In this episode, Dr. Noor Chazam joins Dr. Kelly to discuss his views on vaccines and their use in the treatment of chronic conditions such as cancer, heart disease, and Type 1 diabetes. Dr. Chazom is a cardiologist, surgeon, and professor of medicine at the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Philadelphia. He is also a lecturer in Surgery at the University of Pennsylvania, and an Assistant Professor of Surgery at The Perelman School of Medicine. He has been a member of the CHD, and is a frequent contributor to the Huffington Post, Slate, and the New York Times. He is the author of several books, including "Vaccine: The New Science of Resistance," and he is a regular contributor to The Huffington Post and the Atlantic. He has also been a contributor to NPR, NPR, and NPR Worldwide. Dr. Norchasm is a professor of surgery at the VA Hospital in Philadelphia, and a lecturer at the Thomas Jefferson Hospital in Boston, and he also is a lecturer on Surgery at Brigham and Young s in Boston. We talk about how he got into medicine, and why he thinks vaccines should be used in chronic conditions, and how they should be given the same treatment as other forms of medicine, such as chemotherapy, radiation, and other treatments. This episode is sponsored by the National Institute of Occupational Therapy at the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease and Immunology, the National Heart Disease Research Institute at the Johns Hopkins University, in Bethesda, Maryland, and Harvard University, among other places in the nation s flagship facility in the United States, to improve the lives of the most vulnerable people in need of care and their ability to get access to the care they need the most of what they need most of it, the most effective treatment. Learn more about your ad choices and access to high-quality, affordable and accessible care, including the best practices, the best equipment, the cheapest and the most affordable options, at the cheapest possible accommodations, everywhere you can get the best of the best places to help you access the best services, the fastest and the cheapestest practices in the cheapest practices, cheapest cheapest possible training and support you can access the most efficient practices, and most affordable practices, everywhere in the world, everywhere and everywhere you get it all you can find it all, wherever you go, and get the cheapest, cheapest, affordable, fastest and cheapest, fastestest of it all of it is most affordable, cheapest
00:00:03.000I'm going to call him my friend because I really enjoy corresponding with him, but this is the first chance that we've had to meet in person as it were over Zoom.
00:00:31.000And I know, because he's on a list, we have a CHD that has about 240 doctors and scientists on it, and they're constantly debating You know, all the issues that we're concerned about.
00:00:48.000And he is a recent addition and has cost a big store.
00:00:57.000He's very, you know, has strong beliefs that are different than in many subtle and direct ways than other people who are on that list.
00:01:08.000And he's very, extremely prolific in his writing, but also very, very compelling.
00:01:17.000It's been really enjoyable listening to you, even though he's attacking me many times.
00:01:23.000He did one attack on me on Medium, but I really enjoy it because it's the kind of thing that ought to be happening in our democracy, where we can debate complicated, difficult issues.
00:04:17.000I mean, I have the academic pedigree that you described.
00:04:21.000You know, I'm basically an establishment guy.
00:04:23.000I went to Penn Medical School, MD-PhD, under a National Institutes of Health grant with the medical scientist training program.
00:04:31.000Which I think some of your relatives in the past had something to do with establishing at the NIH. And I subsequently was funded by the NIH for about over 10 years doing immunology research.
00:04:43.000Joined the faculty at several pretty high-level academic medical centers, including Harvard and Thomas Jefferson and Penn.
00:04:50.000And so my perspective as an immunologist is what it is.
00:04:54.000And I'm happy to engage in that discourse with respect to vaccines, with respect to immunity in general.
00:05:00.000But, you know, I think what sort of has brought me into this space and in conversation with you is that because of this very sort of personal experience that my family had, I got tuned into something sort of deeper that's going on in our system.
00:05:16.000And that is this idea of our system somehow being able to tolerate minority harm.
00:05:22.000Harm to minority subsets of people simply because in some utilitarian calculus, the majority are benefiting.
00:05:32.000We're talking about vulnerable subsets of people.
00:05:35.000Vulnerable subsets of people, you know, and in fact, like, you know, I think this is not a new thing in American history.
00:05:41.000You've had, we've had examples all the way starting from slavery to how American Indians have been treated in America where minority subsets of people, you know, in the past, potentially on the The basis of their ethnicity have been discriminated against and sort of, you know, been harmed actually, because there was some majority benefit calculus there that was benefiting the majority of the rest of society.
00:06:02.000And I think this concept has crept into medicine.
00:06:05.000So my wife was a woman who had an occult uterine cancer that was associated with symptomatic uterine fibroids.
00:06:13.000And women have this problem at a rate of about 1 in 400.
00:06:16.000And there's a practice called morselation.
00:06:18.000In fact, on the 23rd, so this coming Monday, there's a movie coming out about my wife, my late wife, Amy Reed.
00:06:26.000She basically had the same academic pedigree as me, was a member of faculty at Harvard Medical School.
00:06:31.000And that cancer that she had was undiagnosed.
00:06:35.000And this practice basically converted it into a stage 4 cancer.
00:06:40.000So it was a dramatic and catastrophic complication.
00:06:43.000And it was happening on a systemic level.
00:06:45.000It was affecting 1 in 400 women on a global scale practice.
00:06:49.000So her and I started to engage in activism.
00:06:51.000Basically, it's a machine that they put inside of you that basically...
00:06:57.000And instead of removing the cancer, slice and dice it and spread it throughout our body.
00:07:03.000That's basically, well, so they don't, if they know that it's a cancer, they wouldn't use it.
00:07:07.000The problem is that when there's an unknown cancer in there, when there's an occult cancer in there, they, you know, the act of mechanically morcelating, it spreads the cancer all over and causes a stage four cancer.
00:07:19.000So it takes a curable stage 1 cancer to an incurable stage 4 cancer.
00:07:24.000And this was happening at a rate of 1 in 300 to 400 to women who basically had these uterine fibroids that were symptomatic.
00:07:30.000And the gynecologists were assuming that these are benign.
00:07:33.000So this happened to Amy and, you know, her and I got plunged into this very big public health fight.
00:08:00.000And so we engaged in a lot of activism and we were able to change the practice.
00:08:04.000We fully engaged head on the establishment and the FDA. And we were successful at it.
00:08:11.000Now, we didn't have to deal with some of the issues that the vaccine space has to deal with, which is that there are very strong federal protections favoring the vaccine industry.
00:08:20.000We didn't have to deal with that layer of protection.
00:08:23.000So I think that had some to do with our success.
00:08:26.000But my perspective really shifted from...
00:08:38.000There's this idea that majority benefit is what guides evidence-based medicine.
00:08:47.000So in other words, when people talk about efficacy of a product or a practice, they're talking about majority benefit.
00:08:56.000So I think the framework that I sort of, and this has sort of been born out of this ridiculous and awful crucible that my family fell into, is that when I think about evidence-based medicine, I think about efficacy, which is essentially synonymous with majority benefit.
00:09:16.000So if something is effective, some series of metrics have been used to demonstrate majority benefit.
00:09:22.000And when people talk about safety, we're talking about minority harm.
00:09:28.000Because you see, if minority harm actually was not minority harm, if it was majority harm, you would never actually have that product on the market.
00:09:35.000So really, we're talking about minority harm Being the definition of safety science in general, in medicine, right?
00:09:41.000The problem is, right, because majority benefit plugs directly into democracy and into the market-based economy that we have, there's a lot of money in majority benefit.
00:09:51.000There's not as much money in minority harm.
00:09:53.000And so the two things that have to be essentially on equal footing, efficacy and safety, Have essentially been dominated by efficacy being the dominant sort of force.
00:10:05.000So efficacy and majority benefit are routinely in medicine overriding minority harm and safety.
00:10:12.000So if something makes money, if something is beneficial to the majority, if the majority prefer it, our system is designed to accept that more and endorse it more and protect it more.
00:10:33.000I mean, look, how absurd a notion that any medical therapy would be perfection incarnate, right?
00:10:39.000I mean, think about it for a second, right?
00:10:41.000When you put federal protections on any product that says you can't give liability signals from the court system to that industry, you're essentially claiming perfection in a fallen world that we live in.
00:11:18.000You kind of amplify that paradox a little bit, which is that in 1986, when they passed the Vaccine Act, they gave all these companies immunity from liability.
00:11:32.000They did it because Wyeth had gone to the Reagan administration and to my uncle, who was then chairing the health committee.
00:11:41.000And to the other senators and congressmen and said, look, we are getting killed on this diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccine.
00:11:50.000We're paying out $20 in the injury downstream liability for every dollar that we're making from sales.
00:12:00.000And their question was, well, why don't you make it safer?
00:12:47.000What you're describing essentially meets the legal definition of negligence.
00:12:50.000Because if you know something is unsafe and you're going to protect it, that's by definition negligent.
00:12:54.000It's unfortunate that they sort of term it that way.
00:12:57.000When I think about harm, when I think about medical harm, You know, in medicine, when I was training at Penn in my residency program, the way we thought about complications were we classified them as unavoidable or avoidable, right?
00:13:11.000There are such things as unavoidable complications, right?
00:13:15.000Let's say you're driving down the street, for example, right?
00:13:18.000And you have your seatbelt on, your airbags, right?
00:13:21.000And some car just crashes right into you accidentally, right?
00:13:24.000That's sort of an unavoidable situation that you're in, right?
00:13:26.000Or let's say you're doing an operation, right?
00:13:29.000And, you know, someone's blood pressure spikes high and their blood vessel, their aorta ruptures, right, on the operating table.
00:13:35.000That's sort of a, that's a complication for sure.
00:13:39.000The word harm, harm, implicit to harm, is the concept of avoidability.
00:13:46.000And I think, you know, the idea that we live in a fallen world, in a world where things are not perfect.
00:13:53.000And in reality, what we are as humans is we are risk management machines, right?
00:14:00.000So the way we operate, right, is we manage and minimize risk to ourselves, to our families, to our society, to our world, right?
00:14:08.000And that's essentially like when I look at the work that you've done over the years.
00:14:12.000And, you know, when you first contacted me, I went back and looked at all the stuff that you've done.
00:14:16.000And I mean, I view you as like a risk management guy.
00:14:22.000I mean, you're basically looking for places where things fall through cracks and you're trying to sort of hedge against that risk by using the legal system or whatever platform you have to do so.
00:16:01.000It's incompatible with sort of the constitutional framework that's sitting out there, right?
00:16:06.000So, you know, I believe people who say they're vaccine harmed.
00:16:11.000And I know that this idea that we create these protectionist structures that basically block out minority subsets of people, so they have no rights, are frankly evil.
00:16:27.000I mean, I don't know what other word to...
00:16:31.000I don't mean to get too philosophical and veer off the beaten path here.
00:16:37.000Going back to your question, where does my perspective come from?
00:16:45.000The idea of minority harm Is something that we need to carefully consider in our society?
00:16:52.000Because if we don't, we're going to create all these structures that harm minority subsets of people, Robert.
00:16:57.000And after a while, we're going to hit this inflection point where the harmed actually become the majority.
00:17:03.000When the harm become the majority, then your society falls apart.
00:17:07.000Then people are going to crawl up the walls of the United States Congress and try to overthrow it.
00:17:11.000You can't create a society and institutions that ignore minority substance of people who are being harmed and take away their rights and then expect that that society over time will stay stable.
00:17:24.000I want to get to your letter to FDA, which I think is really important.
00:17:32.000The FDA, of course, wants to ignore this kind of complaint, but I think it was a hard thing for them to do to ignore you because of your credentials and your history.
00:17:52.000One of the introductions, which is kind of an obligatory disavowal of the anti-vax movement, which we see every year, but it also illustrates the background of your assumptions and how you come into this.
00:18:06.000What you say is, I want to be very clear that I am an ardent supporter of President Biden's plan to vaccinate 150 million Americans in 100 days.
00:18:15.000And that my letter is not to be abused by political, uninformed, or conspiratorial forces attempting to dissuade the American public from being vaccinated, nor by those whose binary approach to the pro-vaccine position renders them incapable of grasping the problem of, quote, minority harm, unquote.
00:18:36.000I do believe that it is the patriotic duty of every American who can reasonably and safely be vaccinated to do so as soon as possible in order that we may save our nation from this pandemic peril that is threatening our very existence.
00:18:51.000And, you know, I'm actually glad that you wrote that.
00:18:54.000And I think, you know, one of the things, like what I try to do when I speak to people is I say I'm not anti-vaccine.
00:19:37.000We give people information so that they can make, as you say, an individualized risk assessment.
00:19:45.000And the risk assessment for 150 million Americans are different from everybody.
00:19:51.000And a lot of that is because this disease that we're trying to prevent has categories of risk that are kind of very well defined for different subsets and different demographics and particularly different age groups.
00:20:06.000So if you're under 55, the risk from COVID is effectively zero.
00:20:14.000Whereas if you're over 55, and particularly when you get into the 75 to 85, there is a dramatic risk from this disease, dramatic, deadly risk that could be as high as 7%.
00:20:27.000And so the assessment ought to be different for those groups of people.
00:20:34.000There's other complications too, because you say, I would say, if you're under 55, There's an argument to be made that you should not get a vaccine because I'm making this argument.
00:20:48.000I'm just being a devil's advocate that you should not get a vaccine because the vaccines do have risks that are pretty, you know, fairly well documented.
00:20:58.000And the risk from COVID, you know, may be much lower.
00:21:04.000Not only that, but we You may get a much more robust, long-term, durable immunity from the disease, from having the natural disease than you will get from the vaccine.
00:21:18.000That is true with every other vaccine that we know about.
00:22:10.000If there are seven people standing on this track and one guy is going to get hit, one guy is on the siding and seven people are going to get hit by the trolley car and you're standing at the switch.
00:22:24.000Do you have a right to switch it to the deciding and kill that guy?
00:22:29.000You know, and does government particularly have a right to demand that that person enter the risk rather than put those other people at risk?
00:22:47.000So that's what I would say is one of the conundrums with this vaccine is That is most troubling to me is this big drive to vaccinate the very young who essentially have zero risk from the disease.
00:23:02.000And it's kind of a hazy argument that is deliberately obfuscated and made opaque, you know, where they're saying, you use the word patriotic, and that makes me worried because they're telling people, you need to do this for the herd, for the group.
00:23:22.000And it may not be in your interest to do it.
00:23:26.000Some of these vaccines, according to the Phase 1 trial for Moderna, 100% of the people got injured.
00:24:15.000You know, one other complication to that formula.
00:24:19.000We don't even know how well this vaccine prevents transmissibility.
00:24:24.000So that's another, you know, now you're asking people to do, to take a risk who are young, who have zero risk from the illness, benefit older people.
00:24:35.000And it may be that the older people don't even benefit.
00:24:38.000So, you know, that's another ingredient to that risk assessment that just makes it even more complicated to answer these questions.
00:24:47.000So I think the idea that there are different groups that have variable susceptibilities, differential susceptibilities, from a mortality perspective alone is absolutely true.
00:25:04.000I do think that the medical ethical principle of patient autonomy That trumps all things in this discussion, meaning that no one should ever be strapped down or threatened with loss of their liberties or their employment because they are refusing a medical therapy.
00:25:36.000I'm not an advocate for forced vaccinations, right?
00:25:39.000I am an advocate for sort of public education about immunology, right?
00:25:45.000And I have to say that, you know, one dimension that I don't hear in any of the discussions that I'm part of is this idea, and I know that this gentleman, what's his name, Geert van der Bosch from Geneva.
00:26:01.000So, you know, there's this idea that's out there that we should stop vaccinating.
00:26:07.000He's saying we should stop vaccinating everyone because the vaccine is introducing this selective pressure that's going to create more dangerous variants.
00:26:13.000You know, I think there's partial truth to that, but the one risk category that people don't think about when they think about the different risk categories, the mortality issue is one thing, right, that you pointed to.
00:26:25.000Like 55 and over, 65 and over are highly susceptible to infection and to mortality and to complications.
00:26:34.000But the one element that has a societal impact actually is that every single naturally infected person, every single naturally infected person is literally a factory for new mutations.
00:26:46.000So really where the variants are coming from The variants are coming from every individual and every community and every sort of city where people are naturally infected.
00:27:01.000So the idea that natural infection, we can somehow sort of let natural infection rage through our communities And expect that we won't have emergent properties and new variants.
00:27:14.000I think we need to, you know, everyone who's rationally thinking about this needs to sort of step back, take a deep breath, and say, wait a minute.
00:27:22.000So if Jack Smith's infected and everyone around him is infected, every one of these people is a factory for new mutations.
00:27:29.000I mean, all these new variants are coming from somewhere.
00:27:31.000It's not like there's this pool of variants sitting out there, right?
00:27:40.000The more activity, the more organisms that are out there, theoretically, the greater chance that you will produce mutations because it's numerical.
00:28:01.000It may be that the worst kind of mutations are coming from vaccinated individuals.
00:28:07.000And this is for the same reason that when you use subtherapeutic antibiotics, that's when you produce superbugs.
00:28:16.000Because you're wiping out the organisms, the strains that are the easiest strains, the most common strains to wipe out.
00:28:24.000And the ones that continue to survive, even if there's only a few of them, are essentially superbugs.
00:28:31.000So you've got a few of them in your nasal pharynx.
00:28:35.000Those ones that survive are the superbugs.
00:28:38.000And we know this is what happened with the pertussis vaccine.
00:28:42.000You had pertussis A, which the vaccine prevents, but there was a much more dangerous pertussis B. And all of a sudden now we have epidemics of pertussis B because the vaccine forced those particular mutations.
00:28:59.000And if you look at just evolutionary theory, There's a doctrine called type replacement that says that the most common organism, the most common strains of any pathogen are always the less injurious, because if you're a pathogen, You want a healthy host.
00:29:27.000You do not want to injure your host, because you want your host walking around, shaking hands, kissing people, having sex, being sociable, because then you get to spread.
00:29:37.000And those are the ones that are the most common ones.
00:29:39.000So it's always the least deadly strains have become most common.
00:29:45.000They out-compete their brethren who are killing people.
00:29:48.000But when you get rid of those strains, You then open up the ecosystem, which is the nasal pharynx, or the rare strains, which are, according to biological theory, are going to almost always going to be the most virulent and the most deadly.
00:30:07.000So I would say what you're saying, what you're saying is not, it's not, there's a Another way of looking at that.
00:30:18.000So I guess, look, I think that you're not incorrect.
00:30:23.000I would say that when you think about evolution and selective pressures versus the source of variance, right?
00:30:32.000There's no question that selective pressures under certain circumstances are dominant selective forces for evolution of new variants and dominance of new variants.
00:30:44.000But these parameters interact with each other.
00:30:47.000So in other words, the source of mutation is Interacts with selective pressure.
00:30:52.000And depending on how large one is versus the other, one could become dominant over the other.
00:30:58.000So I mean, there's definitely the role of selective pressure in selection of phenotypes in evolutionary biology or in immunology and infectious disease is definitively correct.
00:31:09.000I mean, you can have a A massive selective pressure that's selecting for more virulent strains, and therefore, those become dominant, right?
00:31:19.000And that's, I think, what Van der Bosch is pointing to, and I think I'm hearing echoes of that same argument in what you just described.
00:31:29.000I didn't hear him talk about that, but I didn't...
00:31:32.000I wasn't completely clear on his arguments, and I've seen analyses of his arguments that...
00:31:41.000Agree with some of the stuff that he was saying.
00:31:45.000But, you know, he said a lot of the things that were more speculative.
00:31:50.000I guess my fundamental point, Robert, is that you have selective pressure interacting with variant source.
00:31:57.000And depending on the circumstance and the size of each one, One is more dominant over the other.
00:32:03.000And I think that in a pandemic scenario, where you have potentially 9 billion or 8 billion people susceptible to all being infected because there is no baseline level of endemic immunity, that that force is going to be so large in terms of generation of these new variants that what will end up happening if we just let naturally this process occur What we'll have is just this impenetrable,
00:32:30.000dense variety of now-living mutants that'll just be impossible to break through.
00:32:36.000So, you know, I think we have to think about the inflection points in how these forces interact.
00:32:42.000And I think my tendency is to think that in a pandemic situation, the absolute number of factories for mutations dominates over any particular one individual selective force.
00:32:56.000So the Cochrane Collaboration has done a series of studies on the flu vaccine.
00:33:01.000There's a group of those studies that show that people who are...
00:33:08.000We're vaccinated for the seasonal flu, have no immunity from that vaccine against the pandemic flus that come every few years, right?
00:33:21.000The bird flu, the swine flu, H1N1, H1N5, etc.
00:33:26.000The people who got a natural flu infection have much more immunity.
00:33:31.000So that again goes to, you know, is vaccination Is mass vaccination really the solution or do you want young people as much as possible to get natural infections and have a much broader range?
00:33:47.000Of immunity that maybe will protect against all those strains that are constantly mutating and give them really robust, durable...
00:33:55.000Or because if you give the vaccine and then it mutates, then you have to get the new strain.
00:34:25.000She had a pretty robust symptomatic disease.
00:34:28.000There's no way in hell she's going to get that vaccine because, you know...
00:34:32.000I think what you're saying is absolutely true.
00:34:35.000It's fundamentally a dogma in immunology.
00:34:38.000This is a fundamental fact in immunology that if you have a natural infection, you're more robustly immunized than if you just get immunized against this one specific moiety.
00:35:10.000You mentioned that there are studies done.
00:35:12.000Any immunologist worth their salt would tell you that that's probably true.
00:35:16.000If you get immunized with the whole virus, you're more robustly immunized than if you're vaccinated against just one protein from the virus.
00:35:30.000Of achieving a population that's naturally immune versus a population that is immunized with the vaccine in terms of the mortality cost, right?
00:35:43.000And I would submit to you that, look, the COVID-19 disease kills a minority subset of people.
00:35:50.000Unless we want to say, oh, the COVID-19 is not real or whatever, which I, I mean, it's just- I would never say that because I don't think it's true.
00:36:12.000Half a percent is the cost, is the minority subset number, right?
00:36:17.000Now, that's juxtaposed against probably like a 0.05% or 0.01% vaccine harm So you have two minority subsets of people, both of whom will be harmed.
00:36:32.000The vaccine probably does help that larger minority subset.
00:36:40.000And it harms the smaller minority subset, for sure, right?
00:36:44.000So how do we balance the good of these two minority subsets that we're dealing with?
00:36:49.000The vast majority of us are fine when we get SARS-CoV-2, right?
00:36:52.000And so I think fundamentally, that's the question.
00:36:55.000And let me put a finer point on that question.
00:37:00.000Because our experience here in the United States is of a virus that is much more deadly than almost any other country in the world.
00:37:12.000Why are we losing 1,500 people for every 100,000 when Cuba is losing only 14 and Africa is losing only one?
00:37:21.000And there's a lot of factors, younger population, but one of those is Is that there's been a deliberate effort in our country to not look at the benefits of therapeutic drugs.
00:37:35.000And the problem is we literally have an institutional resistance where, you know, nothing's getting published on those.
00:37:43.000Doctors are discouraged from using them, punished, even jailed for using them, and losing their licenses and all of this other hard show.
00:37:54.000In order to have that one-track solution, which is it's either vaccination or the disease, and that should not be our choice.
00:38:01.000We should be doing real risk assessments, and we should be doing early intervention.
00:38:08.000What would the numbers be like if Tony Fauci had not created a system where nobody gets treated until they get in the hospital?
00:38:19.000Where for the first three weeks that you get that virus, you're getting ivermectin, and you're getting hydroxychloroquine, and you're getting corticosteroids, and you're getting antibodies, and you're getting, you know, Zithromax, and all of these combinations of drugs that appear to be very, very effective that The doctors all over the world are saying this is working.
00:38:40.000And we are the country that doesn't allow it.
00:38:43.000And we have the most catastrophic impacts from this disease in any other country.
00:38:48.000I don't know how Tony Fauci, people are saying he's a success story when he has engineered the worst outcome in the world here.
00:38:59.000Robert, if you go back and look at some of the stuff that I wrote early in this pandemic, I think Tony Fauci's approach to this pandemic has been disastrous.
00:39:12.000Fundamentally, COVID-19 is an inflammatory disease.
00:39:16.000What the NIH effort focused on with anti-replication agents and vaccines At the cost of anti-inflammatory therapies is a massive blunder.
00:39:29.000And I tell you, I've communicated with Janet Woodcock about this when she was at Operation Warp Speed.
00:39:33.000You know, you can go back in my Medium blog post and you'll see one of the first drugs that my colleagues and I attempted to test was cyclosporine.
00:39:42.000And cyclosporine is a classical generic drug.
00:39:45.000It literally costs like 12 bucks for a 30-day course, right?
00:39:48.000And it suppresses, it dampens activation of T cells, okay?
00:39:52.000I'm working on it with a mentor and colleague, Carl June, who's the guy who invented CAR T cells at Penn, and a good friend of mine at Baylor.
00:40:00.000Finally, we were able to start these two small clinical trials But, you know, in truth, the dominance of the vaccine and anti-replication efforts, these were all Fauci's sort of prejudice.
00:40:11.000And I wrote an article about this called Fauci's Prejudice.
00:40:29.000And I think the blame, whether it's been intentional or whether it comes from his professional prejudice from the HIV pandemic, the blame squarely rests on Dr.
00:40:39.000Fauci's shoulders because he essentially has ignored anti-inflammatory therapies.
00:40:43.000And, you know, I've written extensively about this.
00:40:45.000I was communicating directly to Janet Woodcock about this right from day one.
00:40:49.000You know, in fact, March 24th is the first time I communicated about cyclosporine with them.
00:40:59.000All the way from the beginning where our president was completely ignoring the fact that this thing is real, up until now, where we're just dominantly focused on the vaccine thing.
00:42:37.000In the history of vaccine science, in the history of the Western Hemisphere, with the exception of maybe the Gardasil issue that you had mentioned to me, but again, that was a much smaller scale.
00:42:48.000We've never ever Deploy the vaccine smack dab in the middle of an outbreak where about 20 to 30% of the population is already infected.
00:42:58.000Just think about that for one second, right?
00:43:01.000You go to a doctor's office and you say, I have the sniffles.
00:43:04.000They would never give you the flu shot.
00:43:06.000You go to your doctor and you say, my kid had the chickenpox.
00:43:10.000They would never give that kid a zoster shot, or most docs, most reasonable docs, when you already had the chickenpox.
00:43:15.000But here we are, right now as we speak, somewhere around 30 million Americans, maybe more, have been infected or have asymptomatic infections currently.
00:43:25.000And we are literally indiscriminately vaccinating all of these people, right?
00:43:30.000What that means is that we're taking people who have the virus all over their bodies.
00:44:00.000If you have a total body infection, a natural infection, these T cells that you activate will go into every single one of your tissues and attack it.
00:44:09.000And you know, I think what we're going to be seeing, and the concern that I raised with Dr.
00:44:14.000Woodcock, was that if you don't know whether this is safe to give to people who are naturally infected in a setting where a vast proportion of the American population is already infected, we are making an error.
00:45:18.000And then we're calling all these people who are dying and having complications, true, true and unrelated.
00:45:22.000Yeah, you know, Jay Barton Williams, 36-year-old, otherwise healthy guy with an asymptomatic infection down in Memphis, Tennessee, an orthopedic surgeon who was just seven weeks out from his wedding, he had an asymptomatic infection, gets two Pfizer shots, one, two, dead, right?
00:46:08.000Marks is, look, the clinical trials did not assess People who have recent or asymptomatic infections, and especially in vulnerable categories, the elderly, the frail, people who have cardiovascular diseases, you know?
00:46:21.000And so here we are, we have this massively inflated subset of people who have natural infections, and we are indiscriminately vaccinating them.
00:46:30.000And if Pfizer and the FDA and Moderna and Johnson& Johnson don't take steps to do it, I think the public should.
00:46:39.000I think the consumer, the American consumer is one of the most empowered species in world history.
00:46:46.000The American consumer has to demand, must demand, screening before vaccination so that no person who's recently infected gets indiscriminately vaccinated.
00:46:58.000The problem is the American consumers are not going to realize this because this issue is censored.
00:47:06.000And what you're saying about it, you know, you will be shut down as soon as you get a public audience, as you already know.
00:48:43.000But it was during that hearing, because I wanted Dr.
00:48:47.000Marks to raise the issue of recently infected people getting indiscriminately vaccinated.
00:48:53.000And essentially, the answer I got is that this is not a concern that our clinical trials have had a small number of asymptomatic infected people, and it's not an issue.
00:49:01.000To which I said, you know, number one, it's not powered enough, and number two, you haven't put susceptible groups with recent infections in it.
00:49:32.000It's more than a million if the rate is one in 500 if you're vaccinating the entire U.S. population.
00:49:36.000But, you know, it's like, you know, if one in 500 are susceptible and you only test 300 people out, the chances statistically that you've missed the event, the signal, are very high.
00:49:46.000So what you need to do is you need to actually power up...
00:50:24.000So when the viral antigens stick around there, if you activate an immune response that targets those organs, you know, you can get like a kid with an aneurysm and suddenly the aneurysm blows after a vaccine and you wonder, well, it's not related, right?
00:50:39.000Well, it could be because the virus goes to the blood vessel.
00:50:41.000And if there's actually a laxity in the blood vessel, In an aneurysm, and the immune system attacks that laxity, the blood vessel ruptures.
00:50:49.000You know, that's just sort of, you know, or let's say the heart.
00:50:52.000If the heart gets targeted, right, you suddenly die of heart block.
00:50:55.000Is heart block a vaccine-associated complication?
00:50:57.000And that's the other thing, you know, that I think it's very highly likely, and you know this, you know, you've talked about this, I know, and you wrote this very nice letter to Biden.
00:51:05.000About how their surveillance systems are an absolute disaster.
00:51:09.000Because, you know, most of the response to these vaccine-associated complications has been, by the public health officials, it's true, true and unrelated.
00:51:28.000A heart attack that you get immediately after vaccination, if you do a full autopsy and full chemical analysis, there's no way that you can figure out.
00:51:38.000You know, I would say that the way to find out is to actually analyze these people for evidence of past viral infection.
00:51:45.000So you can look for IgM in their blood.
00:51:47.000You can actually do PCR for DNA on their tissues.
00:51:53.000There are ways, you know, if you have a good forensic pathologist and if the hypothesis is that these people who are having these complications are the recently infected, you can find evidence for, you know, viral and bacterial disease.
00:52:37.000I hate to let you go because this is fascinating.
00:52:40.000And I really, really am grateful to you for being, for your courage and having this debate.
00:52:46.000And, you know, for just to have rational discourse with somebody who doesn't agree with everything that you say is such a pleasure nowadays because it's all verboten.
00:53:21.000Is there any way that we can find out whether or at least have a suggestion about whether or not we have some kind of, is there some other signal that you can get detected?
00:53:35.000So you've had an antibody measured then?
00:53:38.000So if it's been over a year, chances are that the viral antigens are out of your system.
00:53:43.000I think the basic science, at least from animal studies, says eight months is about the inflection point where the viral antigens are pretty clear.
00:53:51.000So that's the first time I would suggest considering getting the revaccination.
00:53:54.000You know, I think if you don't have IgG, there are some people who don't make IgG, you know, and sometimes the vaccine does force it.
00:54:01.000So, you know, in cases like yours, I would suggest possibly, if it's been over eight months after your infection, you know, getting at least a single shot of the vaccine.
00:54:51.000That was the other thing I wanted to talk to you about, and we can talk about it at some other point, but this idea of why do people need two shots?
00:55:03.000If a person has had a recent infection over eight months ago and their antibodies are waning, the idea of giving one shot, in fact, is reasonable.
00:55:13.000These are all sort of nuances of it that we can discuss over time, hopefully.
00:55:19.000Human-Nutrazen, thank you very, very much for joining me, and thank you for continuing to be a voice for reason and for ethics and for good science in our society.