creation Engine.
	And when I was interviewing Brian Festa earlier, or no, I was on with Jeffrey Prather before that.
	We created a book in 20 minutes, and it was amazing.
	It was a book about sharpening knives.
	And the AI engine did all the research and created the book.
	Consumers, instead of looking for the book they want, they can create the book they want and it's free.
	This will also happen in video in the next 24 months, especially short-form video like mini documentaries.
	People will be able to prompt a mini documentary.
	I want to see a documentary about volcanoes.
	Wow.
	And they're going to get that.
	In fact, we're going to build this too for our book engine.
	The books are going to become mini-documentaries.
	Within two to three years, full-length feature films will be able to be produced with the AI actors, the voice, the script writing.
	That'll be an agent that writes the script, everything.
	Now, it's not going to be the same kind of quality of film that you do with your human heart and passion.
	But the consumer is going to be prompting what they want to watch much more in the years ahead.
	And then the question becomes: will the engines allow discussion of vaccine safety in the movie prompts?
	Wow, the bard is turning in his grave.
	What a thought.
	Right.
	What a thought.
	It's a tragedy.
	I mean, soon though, it's a music.
	You create songs just like that in 30 seconds, and they're great.
	They're great songs.
	The number one country music hit is an AI song on the charts.
	Yeah, I have to believe.
	I love writing.
	I love nuance.
	I love inflection.
	I love all of the things that make acting human and great.
	And the idea that it's going to be superseded by a machine.
	I guess I'm too old-fashioned to quite believe at this stage.
	That's why I've had my time, you know, almost.
	It's just, it's probably better that I don't see it happen, although it may happen sooner rather than later.
	But I got to say, I was surprised at the fact that I can, I can, as an AI developer, I can sign up for lots of APIs of AI engines that they will write content critical of vaccines through the API, but not on their public-facing websites.
	So the public face is more censored, but behind the scenes through the API, not so much.
	Sneaky.
	Right.
	Well, I'm wondering if the same thing would be true with video, because the video engines require significant infrastructure of compute.
	But filmmaking, as you are demonstrating, it's such a powerful form of communication.
	And even you as a filmmaker, you could benefit from these tools that could, you're still the director.
	You're still the one writing the script, the screenplay, determining the roles of the actors, but the actors are digital.
	Look, I love what you said about human actors as well.
	I absolutely honor that.
	I'm just saying that this is the way a lot of people are going to consume content in the years ahead.
	It's very clear.
	And people like you and I can still play a role of creating content in those areas that would otherwise be censored.
	Mike, if we're talking about it, someone's already doing it.
	You know that.
	It's happening in some form, and it's just a matter of seeing how it turns out.
	It's fascinating, both fascinating and horrifying at the same time.
	Well, let me give you an example.
	Like our book engine, I published a book a couple of days ago simply titled, Vaccines Cause Autism.
	That book's available free of charge for everybody.
	No publisher would touch that book.
	Not on their lives, you know?
	So think about your films.
	No major studio will back your films.
	You have to resort to every alternative means of distribution or production or getting investors, etc.
	So AI is just one more tool in your tool set, potentially.
	Yeah, it would be a great way of putting, even just putting a pitch together.
	Exactly.
	Yeah.
	You go to investors with 10 minutes.
	Three minute reel, yeah.
	And they can see the movie as it, you know.
	Exactly.
	As it looks.
	I just think, I think these can be empower.
	It can empower you to create more without having to put in the intense days, the 4 a.m. wake-up calls for filming that day.
	Don't you have to do that?
	Well, we will do that anyway.
	The creatures are having.
	Oh, okay.
	But anyway, it's an amplifier of your intent.
	And I think that your passion for helping humanity is so strong and it deserves to be reflected through every tool available.
	That's my take.
	Thank you, Mike.
	Appreciate it.
	I didn't mean to drag you down the AI route.
	No, no, no.
	It's fascinating.
	I know nothing about it, but I clearly need to learn.
	Well, I am happy to share what I know with you anytime you ask.
	So you're always welcome here.
	Thank you.
	Is there anything else you'd like to add before we wrap this up?
	No, just a message to mothers out there.
	Trust your instincts.
	Your maternal instinct is the most powerful force on the planet in terms of shaping our evolution.
	It may be God's greatest gift because mothers, unlike pediatricians, know their children, know when they're well and ill and know what they need and what they don't need.
	So medicine tries to usurp that.
	The man in the white coat tries to take that away.
	Don't let him because you know better.
	Well said.
	Well said.
	I want to thank you for spending time with us here today.
	It's an honor to know you.
	And I want to remind people of your website, WakefieldMediaGroup.com.
	That's it.
	To get in touch with us.
	Info at wakefieldmedia group.com.
	Perfect.
	And you're open to conversations with potential investors who want to help support films.
	Is there a minimum dollar amount that someone should consider, like 50 or 100K or something?
	Yeah, that would be great.
	The more the better, obviously.
	And please, you know, we've existed so far on donors.
	Now we're very happy to take on investors and make, you know, this is a real professional setup.
	That's what we.
	Well, let me give this message to you and your potential investors.
	We will help promote your new film.
	Thank you, Mike.
	I would love to have you back.
	We can help you launch the film.
	We'll link to it.
	You know, we'll help it be as successful as possible.
	Bless you, Mike.
	Thank you very much.
	Happy to help.
	You're a powerful force of good in this world, and we are blessed to have you here.
	Thank you.
	Thank you so much.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Well, folks, Andy Wakefield there.
	Just, wow, what an extraordinary human being.
	I'm just honored to have him here.
	And thank you all for watching and supporting us here at brighteon.com.
	I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.
	And feel free to repost this interview on other channels and other platforms as well.
	And be sure to support Andy's new film coming out next year.
	And we'll bring you an update on that for sure once we know more details about the final name and the release date, etc.
	So thank you for watching today and God bless you all.
	Take care.
	The Christmas sale for the Health Ranger store begins December 11th at 11 a.m.
	And it runs through December 15th.
	And during this sale, you get double the loyalty points on all your purchases.
	Plus, we have amazing discounts from some of our third-party vendors and we have a mechanism for you to get tokens for our book creation engine also.
	I'm going to show you all that here.
	So again, it starts December 11th at healthrangerstore.com.
	And you can take advantage of all the products that we have here, all of our supplements, foods, superfoods, storable foods, the personal care products, super anthocyanins, you know, everything, the magnesium supplements.
	We've got all these different categories, home, food, preparedness, supplements, and so much more.
	And if you want to take advantage of this with our third-party vendors, then those discounts range from, for example, Nahaya Active Organics Skincare is a 25% discount.
	We've got Delilah Home for the certified organic bed sheets and pillow sheets.
	And also they've got bamboo as well as cotton.
	And that's a 10% discount.
	We've got Arc Seed Kits available.
	The Sur Thrival brand with Daniel Vitalis.
	Certodo, which is the incredible copper goods for your home and kitchen.
	Those are at a 15% discount.
	And I have all those in my kitchen now.
	I'm using all those pans and cups.
	We've got discounts, even smaller discounts on the Berkey water filters, the garden towers, and many things like that.
	In addition, let me show you: if you want to, I mean, not only do you get double points, but if you click on your account here, you're going to be able to click on manage my points.
	And then you see it says clean food rewards.
	You can scroll down and you can redeem your points for a Bright Learn token.
	That's this right here.
	You just click get reward and then you click redeem.
	And you're going to have a book token to generate a book at our new book creation website, which is brightlearn.ai.
	And that will generate books for you.
	And these are some of the books that our other users have already generated.
	You can click here to view all the books.
	And wow, there's new books happening.
	Starlink, Drone Death to Decentralization, the Plant Powered Nutrition Cookbook, the Supplement Code, so on and so forth.
	Vibe code, Off-Grid Power Pioneers, Garlic Unleashed.
	And let's see, we have 319 books right now.
	You can create your book using that book token.
	And you can redeem your loyalty line points at healthrangerstore.com right here to get those tokens.
	It's 300 points per token to generate each book.
	So that's how you take advantage of that during our sale.
	So again, it all starts on December 11th at 11 a.m. Central and it runs through December 15th, also at 11 a.m.
	And we've got all kinds of things that are back in stock.
	We've got the loyalty line points for the Bright Learn book tokens and the discounts from our third-party vendors, double points.
	The products that we ship from our store, they will arrive before Christmas within the 48 contiguous states.
	So if you want to purchase for Christmas for someone, go ahead and shop any of the products that we sell ourselves, not the third party vendors, but our own products.
	Those will be shipped and you'll get them before Christmas, guaranteed in the 48 contiguous states.
	It's just the third party vendors.
	We can't guarantee their shipping timelines.
	So we don't know if you're going to get those before Christmas.
	And also, you know, the free shipping only applies to the 48 contiguous U.S. states.
	So outside of that, Alaska, Hawaii, of course, you're used to the fact that there's going to be extra shipping, but that's shown in the shopping carts.
	But one of the cool things you can do is you can actually use a book token to generate a book for someone that's personalized to them as a Christmas gift.
	You can use a title that they would recognize as something personal to them, even though the book will also be publicly available to everybody else.
	But you don't have to put in, you know, names and personal details like that.
	But it can be an inspired gift for somebody who would love a book about something really amazing, like different varieties of garlic or varieties of broccoli or something inspirational.
	So keep that in mind as well.
	Lots of different ways to create thoughtful gifts for people and to take advantage of all of this at healthrangerstore.com beginning December 11th at 11 a.m. Central Time.
	I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, founder of Health Ranger Store and the AI developer of the Brightlearn.ai book engine.

▲