Dr. Paul 0:00
Dr. Paul Welcome to against the wind doctors in science under fire. This is episode 21. Today I interviewed Jack Lyons Wheeler. He is the author of the environmental causes of autism. He is a co author on so many articles and work that I've done with him and a prolific writer and educator. Today, I interview him about fluoride. Most people are not aware that the CDC has lowered the recommended amount of fluoride that should be placed in drinking water. And so we covered the connection between fluoride and neurodevelopment, fluoride and IQ if you will, fluoride and health problems. Everything fluoride is in today's episode, you're not going to want to miss. I then bring back Dr. Henry Ely, the executive director of the Energetic Health Institute. Dr. Ely has an incredible way of sharing his heart, his love his passion, and information that we just aren't getting in mainstream media about COVID and about the response to COVID. And all things important that you need to know. And of course, we end always with Bernadette page here who tells you information you need to know that's in the news, but not in the news that you're getting that information that's gone missing. Enjoy the show.
Dr. Paul, coming to you from the heart. Do you feel like there are storm clouds overhead? It sure feels that way to me. I walked into my office today and was greeted by a couple a young couple they had their baby in their arms. Dr. Paul, can we talk to you? I said sure we dipped into an exam room and we had a conversation. They work for Nike. We're here in Portland, Oregon, and Nikes a big corporation here in the general area. Nike is issued and eat it that they have to get vaccinated or their employment will be terminated. And this is happening here. And now this month. You have a young couple with a child in tow. What do we do? That's just one example. The local health system Providence Health System has issued a ruling that if you are an employee, and work for the system, in any capacity, doctors, nurses support staff, it doesn't matter. You have to be fully vaccinated for COVID-19 or your employment will be terminated. The Oregon State Board of Nursing is meeting today to make a decision about requiring all nurses, any nurse who wishes to work in the state of Oregon, must be vaccinated against COVID-19. These rulings are just rolling out across the country. Maybe one of these things is affecting you. I'm left with this sense that the whole concept of informed consent, the ethical process of giving you the right to bodily integrity to what goes into your body. That's a decision that only you should make. I've stood on this since the beginning of my career since starting my office, integrative pediatrics and this show against the wind doctors and signs under fire. We are all about freedom, medical freedom, and your right to decide what happens to you. So I just want to give you a little bit of hope. Here's what's occurred to me. Our country, our world has gone through major, major crises before whether you're talking World War One World War Two, the Spanish flu, whether you're talking massive, massive financial crises that hit people, the Great Depression, certainly those who grew up through that knew a hardship like almost no other. We are in such times. But I just want to let you know. I have no doubt that we will come through this and we will be fine on the other side. I want to give you hope and courage to stand firm in your beliefs and do the right thing no matter what the forces might seem to be against you. Because you are not alone. Thanks for your attention. Enjoy the show.
Welcome Jack Lyons Wyler, you are the co author on a couple important papers we've done together. You're a good friend and such an amazing scientist. You have your own university at AIPAC and a prolific writer in so many ways and such a great scientist for our world. In this amazing time. We're all in. Today, folks, we're going to dive into a topic that's relevant but different. So we've been talking about COVID over and over again. And I wanted to just touch on a different topic, and that's fluoride. For some reason, this has been controversial. Ever since I was a pediatrician and training back 35 years ago. Well, there's no controversy anymore. And Jack is going to help us understand why that is with some science. We love science. So is it true jack that the CDC lowered the recommended fluoride levels for drinking water
James Lyon-Weiler 5:30
over time, CDC without telling anyone actually lowered their level have recommended fluoride exposure. And there was a range where the upper level was one milligram per liter in the water that you're drinking. And the lower level was 0.2 or so. And what they did was they kind of quietly dropped the higher range and they just said, we're going to limit it to the lower level to the the lower level, which no one's in compliance with anywhere. So why would they do that? Well, they did that because the science is vastly on the side. As you said, this was a very historic problem. I learned about it when I was in graduate school, it's kind of scoffed at it. Like, why would they put fluoride in the water, then have it affect human intelligence? You know, if, if the science really supported that, what we do know is that there's a couple of ways that the fluoride can reduce intelligence and they're pretty numerous actually, number one is flooring itself, it crosses the blood brain barrier can be found in the brain and people that are drinking fluoride, and it has all kinds of effects on on neuro neurological development. It's known from animal studies. It's known from cell line studies. But it's also known to interact with aluminum. There's a there's a toxic interaction between aluminum and fluoride in terms of Sprague Dawley, rats, I think the study was in in terms of things that we consider kind of important, like sociality, and intelligence and grip strength. And so when we look at the actual science that says, fluoride is a problem. And that can't be done in a vacuum, you have to look at other interactors. And so right there's risk factors, I'm sure for reduced in IQ due to fluoride. But don't call them confounders call them risk factors. If you say, well, these women over here, they get exposed to fluoride, and they have lower IQ, that these women over here expose the fluoride and they don't, you still haven't ruled out fluoride is a potential cause of lower IQ.
Dr. Paul 7:29
I've been doing this pediatric gig for over 30 years, we strongly recommend fluoride supplementation, I mean, we're talking not just the fluoride, you get in your water, we're actually going to give you actual fluoride extra. And there's, there's some division now within our community and within the dental community who've also been doing the same thing, with some percentage of us now going, Whoa, whoa, whoa, there's way too much science showing that fluoride is a problem. But most I think of my peers are still aggressively recommending fluoride supplementation, just as they do vaccination, as if actually those two interventions are the most important things they can do for pediatric health. What do you say to that?
James Lyon-Weiler 8:16
Couple of things. Number one, pediatricians are always in my view acting out of the best interest of the children, they they're both going on what they know, you know, they're hoping to reduce cavities, and improve oral health. The second thing that I would say is, in the studies that have been done carefully, when you adjust for those kinds of fluoride exposures and mouthwashes. And in in toothpastes, and in dental, freezes and applications, then you actually still see an effect just from the water. So we can separate the fluoride from dentistry from the fluoride from ingestion, you're not supposed to swallow these things, right? They're supposed to be applied to the surface absorbed into the tooth. And so when you swallow fluoride every day during pregnancy, and this is mostly during pregnancy, so perhaps it's as simple as telling women to avoid fluoridated water during pregnancy. So you can have your cake and eat it too. We don't know the problem is that the people that argue against the science stop gap, the actual discussion, it becomes an argument to authority and those crazy conspiracy theorists does the same thing. But why don't we just parse it out and isolate the issue and say, Okay, if the problem is in pregnancy, then perhaps OBGYN and obstetricians can say, Listen, you think you're getting pregnant? We're not sure about the whole thing. But you might want to avoid fluoridated water for nine months. But the policy just assuming that it's safe, right. Well, why did we why don't why do we continue to do things for four decades, five decades, six decades after the data actually show that there might be a problem instead of saying we need to revisit the policy.
Dr. Paul 9:53
I still have a question for you. So if if it's a problem during pregnancy, why would it be okay to give him infants and young children fluoride tablets that they're actually swallowing, so it's increasing the fluoride level in their body, when we now have studies showing that fluoride is a neurotoxin,
James Lyon-Weiler 10:10
it may not be okay. And so what we should do is a study of that population specifically, there are studies that show, you know, even even if you take all 10 year olds, in a particular study that I just read, there's a correlation between fluoride exposure and and over the years, so that reflects their probably their exposure over the first 10 years of life. So I'm not saying it is okay. What I'm saying is, at my instinct, we're trying to understand something as science is don't just do a broad population, whole population cohort study, but rather get down into the weeds and say, What about women who are pregnant? What about one to two year olds? What about five year olds? And what about people that have never been exposed? And you know, you can look at other outcomes other than IQ as well, if the public was taught that, you know, there's a correlation between IQ and income, we already know that, right? So if you're taught that your kids going to have higher and higher income, or live longer something like this, right. If they don't fluoridate, then that's different than IQ because they'll debate well, maybe IQ is not the right measure. But the studies that I've seen actually use multiple measures of intelligence and so some of that are broad, less culturally sensitive, you know, dependent and all the rest. It seems it seems to hold up Dr. Grande Jean Philippe Grandjean is an excellent, excellent expert in Environmental Toxicology. And he did a massive systematic review, the 78 Studies have investigated have investigated 70 of the studies actually found elevated fluoride exposures root is associated with reduced IQ in humans. And there's over 60 animal studies and the links are there. In the article that found fluoride exposure impairs learning and or memory capacity. We're talking about a huge number of children in 60s studies, 26,245 adults over two studies, when we're thinking about environmental toxicology, this is the kind of thing that I teach in the course, they control for arsenic and iodine and lead levels, which is fantastic. And they said that the possible safe dose to protect against a five point IQ loss is between 0.0014 and 0.05 milligrams per day. So the economic impact of IQ loss for us children is loss of 10s of billions of dollars, right? So if you wonder why the world's going crazy, this is the fluoride alert.org. I'm not part of them. But this is the fluoride Action Network. These are the guys that if you want the 70 studies, and you want to educate your city hall and you want to your water department to pay attention to the studies, you can look at these studies and just see the high reproducibility, there are eight studies that don't show Association and they actually do a an autopsy on those eight studies here, then this is the TSA trial, you want to do something about this right now and have the EPA reduce across the board coast to coast all 50 states all the territories, what the allowable limit of fluoride is, and go support this TSCA trial. It's alive. It's ongoing right now. They're supposed to make a ruling in August, but they didn't. So, you know, go and support fluoride alert.org with the TSA trial and learn about it
Dr. Paul 13:21
crazy to me that I was part of the problem recommending fluoride, although I just never felt right about it. But that's what we were taught as pediatricians, you do this, it's going to protect your kids teeth. And you know, that's important. It sounded important. Well, you know, as you've pointed out, we've had information now for a decade or two that it's absolutely the wrong approach. The downside is just too great for brain development. What other things should parents be thinking about? As far as if they're want to get pregnant, they want to bring a child into this world. Okay, we've highlighted fluoride. I know it's really important that people pay attention to this, don't drink fluoridated water, especially if you're pregnant. Or if you're, you know, if you have young children, just get water that's get a filter that takes fluoride out or get water that doesn't have fluoride in it. But I imagine if with your expertise in environmental toxicity, you probably have a few other tips for maybe we'll just focus on parents who want to have kids or who have young children what other environmental toxins should they be aware of?
James Lyon-Weiler 14:25
Right so it's it is official policy for entities, three letter agencies like EPA and CDC that you need to avoid certain fish during pregnancy and I would argue in the first year or two coming up to pregnancy, the mercury laden fish including shellfish, it's probably a good idea to stay off, you know, stay away from tuna and swordfish, especially. It also naturally brings up the question as well as methyl mercury is problem for neurodevelopment. What about ethyl mercury? So Mercury being Marisol fact is that the origin Mercury from sorry, Marisol stays in the brain longer than from methyl mercury from, you know, dietary sources,
Dr. Paul 15:06
you need to understand 90% of the flu shots in this country or in the world have a huge dose of mercury thimerosal 25 micrograms, that would clearly be toxic to a developing brain to a developing child. So if you decide to get a flu shot, while pregnant, make absolutely certain it is the single dose version which is mercury free.
James Lyon-Weiler 15:28
So you want to avoid aluminum both from vaccines. And in diet, avoiding all kinds of all kinds of toxins is a good idea. So eating non GMO food due to the glyphosate and the, you know, 21 other pesticides. If you can't eat organic, you can soak vegetables and fruit for 15 minutes or 20 minutes in baking soda and water. And my understanding is that that removes the pesticide from all but two types of pesticides. So it reduces it really dramatically. Environmental Working Group has a dirty dozen of vegetables and and strawberries are at the top of the list. I love strawberries. But every time I go out and want to order strawberries, I look at that I look at the surface area. And I know just the amount of pesticides that are present on that fruit, I can't do it to myself. So you know, this is if this discussion helps just one family have a child through pregnancy, that comes out brighter, you know, not tired in the eyes unable to focus. And you know, I'm not saying that there's a causal link between pesticides, no development and metals and things like that, and things like ADHD, but I am saying we have forgotten the precautionary principle out of an abundance of caution, we need to understand that. It's also not just worth making, you know, generalizations everyone should do this, that there's a subset of people. My research for that book show that there's a subset of people that have a genetic risk to not being able to detoxify in general, it's weird. There's a lot of different genes involved in those body's detoxification defenses. And there's many ways to break that system. And so if your infant, if your fetus and your infant and your child and your team are not detoxifying, that might be a genetic thing. And so these environmental toxins are even more of a risk to you. So this is a different way of talking about genetics than saying, oh, autism is genetic, ADHD is genetic, nothing you can do about it, when in fact, in reality, we have real, real live use cases of people that have worked very hard to detoxify their children, and dramatically improve their behavior. These kids are sponges for environmental toxins around them. And that's why I wrote the paper. Autism is an acquired detoxification Deficiency Syndrome. Right. So kids are not born with autism, by any means. They're born with the risk of not being able to tolerate toxins in this world, as well as others, and they're very much like the canaries in the coal mine. And so as more and more toxins, there's 1000s of toxins that are put into our food and our water and our air. And that's why I teach I'm teaching this course, environmental toxicology, I realized, we may or may not win the argument on vaccines, but we can systematically target toxins that we don't want in our food, our air and our water, clothing, the things the products that we buy, and we have the ability to bans on those.
Dr. Paul 18:31
So in summary, it's seems crystal clear to me, whether you're thinking about getting pregnant, you're pregnant now. Or you have young children, get fluoride out of your water, don't give supplemental fluoride. And if you're using fluoride toothpaste, make sure you're spitting it after the application and rinsing your mouth. Well. And then I I don't want to give any medical recommendations here. But just to sort of paraphrase what I'm hearing you say, probably you would agree, don't vaccinate while you're pregnant. Is that true?
James Lyon-Weiler 19:04
So, I have a PhD, what I'd like to say is, you have three peer reviewed publications that show the kids that are getting vaccines vaccinated per the CDC schedule, are in aluminum toxicity 100% of their day. So as you accumulate chemo, the conclusion of all that, and the ketchup schedule, there's risk of this ketchup schedule, the CDC recommends if they're young, so they should update their ketchup schedule and spaced them out. And minimum and that, you know, this is the kind of talk that got you into trouble, Paul, and it's just so rational and reasonable to say, hey, wait a minute. There's a pediatric dose limit published in 2017. We did it not FDA. So I don't have abundance of caution, the precautionary principle let's create new policies and improve the mental health and the mental well being and the intelligence and so on of our of our kids. We need a super smart generation of kids to come to solve all these problems that we've created. We don't know the way out and we All we know how to do is fight about it. So yeah, in terms of vaccination and pregnancy, I will be happy to say this. I'm not going to have any more kids. But I'm going to certainly advise my sons when they start families to really, really think twice over putting aluminum in the in the mother's body for two years and mercury and other things and fluoride in the mother's body for two years. You know, this this long term clean of a cleanse of just letting the body detoxify? Yeah. If it gives your child an advantage, why wouldn't you want to do
Dr. Paul 20:33
that? Yeah, absolutely. And you and I both know, there are risks to not vaccinating. But they just seem so minuscule compared to the risks to our developing brains of all these other interventions. In wrapping up, Jack, what would be your parting final thoughts for our viewers? Kind of the from above looking down on what the heck's going on here? Maybe a couple tips that you might suggest?
James Lyon-Weiler 20:59
Well, one of the things, of course, is to check out AIPAC. edu and check out our courses last week, I said, Oh, look, this is the bad news I have this week, but at least it's different than COVID-19. So take a break from COVID-19 and come get the bad news about food pollution. We have to keep our sense of humor, we have to keep our wits about us we have to take take realize that it's entirely up to our individual actions. So I see a merger coming of the environmentalists over the other environmental toxins and the vaccine risk aware people who already learned the hard way that yes, there's toxins in the vaccines. I don't like that, that there's a merger there. There's a bigger family there. So I would become environmentalist first and make that your thing. Right and but we don't want to dismantle the vaccine risk aware your organization's are very important. I don't want to do that. But understand that what you've been doing is backing into environmentalism, to identify toxins that hurt people's brains, it certainly is not just what's in the vaccines.
Dr. Paul 21:58
Yeah, I think we're all united in wanting healthy kids healthy brains, avoiding the assault that's on our poor children's immune systems and developmental systems. So starting with the environment, we all fit within that mold and then starting with medical freedom and bodily integrity, it seems to be a place we can all unite. I just want to remind folks you can find Jack That's IPA
James Lyon-Weiler 22:23
knowledge.org for the research that we do. It's IP a K dash.edu for the university check out that popular rationalism it's the school of thought popular rationalism is the school of thought that belongs to the people because the government and the corporation's they've all given up on rationality and science, real science, you know, a bonafide objective science. And yet you guys are carrying the flame of wanting science to come forward not the science that is pseudoscience and science like activities, but but actual bonafide, rigorous science like the science on fluoride. So
Dr. Paul 22:59
yeah, well, thank you, Jack. I know of no other scientists out there who is is deeply scientifically involved writing important work every day. You're prolific. Thank you for your contribution to humanity and to all of us. God bless you, man.
James Lyon-Weiler 23:17
Thank you, Paul knew to stay in there.
Dr. Paul 23:26
It is such an honor to have you on our show today. You are the executive director of the Energetic Health is two but honestly, you're so much more you you bring love to everything you do, and you tackle big issues. It feels to me like our world is universally tackling a big issue. I'm curious, because one of the challenges I think so many people are facing today is how to talk to one another when we are so polarized. Yeah. And I know everything about your work is about bringing love and connectedness and meeting people in a way that doesn't polarize and alienate. But people are struggling,
Dr. Henry Ealy 24:08
it's time for us to grab a juice box, you can get your organic galactic grape, grab a blankie. And we all need to have a timeout. We all need to have some nap time on this. And I would love for us to call for a one day vacation from COVID Not for the people that are in treatment and the people that need care. I'm not saying anything crazy like that. I'm just saying for us as a world culture that we need a vacation from COVID for even a day I've diving into the data on post traumatic stress disorder. And during World War Two, there was some really good analysis done, or at least data published in 1943. And what they came up with it was that United States military decided that every soldier at the frontline had to get r&r by day 80 No questions asked. That 80 days was the maximum a human mind and and really spirit could commit themselves to being on the front lines of a battle. And we've been on this frontlines of this battle now for maybe not 644 consecutive days, but certainly well over 500 consecutive days, we have to talk about giving each other a week off. When we get into the conversations of it all. I think the first thing that we have to do is take a step back, it's okay to dis agree. It's okay. Just because you disagree doesn't mean you have to be disagreeable. Right? I think that's number one. I don't have the power to change anyone's mind. Right. And I accept that. You know, I was spending a lot of energy Dr. Pol, trying to change people's minds here. I'm going to show you the data. I'm going to prove it to you. I'm going to show you where I am alleging the CDC has, you know, has committed gross acts of misconduct, we can disagree on elements of whether a person should you know whether we think someone should or should not be inoculated, that's totally fine. You know, I'm having entitlement to my perspective, you have an entitlement to yours. You're not going to change my mind on it, I'm probably not going to change yours. That's cool. Right. And let's find where our common ground is. I think this is the key in our conversations with each other. Let's find what we agree on. Hmm. You know, and let's start conversations from that place. Do we all agree that these brave nurses and state of Oregon who rushed into a essentially a burning building to risk their lives and save other people? Yeah. Can we all agree that it's wrong to threaten them with job loss? Because they, number one, almost all of them have acquired immunity from the exposures they've had? Yeah. And number two, whether they have immunity or not, they have a right to choose they they were the one that made the choice of freewill to say, I'm going to go in to this unknown situation and risk my life. Yeah. Can't they still have that right to say, I'm going to continue to go into this situation and risk my life. I mean, we know I'm going to share some data in a second. It's not a life. It's not a life risk for them. By all accounts, from the data that we've collected, we learned so much. There are early treatments, there are immune priming strategies that the empirical evidence is overwhelming at this point. But they made the free choice to go in when they didn't have to.
Dr. Paul 27:31
And we're talking true heroes, like you said, running into a burning building. They literally knew they were potentially risking their lives. Yeah. And they did it anyway.
Dr. Henry Ealy 27:41
They did it. Anyway. That's to me. Dr. Paul, I'm getting chills right now. That's what being an American is. We have plenty to argue about. Okay, we there's no shortage of that, right? Sure. Let's find where we have common ground, because that's how you build a society, in my opinion worth living in?
Dr. Paul 27:59
Yeah. So so I'm gonna make it a little harder for you here. All right, hit me. So, you know, you're a healthcare worker. And you and I are both doctors, we are in a clinical situation, perhaps, or you're just in a work situation where employees or employees or co worker are afraid of you because you're either unvaccinated or you won't wear a mask or both. How do you how do you deal with that?
Dr. Henry Ealy 28:29
I have to be able to allow people to change their own minds on this. So, you know, I don't know that we have the right answer to it. And I'm not suggesting I do, but I can share what I'm doing with practitioners is when I have practitioners and clinicians who are scared, I will simply say to them very easily. Tell me what you're scared of? Or were you aware of this? Were you aware of this information? No. Okay, hold on. Let me kind of show you on my phone. I'm constantly asking their permission to engage with them, not because I'm, but it's just is it okay for me to show you this? Is it? Oh, have you seen this before? And then what ultimately happens every time Dr. Paul is this? Why aren't we being told this?
Dr. Paul 29:13
Yeah. So the one I'm getting a lot lately and you know why? Because it's in the news is our hospitals are full of unvaccinated people. It's the unvaccinated people who are dying. And, and they say this. Some of these are health care professionals. And they're saying this to me with literal fear in their eyes. I mean, you can just tell they are fearing for their own their own lives. Right. And my guess is you would use that same approach. Would you be open to taking a look at some information I have that might, you know,
Dr. Henry Ealy 29:43
let's let's model that right now. I'm going to pull up the breakthrough report the latest breakthrough report from the Oregon Health Authority authority. They publish a breakthrough report every week now and I think most people are objective, they're scared and that's so it's okay to be scared. Alright, I think that's one thing we have to give People it's okay to be scared. But let's see if the data brings us some reassurance or if it validates that we should all be freaking out, because if we're all supposed to be freaking out, I'll freak out with you. I'm just seeing this one for the first time. I haven't looked at these in a couple weeks, during the week of September 19. Through the 25th. There were 11,567 cases of COVID reported in the state of Oregon. And they're saying that 79.2% of them were the unvaccinated 20.8% are in the word breakthrough cases. And then they give median age and where they show up. Let's see what else they got on this report. So here's how you can see how many you know what percentage it's in, it's been brought about 20% of all of them have been breakthrough cases not see what they have here on hospitalizations. So here's the number of hospitalizations of the breakthrough cases, there have been 1168 hospitalizations, breakthrough and 218 deaths in the state of Oregon. And keep in mind, this is one thing. I when I break down this report, I've broken this report down for some elected officials. The first thing we have to keep in mind is look at when they start tracking breakthrough. It's August 21. Okay, so here's the definition of what constitutes a breakthrough case where you'd have to do you have to submit a specimen to the CDC. And these are the requirements for a case to be considered breakthrough. Number one, the person has to be considered fully vaccinated. That means that they've received both of the Johnson at OSU, both of the Pfizer or Maderna, one of the Johnson Johnson, and it's been at least 14 days since the last one. So there's special rules. Yeah, now we have more special rules, you have to have a positive PCR that a cycle threshold value that's lower than 28. Why? Because the CDC knows. And they're admitting it here that when the cycle threshold value is above 28, it's likely a false positives, and they don't want to deal they don't want to inflate hyper inflate their vaccine data breakthrough data. And then there's this other little stipulation here. All right. And that is, oh, that's if it's not No, the other stipulation on it is that a person has to be symptomatic. How interesting is that? How can you compare apples to apples? If you have a completely different set of rules for the inoculated? Then you have from the people who are uninoculated?
Dr. Paul 32:35
Yeah, no, it's total insanity. Do you happen to know are is the data available of so there's three groups, there's people who have truly not been vaccinated? There's people who have been vaccinated, but they're not considered vaccinated because of all these crazy rules. And then there's this small group of what they're being fully vaccinated. So this massive group in the middle who've been vaccinated probably are having symptoms, either from COVID, or the vaccines themselves, right? Who are, I think, being lumped into the unboxed group? Or is that data available anywhere?
Dr. Henry Ealy 33:11
No. And this is this is on on purpose. In my opinion, one of the things we're seeing in terms of their data collection, is that they have created only an either or situation. When actually like you just alluded to, there are three unique situations, you can be completely uninoculated, I'm not going to use the word vaccinated. I just have such an ethical thing against it. Forgive me, I'm being ridiculous, probably, but whatever. But then there's this second group, the partially meaning the people that maybe got one we've had so many reports of people who got one had an adverse event and said, I'm not getting the second. Right, right. We're talking. We're in the millions with that right now. According to the CDC, okay. Millions of Americans have said, I got one, and I'm not getting the second one. Then we have the third group, which is which, which could there the middle group, what's crazy, Dr. Pol, could include the people who got both if there were two in the series, and still weren't 14 days beyond because there's a special rule. And then you have the third group, which is that one of the Johnson Johnson or both of the Maderna or Pfizer, and it's been 14 days. So there's really three unique groups here. But what they're doing is they're saying, we're going to take the one unique group, the what we're deeming fully vaccinated, and if you're not fully vaccinated, you're every year something else. So what's happening in these breakthrough cases, these are only in fully inoculated people 14 days. But that, again, that drives down the number of total breakthrough cases, because if a, let's say a person is partially inoculated, they're going to be counted as not inoculated. They're going to be counted as what they're saying in the media, on vaccines. And what that does is it's a it's an it's a really disingenuous attempt at manipulating this data. So you can make a statement that still even with this data is wrong. The hospitals are filled with are overflowing with the unvaccinated? No, they're not. There, they are filled with people who need help. Okay, so why don't we instead of trying to trying to manipulate the data, why don't we do something courageous here? Why don't we number one issue nutritional guidance to all Oregonians to help get their vitamin D levels up and their vitamin A levels up? And why don't we do something incredibly courageous and say we have great clinical and great empirical evidence on ivermectin and we're going to authorize that as a treatment. Why don't we as and why don't we do this, send a guidelines out to every practitioner saying, get into early, early treatment of this, so that we can minimize the number of people and the length of hospital stay for the ones that we do have severe conditions that the data supports. Dr. Paul is the same thing. It's imported from the start. The high risk group is over 60 years of age, with multiple co morbid, pre existing conditions. Alright, and let me show you something that we just found, ooh, you like this? This is on our immune our prevention and early treatment, our immune priming strategies, right, look at this. And please be sure to read the disclaimer, folks, because the FTC and FDA are are coming after us. And we got to make sure that we can keep that at bay and keep doing our work here. So here's the information we have on clinical testing, long haul syndrome, to doo doo doo doo Oh, here, this is it right here. So this was published on September 13. And it goes for data from March 1 2020. To July 31 2021. It may have been updated since let's go take a look at this right here. What it's essentially saying is that the CDC confirms that of the adult hospitalizations 58% were hyper tensive 49.9% were obese. 42.6% had metabolic syndrome and 35.3% had at least one cardiovascular disease. So like we said, this is still even postinoculation disease. COVID-19 is a disease of people at advanced age. And it's not just advanced age, it's advanced age and who were already in poor health. So let's see, they just updated this for October 2, look at this. So here's the the percent of people who are hospitalized by age, how craziest we know, right? They know that this isn't affecting the kids look at this. Like if we take out the if we take out and let's just look at infants, right? They know,
this isn't affecting infants, compared to the total of infants would be the little yellow portion, right? If we just look at teens that are toddlers and teens, right? Like, they're not making up any significant percentage of hospitalizations, period. Now, this is our unmatched group right here. This is our only control group, right? That we got. So that's telling you something right there, okay? Then you go down a little bit on this page and look at this. Characteristics of COVID-19 associated hospitalizations look at this, you know, they're telling you what percentage of people who are getting this or or, or saying that they're confirmed with the COVID-19 are actually needing hospitalization, it's roughly just 9%. That means that you have 90, basically 91% likely to not need Haas hospital, medical care if you can track this, that message isn't being put out there. And that's been consistent virtually throughout all of this. We have a couple of high points they can in April of 2020, with New York and everything that was going on there. And then there's another high point in December, you know, of 12. But we don't, it's not like we have for the people who get this need hospitalization, right. But that's what you would want they want you to believe. And then you get to this last bit of data here. And look at this. They're showing you right here, what were the underlying medical conditions for the people needing hospitalization, look at this. Hypertension 57.1%. Now, metabolic disease 42.2% obesity, this is one of the big ones right here and adults 50.3% of all hospitalizations were obese. But they're not sharing this context so we can understand with a greater ease. Am I at risk, or am I not? And so I just pulled some more data from the CDC. Can I go through this data? Because one of the questions I keep asking is, what data do you have to show that this is an emergency? I can't find this data that makes me feel like a data analyst that this is an emergency. Is it happening? Yes. Are we concerned about the people who are already in a elevated age and at a high risk because they are in poor state of health prior to Yes, of course. We Are you guess who else we're concerned for? We're concerned for the people who have gotten the inoculation, like Simone Scott, who have spoken about many times, 90 year old Northwestern student who got it had no risk of having a severe episode of COVID. But she got it anyway, she got the inoculation and is dead now. And because of it, can we talk about them too, because I'm concerned about them as well. Let's let's look at this data. Dr. Pol, tell me, tell me what you see here. Help me Help me with this. Because sometimes I feel like I'm missing something. All right. I just pulled all the data from the CDC data tracker through August 6. Okay, so this is the most recent data we can have access to right now. Look at the look at the age distribution here of cases, a lot of cases. So it's not like we have a small amount of data. And look at the percentage of deaths in the under 18 0.08% of all deaths occurred in these groups. This is this is
Dr. Paul 41:01
yeah, I love the recovery rate on the on the end there. 99.99%. Recovery. Hi, I would say that's like a common goal.
Dr. Henry Ealy 41:12
Even I think the common cold has more is more deadly than this. Perhaps you're right. We don't know that's from that. We don't you know, so. So what we we've been looking at is and aggregating all of this information, is when when they read things out to people, they give the bottom line numbers. This is how many people died. They're saying 700,000. Now that's not what's published by the CDC. That's what's estimated by the CDC, the published data is 573,000. So they're overestimating number one. But number two, they're never talking about how many people have recovered. And there's a simple mathematical formula to determine recoveries, are you ready for this? This is CDCs formula, you're ready for this? You're, you take the total number of cases. And you're going to subtract three things from that. You're going to subtract all the new cases over the last 10 days, because you don't know what's going on with those cases yet. So you just remove all those tips. You then subtract all the current hospitalizations, because you're saying we don't know if somebody is hospitalized if they're going to recover, and so you don't consider them. And then you subtract all the fatalities. So when I subtract when I use that simple CDC formula for determining whether or not a person has recovered, how many people recovered, folks, out of the 34 million people that the CDC is publishing right now saying, have contracted COVID 32 million of them have re covered, have read, have recovered. And as we saw, less than 10% even need any medical care. And when you look at these recovery rates, I just go, what are we talking about? People keep saying this as an emergency. I'm like, it's very concerning. But it's not an emergency. So it is a virtual certainty that if you're under 65, you are going to recover. And we have proof because there are millions of people who have recovered. But the message that's getting out there is you need to be afraid of this. Dr. Pol? Am I seeing something wrong? On what medical grounds? Should we be afraid of this if we're not in the high risk group?
Dr. Paul 43:21
No, you're absolutely right. And this is a probably the number one message I know you and I both want to get out there. And not of course, minimize the risk for people who are in the high risk, right. So if you're 85 and older, and you have multiple of these conditions, obesity, heart disease that puts you at higher risk, you should be careful. And you can do well, even with all those conditions, Asian underlying conditions. If you do the sort of nutritional things, Dr. Healy that you've been promoting, and stay away from sick people, that makes sense. We know quarantine works.
Dr. Henry Ealy 43:58
Yeah. For Yeah, for high risk. It makes sense. There's even we've been clear on this, you know, it seems there even is a statistical argument for people who are in the high risk having access to the experimental inoculations. There's a statistical argument for it, you know, where we look at at risk versus benefit. Yeah, but we went through that before, you know, but one thing we can't do is ignore the information on various, you know, if I can just share real quickly, I mean, I've been so busy, I haven't even really had an opportunity to look through here. But I want to see, one of the things I like to keep track of Dr. Pol is how many people have died postinoculation within 48 hours of the inoculation. Let me do a quick one real quick. Yeah,
Dr. Paul 44:39
look at that, because that if it's that soon after the inoculation, there's little doubt that it's realization, right? Yeah, right late into it.
Dr. Henry Ealy 44:47
The results are 5272 Americans have died within 48 hours of receiving inoculation. And this is the low estimate. This is the low number reported. This if we're following Tom Rennes, his work The the great attorney out of Ohio, he's saying you can mold to his whistleblower says you could safely multiply this by a factor of five to get how many people have actually died within 48 hours. And the thing that's gets crazy for me, Dr. Paul is clinical trials are supposed to clinical trials are supposed to be terminated when there are a significant number of deaths, and that's usually we've seen clinical trials terminated for one death.
Dr. Paul 45:30
Yeah, or a handful of just a handful. But this is way more than a handful. there's ever been in a clinical trial that hasn't been terminated with more than 50 deaths. Right.
Dr. Henry Ealy 45:40
So this is we're in the 1000s. We're in the 1000s right now.
Dr. Paul 45:45
I know you're you're so connected and wise in this in this natural healing journey and process. Give our viewers just your summary of what can we do, give us some hope.
Dr. Henry Ealy 45:57
To me, it's definitely making sure you have at least one day every week to sleep in as long as you can as long as your body needs, right. Because I'm sure your body needs to rejuvenate. Number two, it's all about making sure your immune priming, right and getting those nutrients and so you can withstand those are two really key things. If you can add on to that, getting out and just walking in your neighborhood every day. If you can add on to that some meditative time where you're just going to sit down and breathe or pray, you know, and really embrace your faith. Great. Give your body joy. Why one of the things I recommend to patients, I've been doing this for 20 years, Dr. Pol, before you go to bed at night, watch something that makes you laugh. You know, don't watch the news. Before you go to bed. Don't watch the news at all really know about it. But don't watch the put things into your body through your senses, whether it's great music or something that's funny, whether it's getting massage wood, it puts something in your body that reminds you of what we are fighting for every day. And then use those three words I spoke of earlier. Those three words are I love you use those three words. Everyday. It's the most powerful magic that we have among us. Those three words are actually a blessing of protection that we bestow upon each other when we use them. So bless each other. When you see them. I love you. I love you. And I'm telling everybody that Dr. Paul, I love you. You know, I can say it because I love the work. You've done the courage, the bravery, everything you had to do to get it. I love you. I'm grateful for
Dr. Paul 47:37
you. Dr. Ely. I love you.
Dr. Henry Ealy 47:39
Thank you, right, and then you get to how it makes us feel right? Yeah. And it's like, share this love because it's the most powerful magic we have. It's the light that casts out the darkness. And it's what kind of it's gonna be the magic that helps us get through this so that we can build this better world that's on the horizon. And within our grasp, we just have to take that next step.
Dr. Paul 48:02
Folks, we will get to the other side. We love you. And what we need here is to bond together so we have resilience, and we have the fortitude and the endurance to get to the other side. That's what we're looking for. We will get there together and with love. Thank you Dr. Ely.
Dr. Henry Ealy 48:22
Oh, thank you so much for having me. And can I say it to your audience to? Absolutely I love you so much. I'm so grateful for you for carrying the way you do to keep watching these kinds of shows and supporting and everything.
Dr. Paul 48:36
Amen, brother, thank you
welcome Bernadette pager two against the wind, you provide such an important piece. It's about news. And maybe what's not in the news or what you're getting that you should be thinking twice about. You got an interesting angle to present today. But you are the Public Policy Director of informed choice Washington, you host an informed life radio, and so much more. Welcome to the show.
Bernadette Pajer 49:07
Thank you, Dr. Paul. As always, it's such a pleasure to be here. I want to say to begin with that what I'm going to be showing viewers today is another place to go get information what a lot of people don't understand about how major legacy news works today. It's very consolidated. They've really downsized over the past decade, the number of employees the number of investigative journalists, they have. So information gets sent to news wires and it comes from it comes from industry. It comes from government. It comes from a lot of places. It gets fed to CNN, ABC, all your legacy news places and it pretty much gets read as it is. There is very little to know No vetting of the information questioning of the information, no time spent, you know, really trying to look at it critically. And and it's left consumers and citizens with a job that the journalism that used to take right, we have to try to find our own, do our own due diligence when it comes to information. So there is a website called trial site news that I've been following for a while. And I wanted to share that with your viewers today. So I'll go ahead and do that and kind of take you through it. Dr. Paul, I think that you're familiar also with this website.
Dr. Paul 50:42
Bernadette Pajer 50:43
So if you're seeing my page here, about trial site news, this is their about page. So I went looking, you know, because I have been reading their articles to get a different point of view. They were started in 2018. And they really, as they explain, they started as a way to develop trust and facilitate engagement of researchers and the public. They wanted to create a new disruptive force in the world of biomedical research. And why disruptive? Dr. Paul? Well, as we can, we've seen, we've got this corporate capture of the scientific journals of our regulatory agencies, we need to disrupt that to get back to honest science. Especially as consumers, we need to know what to trust. And then I look down on it further to see you know, here's their founders and people who run the company, I was thrilled to see that their advisory committee included some of our very favorite people. Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Robert Malone, Bart region, I don't know how to pronounce that. He's new to me, Dr. Ron Brown, Dr. Michael Goodkin, and Dr. Pierre Corey, who I've interviewed a couple of times. So so I feel really good about the information here. As with anything else, you take it with your own grain of salt, your own perspective, it's just another way to help you engage with the information to try to find out what has meaning for you.
Dr. Paul 52:20
Yeah, I think we have to consider the source when we're looking at information and especially news, as you pointed out, it just comes across a wire. And if it's coming from sources that have financial interests in whatever it is they're reporting on, it's going to be tainted or conflicted or possibly truly false information, or propaganda. And that's why this site is so important because we have people with no conflicts of interest, people who've actually sacrificed their careers, or are in the process of destroying their careers by trying to bring real science to the forefront.
Bernadette Pajer 52:56
Yeah, and it's, you know, in the world of drugs, and biological such as vaccines, the FDA does no independent investigation into products, the companies that stand to profit, do their own research, they present the data they want to present to the FDA, the FDA rules based on that. And then, you know, press releases go pushed out on the news wire. So for anybody to think that's not biased, you know, they just aren't understanding the process. It's all biased. So here's a really good opinion piece on mall new pair of beer, I cannot pronounce it. It's the mercs new drug that they're trying to get emergency use authorization on. And it works by introducing mutagenic nucleotide analogue, it introduces errors into the SARS cov, two RNA and according to this opinion piece, which I have not thoroughly researched, and I will later on take the time to go to see you know, what it stands on here is that this is very dangerous because it will increase mutations. That's that's spread among the general population. Many articles on trial site news are free in full, some you have to subscribe and there are different levels of subscription. I have no ties, no financial ties at all to this. I don't yet have a paid service myself, but I may because I've seen a couple articles I want to read in full I may pay for a month to go read some of these articles in full. So it's very concerning this new this new drug out there that they are pushing. Dr. James Lyons Weiler has written about that as well. He's about this particular drug and about the really questionable clinical trials that happened with it. Yeah, so then let's move on. There was an article about the Washington University School of Law Edison came up with a, a trial drug that says crushes remdesivir in preclinical lab tests. So that's interesting to follow. This is just lab work. But it's showing that it works far, far better than currently only ELA authorized product that costs 1000s per dose. So there may be more. Have you noticed, Dr. Paul, that it seems like it's more allowed to talk about treatment? lately?
Dr. Paul 55:33
Yes, we are starting to have a breakthrough for sure. Long time and coming, right. I mean, this is where we should have started 18 months ago. But I'm glad to see we're starting to at least have a dialogue about treatment options. And of course, you and I know because we support the natural world remedies. Simple things like vitamin D zinc, where certain melatonin things that we know will boost the immune system reduce the attachment to the ACE receptors, these are readily available to folks and and you burn that especially have been bringing forth most of our shows. Here's where you go to get information about treatments. So I thank you for that. I have an announcement to make. That's newsworthy. It's not good news here in Oregon. Just yesterday, the Oregon State Board of Nursing had an a hearing meeting a vote. And they voted that they the board can discipline nurses if they're not vaccinated. In other words, they can take away your license. And of course they write I went to their website this morning, and I saw their writing this reassuring sounding paragraph that well, of course, we're not going to target nurses we only investigate when nurses are reported. In other words, somebody anonymously reports a nurse that they're working unvaccinated and they can lose their license. That is the current state of affairs here in Oregon. I have Have you ever heard of such a thing where your actual license to practice is threatened based on your required uptake of a no investigational product? It's just bizarre,
Bernadette Pajer 57:12
right? That does not prevent infection or transmission, or hospitalization or death for that matter. Right that it that just shows this is not about health. Dr. Paul, this is about control and trying really the pharmaceutical industry used as a tool for other things we won't go into here. They want nothing more than pre cradle to grave customers. And they want it so that you don't have the option to say no to their products. They want a fully vaccinated boosters every couple of months for everything they develop a product for and they're using government's to push it and, you know, we knew that this was systemic pre COVID COVID is revealing it So take heart. Dr. Paul, I really feel like this overreach that is so absurd is only going to wake up more people so that we can get rid of the systemic CAPTCHA for public health agencies. But yeah, we've got a way to go. Let me just show a just a couple of more if I could. places here, and I'll just go over the headlines real quick. They're so awesome to read at trial site news. Trouble in paradise surrounding the use of ivermectin. There's a woman in some island nation that her license is, is being threatened now simply for healing patients. With ivermectin, there's another Oh, I already did that one. There's a great piece on how ivermectin became a target for the fraud detectives. That's really fascinating to read. There's one. I did that one and the psychology psychology of vaccinations, opposes any other cure. This is really interesting to read, you know, because that's really where we are. We know that going back to the 1980s, where we have recorded in the Federal Register, our government saying that anything critical of vaccination has got to be suppressed in order to maintain faith in the vaccine program. And that statement that that mindset toward vaccination policy has grown into a monster that we see today. Yeah, well,
Dr. Paul 59:38
yeah, anything I've done participated in mainstream vaccine related activities. It's always about vaccine uptake is the goal, never about whether or not it's safe, never about whether or not it's effective. Those things are just assumed or presumed or swept under the carpet is just all about the program. The success of the program, it's just like this monster Mark. thing. That is unquestioned, of course you and I know this is a industry that's liability free. We can't sue them if we're harmed by that by a vaccine. We have a problem, Houston, we had a problem.
Bernadette Pajer 1:00:13
And as you so beautifully showed it, there's no attention paid to long term health outcomes for interrupting what be the human immune system for altering how the human immune system reacts to the environment around it. And your study of your population of your practice showed us that some very concerning how things happen when you monkey with Mother Nature?
Dr. Paul 1:00:40
Yep, no, absolutely. And I'm traveling around the country giving the talk about vaccine vaccine, because it's not just my study. It's the control group. It's the two recent studies by Brian Hooker and Neil Miller. It's the Maassen study, we have now a set of studies that are looking at comparing a real control, which is those who are unvaccinated to those who are vaccinated whether they're partially or fully vaccinated, the data is so overwhelmingly powerful that we have to stop this attempt to wipe out the control group. It literally if everyone's vaccinated, we'll never know. It's like if everybody smoked, we would never know if smoking was a problem.
Bernadette Pajer 1:01:20
Exactly. I've heard you can even prove that that. How do I say that? That that sex does not lead to babies, if you design the study correctly? To eliminate all the pregnant women from the group?
Dr. Paul 1:01:36
There you go. Yeah. No, dear, or postmenopausal or whatever. Yeah, you can, you can absolutely construct a study to show whatever you want to show. And unfortunately, that happens too much. Yeah. So do you have any parting words of wisdom for our audience this week?
Bernadette Pajer 1:01:54
Well, everybody, just keep doing your homework. Be brave, speak up, stand out. And if your neighbor, your friend, your loved one is being impacted by any of the mandates and things going on now, please help each other, you know, let's all stand together to get through this we're gonna get through to a better, healthier world, a better healthier health system, medical system, but we've got some dark times ahead, but we can get through it. If we help each other.
Dr. Paul 1:02:26
Absolutely, I would just add to that love and kindness. That's, you know, when we're in the midst of a storm as we are, when you have loved ones who are facing job loss. It's happening all around us. Just share love, kindness, support, be there for them. And this will pass. They are pushing this so hard and fast and furious. The the, I hope it's not true. But those of us who really understand what's going on, have little doubt that this thing's gonna fall apart. And then when the truth comes out, the roof caves in as the song goes, and everybody's gonna know what really happened, or you're not gonna know what to do, because you had bought this marketing as truth. So we're here to give you the other side of the story. The news that isn't hitting the news. Thank you, Bernadette for your important information. Have a blessed day.
Unknown Speaker 1:03:23
Thank you, Dr. Paul,
Dr. Henry Ealy 1:03:24
Dr. Paul 1:03:30
Dr. Paul, here, doctors in science.com is where you go to get access to my exclusive members only section. This is how you the viewers support our work. We have no sponsors. We are fully supported by you, our viewers, what do you get in the member section, it's quite a list, you get access to a couple of my eBooks. The first one is the authoritative reference list for my vaccine friendly plan book. I also have written a book very extensive called everyday health that covers pretty much what I think you should be doing if you want to live a healthy life in this world today. But there's so much more. We have a live q&a Every week after the show with yours truly, Dr. Pol answering your questions, submit your questions online, and I will tackle as many of them as I possibly can. And try to answer to the best of my ability, whatever burning questions you have. In addition to this, you get transcripts of every show. We have other bonus content. And I think one of the huge bonus content pieces is the PowerPoints of the talks I'm giving as I travel around the country. People are always asking me how can we get those PowerPoints? This is how you do it. Head on over to doctors in science comm and become a member and join the team of against the wind help me spread the truth and share this on social media and with their friends at doctors in science.com. I look forward to running with you against the wind. Go to our website dr. And science.com Sign up donate if you can let's make this the weekly show the nation's been waiting for I'm Dr Paul
Transcribed by https://otter.ai