Turtles All The Way Down - Vaccine Science and Myth: Interview with Emma Tekstra

welcome back to another episode of Christian Natural Health today I'm very pleased to have Emma ttra back with us again Emma is a global Health consultant

and Independent Health researcher passionate about helping companies and individuals understand what truly

creates health and well-being as a fellow of The Institute of actuaries Emma is deeply rooted in the data and

science of the human body and what it t m what makes it tick or break down she's the author of how to be a healthy human

welcome Emma thanks for joining us thank you thanks for having me yeah so to today I want to ask you about somebody

else's book it's kind of weird but uh the book is Turtles all the way down I learned about this on from your book and

that's why I went and read it and it totally blew my mind so um the reason I'm interviewing you about their book is

because it was written by Anonymous authors uh which I assume the reason for that is fairly obvious but what's your

take on why they didn't want their names to be out there yeah so part of the problem with this kind of information

about vaccines or any other asp ects of the the conventional medical industry is that those who don't want it to be

common knowledge go after the individuals with personal attacks instead of focusing on the the arguments

that that they're making so the book was written by doctors in Israel it was actually originally written in Hebrew

it's it's been translated and Israel is a really small country so part of their reason for remaining Anonymous is is

just to protect their families and everybody kind of knows each other but it also makes sure that any criticism of

the book is focused on the science and the evidence that they're bringing and

and there's a lot of it there's a whole separate um reference document that that you can go into with links to to all of

the papers and things like that so um actually so much um silence followed

once they' published the book um that an academic actually decided to offer a

reward of of $4,000 us if anybody could dispute any of the um arguments made in

the book or even the claims made at the end of first chapter and today it's just been total silence nobody's been able to

do it wow I hadn't heard that that's fascinating yeah and part of the reason why I really wanted to bring this up is

because I am a naturopathic doctor and I didn't know this stuff like they didn't teach us this in school so it totally

blows my mind and just like as a we'll we'll talk get into some of the nitty-gritty in the rest of the the conversation but the book isn't really

going into the like this vaccine causes this side effect it's taking a big step back and it's looking at the bigger

picture of what's really going on behind the scenes in terms of like the vaccine industry and a lot of the slight of hand

that goes on in terms of interpreting the data so first thing I want to ask you about is there's uh the book States

the three pillars of vaccine safety are pre-licensure clinical trials adverse event reporting systems and postm

marketing epidemiologic studies so can you explain first of all for our audience what these are and why they're

important sure sure so the main arguments for and against vaccines right are about their safety so whether the

the harms outweigh the the benefits and their efficacy whether they do what they say they're going to do safety is most

critical because unlike other Medical Products you're giving vaccines to people who don't currently they're not

they're not sick right at least not with um the infectious disease that they're actually designed to combat so they may

have different health problem of course but but so many vaccines are given to perfectly healthy babies so the the

pre-licensing clinical trials what you tend to hear most about so once a new medical product is is developed in this

case a vaccine the manufacturer carries out clinical trials to show the government authorities that they're

they're safe and effective so that they can approve them for use so they start with um animal trials in in phase one

and if that looks okay then they'll give the vaccine to just like a few hundred people in um the phase two trial just uh

there won't be any control group we'll get into that uh just a few people to see if it's if it's sort of safe and

then if phase two looks okay then they'll get into those all important phase three trials which is what

approval is based on so phase three usually involves a few thousand people and compares the trial group those

receiving the vaccine with the control group those who don't and then they compare the outcome but clinical trials

are really Limited in their scope so for example if a trial includes 5,000 people

they might miss a reaction that statistically occurs in one in say every 6,000 people so if you think of all the

millions of people that that are getting vaccines that could be a problem so the the trials also just tend to focus on um

certain groups so maybe healthy individuals in in a certain demographics so the trials won't show any problems

that might occur in in broader demographics or or people with existing health problems so because of that we

need these other two pillars um that you mentioned so the Adverse Events reporting system so that's set up by um

Health authorities and it's essentially a huge database so after a vaccine is out in the market being administered to

millions of people a doctor is expected to make a report if if anybody's reacted

badly for example and then the third pillar is those postmarketing uh

epidemiological studies so epidemiology studies disease at the the population

level rather than the individual level so it's carried out by science and actores like me um I actually considered

becoming an epidemiologist once I was qualified as an actory in my 20s I found it really really fascinating but if you

look at the um the various health related data points and all the the different demographics um in this case

those who got a vaccine got sick or or got the disease or you know had problems or not and then it draws conclusions

through the statistical relevance because there so much data there's now millions of of data points so that's

basically we can get more into that sure yeah absolutely so back to the trials themselves so at that earlier

level you're supposed to have placebos that are involved in all of this right so the placebo controls were told that

all of the vaccines that are on the childhood schedule had a placebo control

but that isn't actually true why do they claim that they have been and why

haven't they what's going on there right right so if you think about the the clinical trials if something happens

right away Within hours of the vaccine like a fever or a sore arm you can

easily attribute it to to the vaccine but if it's days or weeks later it becomes more complicated to attribute it

to the vaccine or something else that that happened to be going on so that's why in the phase three trials they're

supposed to have these Placebo controls so half of the people get the vaccine being tested and half of them do not and

then you can use statistics to analyze the outcomes good or bad um that is from the the the vaccine itself so say there

there's a trial and there's a thousand children so let's say 500 get the vaccine and and 500 don't so in the

vaccine group let's say 50 of them have a high fever over the next week or

something and then in the the um the the no the no vaccine group let's say or the

the the supposed control group let's say only 10 uh have a fever in the next week and it could be that they caught a cold

or some other kind of virus um you know that just happened you just kind of a coincidence it happened at the same same

time so this all sounds really good right so the problem is what is being used for those Placebo controls as you

mentioned so ideally it would be nothing but a saline solution which is completely inert in the human body but

sadly that that's not the case um vaccines are actually mostly tested against other vaccines as the control

that's that's what's so crazy and sometimes they they will um test it against a shot that includes all the

vaccine ingredients not the antigen so that's the specific antigen for for the disease but the ingredients the other

ingredients include things like preservatives like um form Malahide which is a known carcinogen stabilizers

and the the all important adun so I think important to to mention the Aden so this is a known toxin something like

um aluminium or Mercury so aluminum sorry you might get the British Bri out

of me so so that gets um the immune system really hyped up to respond to the

antigen that's the the virus or the or the bacteria that the the the vaccine is meant to uh be protecting against so

it's essentially tricking the immune system into creating antibodies so in fact these adant are Toxic by Design

that's what they're be doing um and most of the adverse reactions to a vaccine

it's due to these extra ingredients and not the dead or weakened virus or bacteria that's that's being addressed

so to give you an example so if we look at at a particular vaccine and and what the control was so dap let's look at dap

so this is uh diptheria tetanus and pusis hooping cough and this replaced

the old dtp um vaccine and and that really they brought out a new one because the old

dtp was known to cause serious side effects right so but the control in the the new clinical trial for daap

everybody was given the the the control was given the old dtp vaccine and so there was no true Placebo now if you

look back back to okay well what's the DT the old dtp vaccine so that was

developed in the 1940s so old and they never had all of this methodology so there was no control group at all and no

methodology for tracking any side effects or anything but it was known that it caused a lot of side effects in

recent years which is why they they they they use this new one or developed this new one and and what they found in this

new clinical trial was one out of every 22 infants in this new trial were hospitalized

from the det vaccine but they didn't think it was a concern because it was similar to the control group right but

the control group was the old dtp vaccine so just to give I'll give you an example of uh using just the vaccine

ingredients so Merks hepatitis A vacine the package says it was tested against a

placebo it uses the word Placebo but on Investigation if you investigate what that Placebo was they get a shot without

the antigen but it had aluminium in it in the shot as well as as the preservative um therasol therasol is

based on Mercury and there's plenty of science now that shows those two toxins

together become exponentially more neurotoxic than either one of them alone

yeah it's it's it's really crazy and the the book authors actually do a really wonderful job they they list out every

single vaccine on the the childhood schedule now and uh who the manufacturer was sometimes a vaccine has two

different manufacturers so who the manufacturer was um and what the clinical Tri was what the placebo was in

some cases there's no control at all and then they tabulate this this all out and so the the the implications for this

this this Revelation really can't be overstated enough because from a scientific perspective the zero evidence

that any of the vaccines on the childhood schedule have have been really tested fully tested for safety I.E

causing more harm than than they prevent yeah and what you just described is where they get their title from this

idea of so this was compared to this which didn't have a control either which was compared to this which didn't so

it's Turtles all the way down exactly they tell that story so I I think that this was also referenced I want to say

at the beginning of a Stephen Hawking book where there was a woman who said that the the the Earth is resting on the

back of a turtle and they said oh the the speaker thought I'm Gonna Get You what's the turtle on and she says

another turtle and then he says what's that turtle on and she goes you think you're so clever it's Turtles all the

way down so that was the refence a wonderful title yeah it is a wonderful title and so it's so yeah super clever

and that in and of itself if if it was just that chapter that's absolutely

shocking like the implications of that so none of them have been tested against a true Placebo right right right right

yeah oh my gosh yeah that's absolutely crazy so I'll get to the why in a little

bit on that one um but so let's talk about as far as kind of the is there a

causal link like some of the the post marketing once it's out um The Institute of medicine so this was a committee that

was tasked with determining whether or not there was a causal link between childhood vaccines and any Adverse Events so who are they why did they why

were they chosen for this and what did they what did they base their conclusions upon yeah so the Institute

of medicine it's actually now called the the National Academy of Medicine but we'll stick Toom as that's what it was

called when it was originally tasked with uh the vaccine question like 20 years ago so it's of the broader

National Academy of Sciences and and and and that organization is meant to be an independent body in serving in an

advisory capacity to to the nation to policy makers to the public and obviously in's case on on uh medical and

health matters so they've published a number of reports over the last 20 years on vaccine safety but the one that gets

all the attention nowadays is a um 2013 study on the safety of of the whole us

uh National vaccine program and it basically included nothing to see here all is

well interesting so and their conclusion was based on what exactly like how did they that yeah so so they spent two

years looking at all the epidemi epidemiological evidence right all the statistical data the the clinical trial

data as well as any biological evidence so um medical studies in humans on um

any adverse reactions or anything and they focused on 158 Adverse Events or uh

conditions so uh gon bar vasculitis juvenile uh diabetes autism asthma these

are all conditions that that they studied and they found the causal Link in only 14 and um I think a suggested

Link in in just another four and for the rest it concluded that the evidence was insufficient to either prove or refute a

causal link so the government and the media blasted that that this meant Oh vaccines are safe um there's no evidence

for most of these adverse health conditions being due to vaccines but the absence of

evidence is not evidence of absence right so in other words just because

they they couldn't find any evidence that doesn't mean that evidence doesn't exist so actually this study presents

the the glaring problem uh with the conclusions in in that particular report that that these should have sounded

alarm bells that that there's a massive lack of scientific research into um you

know the effect of of vaccine in ingredients on the body uh the biochemical interactions between uh

different vaccine ingredients um the the between uh different uh vaccines that

are administered within weeks or months of each other let alone on the same day there's never been any any of that

research uh what genetic characteristics or or familial traits um can leave

individuals more susceptible to to Adverse Events any existing health conditions that that might possibly lead

to to worse outcomes long long s but the problem is that vaccine research is is

radioactive you know nobody wants to touch it and if if we don't study what's causing these Adverse Events we we can't

hope to make vaccine safer or know how to help people that have already been harmed sure so to clarify here so it

sounding like what you're saying is that the question that they are supposed to investigate is correlation versus

causation is there a correlation between this vaccine and these symptoms that is completely unrelated or is the vaccine

causing it but in order to answer that second question question you have to understand like what's the potential

mechanism for how this ingredient could cause adverse effects and if you don't

look for what the possible mechanism could be you can't expect to find it

right yeah basically so nobody's looking yeah well nobody officially commissioned

by by the government right into the vaccine ingredients but there is some science being done um some of it's not

published like in in the early 2000s the the US government realized how much mercury babies were were getting in

their first two years of life Mercury is a Nome neurotoxin as we mentioned and they may quietly made a push to get

Mercury out of vaccines with you very quietly didn't didn't appear in the media or anything um and then other

independent scientists are looking at some of the other ingredients so um uh Dr Carl jablonowski over at Children's

Health defense that's the organization funded uh founded by Robert Kennedy Jr

Dr Christina Parks Dr James Lions Wier so they've looked at things like now the

amount of aluminium a one-year-old is is subject to across those first 12 months

um if the CDC schedule is adhered to um aluminum's been shown to to build up in

the brain and and it's difficult to to detox so it may be the cumulative effect that that's the the the problem but

remember the time the I report came back came out in like like 2012 2013 the

commission claimed there was insufficient evidence and rather than sound the alarm that more studies need

to be done right away and safety couldn't possibly be claimed because because of the the the lack of

scientific evidence they just highlighted the the lack of findings and then uh you know epidemiological studies

that focus on the statistical data they're actually insufficient without the the um the the the evidence of the

mechanism of harm so statistical data is only ever approximation to what's really

going on that there needs to be uh a published biological explanation so it's

really important to do the the medical studies in a lab but you know who's going to fund those studies of course

yeah absolutely so and then into the whole idea of reporting system so vs I

had never even heard of vs until the covid vaccine all that stuff happened um but so what's its what is it what is its

theoretical purpose before I get into some more of that yeah yeah so there stand for uh vaccine Adverse Events

reporting system so it's the the US version of that database that the health authorities supposedly track problems

with any vaccines once they're out in the market so that's that second pillar of safety that that we talked about

earlier so each country has their own system the the UK has the yellow card system for example and they all work

similarly so theirs in the US was started in 1990 um it was part of those new

regulations that were passed in in 198 uh 19 uh 86 to Grant immunity to um the

the pharmaceutical companies from from liability for for vaccine products so that that Mark the the 1986 Mark the

start of the the vastly expanded vaccine schedule and and V started in 1990 now anybody can can um uh submit a report on

on theirs uh vaccine manufacturers are technically required to um if if they

become aware of any um adverse effects but then doctors or members of the general public can can do so as well and

just to give a sense right so before covid when like you heard of it and everybody started hearing about it there

was something like 20 to 30,000 reports made on vs every year uh there was

actually uh a first big uptake um when the gardacil the HPV vaccine was rolled

out in um 2009 that was a really terrible vaccine even in the clinical

trials one in 43 young women were diagnosed with an autoimmune disease

shortly after getting the vaccine uh so really horrible so there was a big uptake then but then V really exploded

um with the roll out of the covid shots in in 2021 and there was you know very quickly like a million reports ju just

to give you a sense of the numbers so theoretically a system like theirs should alert us to any problems with um

individual vaccines specific batches of vaccines even enabling us to to track any risk factors for Adverse Events and

and really to to monitor the the risk profile of the vaccines yeah but the fact that it's voluntary so I mean to

the point where I'm a doctor I'd seen plenty of vaccine injuries and I didn't even know to report them because I

didn't know that this existed so how does that call into question the

significance of the findings that are there yeah well um I mean it's it's it's a it's a passive system so nobody

approaches doctors and reminds them them to use it so yeah you know if you ask a bunch of doctors and nurses they

probably like you don't I've never even heard of it let alone how to go about making a report so a single entry even

if you did know a single entry probably takes about an hour to to put all the entry in with all the information and

that that's if you're familiar with all the screens and everything um and and doctors aren't getting paid for that time um and parents are even less aware

of such a system um but various um uh analyses now have actually assessed that

it's actually Under reporting the the true case of of vaccine Industries uh injuries so um these assessments think

the the reporting is anywhere from 1 to 10% so just to give you a sense of of

what that might mean so let's say a vacine is administered to 4 million babies um in a year and let's say in V

there's there's a hundred reports of uh of a particular adverse event let's say seizures so a hundred out of four

million babies would indicate the the rate of seizures is one in uh 40,000 and

and you could legitimately say that that's a rare reaction right so but if if theirs is Under reporting so let's

say only 10% of the actual reactions are reported then those 100 reports actually

represents a thousand cases so now the reaction rate is is one in 4,000 babies

but if the Under reporting is nearer 1% which is what is generally agreed these

days uh with all the analysis that's been done so those 100 reports actually represent 10,000 cases of seizures and

now the rate of seizures is one in 400 babies so you know now that that's a a major major concern sure yeah so orders

of magnitude different in terms of what's going on there um okay so is you said that the manufacturers are required

to list any kind of adverse effects here so um how useful are those reports

typically when they are required to make them yeah so so technically only the

manufacturers required so so they tend to be the majority of the reports but there's little to to incentivize the

manufacturers to make fully and and complete reports so for example in the case of the the Gil vaccine that that I

mentioned earlier when it was rolled out there was immediately a lot of anecdotal stories about teenagers exhibiting

serious illnesses and and neurological problems um after the vaccine so in 2009

the CDC said oh we're going to initiate a study of of theirs and see if there there's a problem right and so they

found that two-thirds of the reports had been made by MK the Manu manufacturer

but over 90% of those reports had insufficient detail to Warrant inclusion

in the study so they simply threw out the reports yeah so the poor quality of the reports plus that Under reporting

that that we mentioned makes it a really jub system to to monitor safety oh yeah so then there's also the vaccine safety

data link um what is that and is it theoretically any more reliable well

this is a uh the the the vssd is a CDC run Information Network and so it pulls

data from um us Healthcare Systems um that have agreed to share their data so

if you think of electronic medical records so when you visit a doctor or a clinic or a hospital and you get a test

or a procedure or you fill a a a prescription out the um all that data

each of those is an individual data point which links back to you as an individual so data scientists and

actores can then study this data usually for financial management reasons right

because they can they can monitor care as well but it's mainly Financial um and then the systems have agreed to to share

the data with with vssd but it's uh wholly under control of of the CDC so

it's not available to the general public and and no researcher can just say oh I'm I'm going to make a study on it you

have to submit a formal request and say you know what you're going to study and

and who's funding your study and and what you going to do with so the CDC keep a tight re on this

particular database and and how it's used so theoretically it's it's probably more reliable because it's a it's a

simple tracking uh procedure and every test and and um medication that that

that's given because it's uh for financial reasons so there's no you know the main objective is not to track

Adverse Events so if somebody needs to get paid for that particular procedure they they want to make sure that the

data is input correctly so you know in in theory a statistical analysis can

analyze um if if you had that vaccine and then what tests and procedures of medication you had after it you know it

might indicate a particular illness or something and then they can see the the conditions that that might indicate but

you know as researchers can't get access to it it's kind of a moot point got it yeah and so every now and then some

concerns leak out into the public and the one that I'd heard about I think the only one that I'd heard about for a

number of years was the Mar controversy from the 1990s and it was associated with Dr Andrew Wakefield so tell us a

little bit about that story what was going on there yeah so so the Dr Whitefield controversy had had actually

a really big impact on on my life and career because he's British and he he had to leave the UK around the same time

that that I moved to the US and I was I was a newly qualified act at the time I already had a Fascination a weird

fascination with autism so I I really kind of followed it uh quite closely so I'll I'll try to to sumarize it but it's

quite a long story so bear with me because I think it's important to address just address this one fully

because there's so much bad information out there but basically Dr Whitefield is the first to raise the issue that

vaccines could possibly cause or at least contribute to to autism and it and it ruined his career so other doctors

now call it weight fielded if if they get censored or or maligned for for simply doing their job so um MMR is is

the triple header vaccine measles Ms and r Bella also called German Measles and

it was originally licensed in uh 1971 so Dr Whitefield graduated in uh

1985 and he was a a fellow of the the RO Royal College of of surgeons in the UK

he he specialized in gastrointestinal surgery nothing to do with Neurology interesting um yeah he's highly

acclaimed in his field he he already published over 140 scientific papers

yeah out of the he he worked out of the the Royal free hospital in London which is a huge very well-known teaching

hospital um he became an expert in inflammatory bowel disease um and so one day you know he's reading his journal

and he comes across this study of uh four um uh mothers who when they were

pregnant they contracted measles and three of the four resulting children

were diagnosed with very severe Crohn's disease and so three out of four having

that very specific disease is is nearly statistically impossible to to just be coincidence right

so he ends up publishing um a paper in the lanet the the the prestigious uh

medical journal in in the UK uh this was around 1994 and his study was called you know um is is measel vaccine a risk

factor for inflammatory bowel disease okay so no problem so far but because he published that first paper parents start

reaching out to him who believe that the MMR vaccine caused gastrointestinal

disease and um neurological regression in in their children children so hold on

let me let me clarify something so you mentioned that they'd had measles during their pregnancy you meant they got the MMR that's they they so they were

looking at that so so the journal article said that they got measles and so then he dug into did they naturally

contract me or did they have the vaccine so yes that was absolutely I mean that's

the that was the implication but it wasn't that clear so it was just kind of an exploratory paper hey we're not that

sure because the records weren't that great but back into this let's have more investigation which is what you know a

lot of these fantastic doctors are doing they're just kind of saying you know hey let's let's just this just warrant more

investigation sure yeah so so he he' done that so but then parents start saying oh I I think my kid regressed or

had all these problems after MMR and of course they do research online and they came across Dr Whitefield and then oh he

might know something about this so they reach out to to Dr Wakefield so so this is sort of building up and he starts

looking into some of this and just kind of starts getting interested right so then eventually a lawyer contacts him so

now it's around 1997 and this lawyer was actually representing parents of 12 um

children that they were actually wanting to sue uh mer for saying that the MMR

vaccine actually caused autism and and gastrointestinal problems in their kids and the lawyer was just looking for a

medical expert to testify whether this was possible or not so um so Dr

Whitefield gets involved very reluctantly but but gets involved and through that whole um study and Analysis

of the children and he pulled in a whole bunch of colleagues yeah um and then again he wrote up another paper for the Lancet as he'd done so many times before

he WR paper for the Lancet he was the lead author there was 12 other authors

who were very involved in the study he didn't even examine the children all all his colleagues are the Royal free

examine these children and so they write up this uh this paper it was completely

obs ational and the conclusions really just called for more research um and

then made a little suggestion that the parents maybe not have the combined MMR but have the the individual vaccines for

each of them separately that right used to be available but back in those days and and then were the market so you had

to have the MMR right um but anyway so that whole paper very sort of innocent paper sent shock waves through the

medical community um and the mainstream media got hold of it and they published a hit on Dr Whitefield they were

claiming ethical misconduct it was totally unfounded but he was let go from

the the Royal free hospital in the UK and he ended up having having to leave the UK um and he's been in the UK uh

been in the US ever since but you know God works in Myst mysterious ways and he's ended up becoming this phenomenal

filmmaker um yeah oh yeah I mean you should look up his his movies so I think one of his first was called vaxed and

this was about a CDC whistleblower that spoke up about some of these dodgy things that have been going on at the

CDC um another one called 1986 the ACT which was about that act that that took

away liability from from um the pharmaceutical companies and then his latest actually just came out this year

and it's called protocol 7 um and this one is another whistleblower this time from Merc internally um and about the

measles vaccine itself so you know I get I get really mad when I hear people dismiss this dedicated Doctor Who's just

trying to help children you know they say he's a crack pot or a fraudster and you know it's now become Norm to go

after individuals as we as we said you know in these adom tacts which is why part of the reasons why the turtles

authors chose to stay Anonymous yeah I can definitely see that so some of the

scientists on the other side who are arguing for vaccines will point to a lot of studies that fall under the category

of retrospective observational studies so as opposed to double blind Placebo

controlled why is that important right right so the the randomized uh control

trials that we we previously discussed as that first Pier right they're really expensive to carry out yeah um and if

they're done properly with with a a proper Placebo control group they're kind of hard to to manipulate because

the the groups are blinded from the start um and they're also they're only based on a few th000 people so the third

pillar uh looks at the these retrospective um observational studies they're much cheaper and easier to do um

and this is epidemiology that that study of of disease in in Broad populations as we talked about so they're taking

existing Health Data from from these health systems for example and they're looking at at what happens in these

different groups so with the growing noise from parents since the the Wake field controversy the uh the governments

and pharmaceutical companies felt that they needed to to beef up the narrative a little bit on on the supposed safety

of of vaccines so these large scale studies um they're really useful for doing that because well from our

perspective the the the problem is that they're they're really easy to manipulate right so they they they can

decide how to allocate um the research subject into into one group or another

um and then if the results don't give the outcomes that they want they can actually change the group yeah right and

and then reun the analysis and they can emit certain data um or subjects for arbitrary reasons and then there's a

whole host of statistical methods that can be used to massage the data a little

bit sure oh wow so there's a study that is very often cited 2002 Madson at all

um it's cited to establish vaccine safety and to debunk the autism link so can you break that study down for us

what does it actually say um and conflicts of interest and all of that yeah okay so so this one examined the

medical records of over half a million uh Danish children between 1991 and and

1998 eight so it basically compared the rates of autism in children who Reed the

MMR vaccine and and and those who who didn't and so the researchers found that the rates of autism in the two groups

were almost identical so sounds very straightforward really large group studied had the vaccine or not case

closed right but then if you dig into the details so yeah so firstly the conflicts of interest so who carried out

the study so uh on that particular one there were eight researchers one of them

actually worked for the the US CDC and the rest of them work for this institution that kept receiving funding

from the CDC including for this particular study that they did um so the

conflicts of interests were were really clear so just as a reminder so the CDC is the one that sets the the childhood

vaccine schedule in in the US obviously so they're they're under huge pressure to prove that the the vaccine schedule

is safe um another fun fact on on the study is that lead author is actually wanted for fraud to this day uh he yeah

he pocketed some of the the funds for uh from from that had been funded for for the study but anyway so so conflicts of

interest is a big issue but then we get into the into the raw data so while it sounds like a really big giant study

500,000 kids the number actually diagnosed with autism was

253 in the MMR group and 53 in the group that was identified as non MMR

so these are tiny numbers and really difficult to draw statistical

conclusions from and it would only take a handful of children to be put in the

wrong group to completely change what the what the conclusions were right so you know remember this this is in the

the 1990s when children were only getting a handful of vaccines and much less autism than than we see today so

one of the critical pieces of this data you might imagine is you know if you were diagnosed with timos or not did you

get the MMR vaccine or not that's a really critical piece of of information so did they study whether the records

were correct so of those 53 children that were indicated as non MMR is it

conceivable that maybe their Physicians when they saw there was a severe reaction maybe they they didn't complete

the record completely or maybe it was just an oversight uh you know who knows but the authors ad ad MIT that they made

no followup at all they just you know whatever the database was and it was only 53 it wouldn't have taken too much

work or even just to all of them like 300 you know no there was no followup to really double check and interview

anybody did they really get the the vaccine but the biggest kicker in this study and and you can look at this

yourself in the paper if you look at the paper there's a table in the paper that

actually shows the raw data and that the the kids that got the shop were 45 %

more likely to have autism than the non MMR group but the um so clearly an

increased risk okay but the conclusions if you then go down to the conclusions

they they they simply say well you know there's no you know same risk or even lower risk you know in the shot group

and when you press the researchers they just say well we had to make adjustments to the data for you know like birth

weight gender socioeconomic status but they don't really go into any of the det why they made these adjustments um or

even why the adjustments completely reverse the conclusions that are shown by the raw data yeah how often does that

happen where you can they especially and I assume the retrospective studies are where they can really do this um but

they how often do they you know the raw data completely contradict what their conclusions are yeah a lot so yeah so

that's just that's just one study of five examples that that the book Turtles goes into in in a lot of detail but

unfortunately you know there's probably a lot more stud uh a lot more studies out there that are like this but the

book um looks at these five in particular because they they're really examples of all the different ways that

data can be manipulated if you're not really statistical like me a bit of a data geek then then you know you think

well you know data is data right you can't manipulate data so um but then it also shows how the conclusions can then

be manipulated to drive you know public understanding so another other of the

the widely quoted ones is is is another 2013 study um that apparently addressed

the argument that um it's too many vaccines on the schedule that that's created um problems but that study was

actually completely funded and carried out by the CDC itself um and if you dig into it it didn't even study the

vaccines and the number of vaccines it studied the number of antigens so

antigens are the uh you know they they're for the disease or the the virus

and you can have a a number of of different antigens in different vaccines so one vaccine by one manufacturer might

have 3,000 antigens and another one has five you know so massive differences so

you can't really do a statistical analysis you know on on on the question of vaccines when when you really just

focus on the number of antigens it really makes no sense and then you've got all those different ingredients like like we mentioned um yet the the media

uses that particular one not really understanding statistics to quote you know conclusions about the the vaccines

you know not when it wasn't really even doing that but one of the vers we've mentioned gardisil already another of

the really bad studies um was published in in 2014 and it was about this the gardacil

HPV vaccine and it was all about autoimmune disease so just to show you another manipulation so this was

actually funded by um uh by um the pharmaceutical companies that makes gardisil right conflict of interest

again so so they report that they compared um a group of teenagers with autoimmune disease with a control group

and then they want to see whether those with autoimmune disease had uh more of of the HPV vaccine or not but then if

you dig into the control group that was used you find that those kids were were

just as sick as the um the autoimmune kids and so the spite of hand that they

use so when you have a control group the way it works you you have to make like a

demographic match for for each of the test subjects so let's let's say you have a test subject with lupus right you

have to have a control kid of a similar Age and and gender probably that doesn't

have Lupus right but you found when you dig into it they could have you know type one diabetes or rheumatoid

arthritis and so the control kids were were just as sick so again the the media

just picks up you know this is what the study concluded without details oh my goodness so all of this

does kind of Scream the question of motive um so why would Health

authorities and vaccine manufacturers and scientists and medical journals all collude to publish misleading data

what's going on yeah well you have to break it down a little bit you know to to to understand so so first it starts

in with the manufacturers well well they're just focused on making a profit right so they've developed a product and they want to sell as many as possible

big farmer is the most profitable industry in the world and they wield a lot of power to make sure that you know

they stay that way um and then you got the health authorities and so they've been recommending and and sometimes

mandating vaccines um all of these past decades and so they want to protect themselves against liability because if

if people acknowledge that vaccines can cause health problems then people that have been injured in the past are going

to come looking for for compensation right then you got the scientists and and medical journals well they're not

the totally independent o objective truth seeking um you know individuals

that that we like to assume that they are the the book explains this as the pure science myth um so you know

scientists are human like any of us they've got to put food on the table for for their families and just the way that

they get um funding for their research usually that's comes from uh big farmer

or governance the the people with the deepest Pockets um and if they publish a study that is unfavorable to those

entities then they're not going to get funding for for their work you know in the future and then another part of the

myth is the the peerreview process um that the medical journals are supposed to have and again we like to think that

this is totally objective right but the the reviewers are are often handpicked

um they don't get paid for their review um so they have to basically do it in their spare time uh most of the time

they don't get access to the raw data that the the study was based on um yeah and very rare that a that a reviewer

will you know will have any problems with it the British medical journal actually did a study they they tested uh

they planted some you know studies for review that had some very obvious errors to see how many of those errors were

picked up by their reviewers and most of them were were not you know pretty theic so it's not necessarily that it's one

big conspiracy it's just individuals and the entities involved just really are

acting within their own best interests sure that makes perfect sense and also the whole idea of who wants to admit

they've been wrong you know like after all that time so are there any studies out there that already that that that

currently exist that will demonstrate any correlation even not causation but correlation between the childhood

vaccines and the increasing childhood morbidity in terms of chronic disease yeah well we we first have to start with

you know what would this require sure so it should seem obvious that we should be comparing the health of vaccinated

children and and adults with those who were never vaccinated or or at least had

fewer than than the schedule right so authorities I.E the governments have

have have never published um such a study you know even there was an investigative journalist in in 2005 that

noticed that the rates of autism in the armish community were a fraction of the

of the general population and he speculated it it was mostly because you know they they don't vaccinate tend not

to vaccinate and you think the Govern government would jump at this discovery and oh let's investigate further but you

know nothing at all sure there was an academic study done in Israel in 2004

that noticed the autism rate uh was basically zero in the Ethiopian

immigrants in the 1990s there was a huge number of Ethiopians they found these Jewish Ethiopians and they uh immigrated

to Israel and so they hadn't been vaccinated as children at all in Ethiopia and then now they were subject

to the same diagnostic conditions in Israel again you know should have dug into that a little bit more but you know

total silence so the fact that the The Institute of uh medicine paper from 2013

it stated quite openly that there's no research comparing uh vaccinated to unvaccinated health uh outcomes but that

paper just made excuses as as to why so ranging from it's unethical so to assign

some children to take a vaccine and others just to get the the saline Placebo shots or something but if you

think about it that's a circular argument right because it's assuming that they're safe and effective and therefore you know we shouldn't withhold

this from from children right right they they say it's too expensive and and there aren't enough uh voluntary uh

voluntarily unvaccinated children neither neither of those arguments are true um the the vssd the vaccine safeta

data link clearly has um I think it's over 1% of children are unvaccinated so you could do a study there they say that

you know such a study will be biased because parents who don't vac inate um

are going to have unusually healthy children due to their lifestyle well again that's kind of a a bit of a

circular argument right any anyway but even so all of those issues could be solved and and in fact some robust

Studies have been done uh you know outside of the establishment by ethical individual scientists who who've risked

their careers um and continue to do so um probably there are some government studies that have been done quietly but

they were never published because they didn't like the results but um there's a great book published earlier this year

by Children's Health defense again it's published by Bobby Kennedy Jr and Dr Brian hooker and it's called Uh vax

unvax uh let the science speak it's also in the further reading section of my book um it's a compendium of about a

hundred studies that in various ways looking at Health outcomes in in vaxed versus um unvaxxed populations and it's

a great book it's you know Layman's language really great colorful graphs really you know kind of small uh but

easy to read um and so there's um one of the more high-profile uh studies

that that I think that book covers uh was carried out by a pediatrician in Oregon Dr Paul Thomas you might might

have heard of him this was a a big media storm actually because it kind of came out just when kind of covid was hitting

and things like that so it it made a big media stink um he had a a very large pediatric practice in Oregon I think

10,000 kids and he would give uh his parents the the option to vaccinate or

not he'd educate them on each individual uh vaccine what it did what it was protecting against what the risks were

and he' let his parents choose so he had a big range of completely fully vaccinated based on the US schedule uh

something in the middle and then some parents didn't vaccinate at all and he noticed that his unvaccinated kids never

came to his Clinic except for their annual well tricks and he's like you know there's something going on here I I

want to investigate so he reached out to a data scientist um Dr James lies Wier

um and gave him anonymized data completely anonymized and and uh uh Dr L Wilder was very skeptical he fully

vaccinated all his kids he's like I don't think we're going to find anything and he did and so yeah he he looked at

it and and the data was unbelievable I remember when it came out in 2020 it it blew my mind and I knew a lot of this

stuff but it was so blatant that the the levels of asthma autism type two

diabetes uh eczema you know you name it Cron's disease everything was so much

lower in in the unvaccinated or partially vaccinated kids than than in vaccinated it was it was crazy um and

the medical establishment went went after Dr Thomas similar to to Dr Whitefield uh but again now God God

works well because now he's got this great podcast and you know he advises people through that and he's written some books and things like that so yes

there there are some studies but but you won't find them in in mainstream media wow so one of probably the most common

arguments in favor of vaccinating is the idea that it's thanks to vaccines that chronic disease has disappeared across

the globe to to a large extent so is that an overs simpli simplification is there more to that

story yes there's more to the story so yeah if if we dig into the data on um

mortality from infectious disease we can see that it it was totally plummeting already in in the first half of the 20th

century before vaccines and even antibiotics came on the scene so it's not hidden data it's it's readily

available I've got several graphs in in my book uh even Studies by CDC doctors

in the 1970s and preeminent scientists at at um John hopins Medical School

they've confirmed that um infectious disease had dropped by 90% by the

1940s um and therefore vaccination can't account for for the health improvements yeah and so why what were some of the

reasons why the Infectious Disease had dropped so dramatically before vaccines even came on the scene so so the biggest

improvements were in in sanitation clean water uh better uh better nutrition so

once people had mooved to the cities that the living conditions were really terrible right and so fruits getting

hold of fresh fruits and vegetables became problematic but then uh Refrigeration was developed and and

people had ice boxes in their home to keep food fresh you could transport those fruits and vegetables um longer

distances now now they had refrigeration and Ice boxes and another big change Was the removal of horses you know simple

they used to be the the main mode of Transport right they're defecating everywhere and you know spreading disease so about that but yeah yeah and

then and personal hygiene just general personal hygiene improved through um an understanding of microbes uh washing of

hands um uh uh washing your clothes really well in in hot water another

great book that's that I recommended mine I've got a very extensive further reading section uh but dissolving Illusions by Dr Suzanne humph she's

she's also got a a great website of the same name but her book is Cho full of images and newspapers and photos of the

time it's a really thick book um and it showed what what living conditions were really like because a lot of people nowadays they just they have no idea you

know a lot of people aren't even studying some of the history and history is getting Rewritten sometimes um but it

really shows that absolutely doctors and scientists contributed to the the uh you

know massive reduction in disease but it was through an understanding of what causes disease and some of these

elements of of hygiene and sanitation where where disease comes from rather than the vaccines which came later right

and so there were other infectious diseases that did not correspond to a vaccine that dropped as well during that

time right and okay yeah absolutely so the establishment likes to focus on the

reduction in the in the vaccine preventable diseases um these days but what they don't highlight is the the the

concurrent reduction in you know lots of diseases that that didn't have any vaccines so you got like dentry chalera

uh scarlet fever typhoid and then you got the diseases that weren't D due to to microbes at all so scurvy uh berry

berry uh pellagra these were due to nutrient deficiencies so you know the

these are fatal illnesses too but at the same time it highlights the drop in them and and again I've got I've got data in

my book but the drop highlights that the improved nutrition was really helping a

body be able to fight a bug you know as well as avoiding those nutrient deficiencies yeah yeah and that's just

to be uh like fair and Balan it's not to say that vaccines had no effect on dropping any infectious disease levels

right and antibiotics and all the rest of it so well you know it's complicated right so so I'm a statistician and then

stat statistics can't fully confirm or deny that you there's just too many variables but you know was there any

benefit to vaccines at all it would depend on on the vaccine and depend on you know what benefit you're you're

focused on is the reduction in a particular infectious disease circulating in in in the population is

is there is there a benefit to reducing that possibly um did antibiotics wipe

out a chronic infection that somebody who's malnourished and and can't fight on their own might otherwise had died

yes of course but the the potential benefit for the population as a whole

doesn't necessarily translate into the the benefit for any given individual there's a lot more going on okay and so

that leads into the whole concept of herd immunity which we heard a lot about four years ago so uh first of all what

is it and uh like does it eventually eradicate a disease because that's I think what everybody thinks that if you

can get to a certain threshold of her immunity then that disease is effectively gone yeah yeah exactly so

well let's first explain what we mean by immunity right so there's actually two levels of immunity so you get immune

from getting sick and then immune from getting infected so these are two very

different propositions and it's important to to understand the difference so if if say the flu is circulating you could be infected with

the virus and you don't actually feel any symptoms you you might be referred to as immune to the virus you're not

getting sick you go on with your life but actually you're you're a carrier and you're passing it on to others um or you

might not get infected at all and then you can't pass it on to others so both of these situations are referred to as

immunity so herd immunity says that if you have enough people in a given

population who have the second type of immunity so they don't get infected and therefore they can't pass it on and then

the chain of transmission is broken and in theory the the disease will disappear

and so do vaccines confer that second type of immunity well so the whole concept of

mandatory vaccination right is based on the on the concept of of herd immunity as you say that's what we heard during covid but even if you you know if if you

prefer not to get a vaccine yourself you're compelled to because of the of the wider good but the problem is that

most of the vaccines don't provide herd immunity so if we take a couple of examples so firstly tetanus okay okay so

tetanus is a disease that's created by a toxin that's excreted from a bacteria that lives in soil and and feces and you

can pick it up from an infected wound um very common when those horses were around uh but humans don't excrete the

bacteria so you know they can't pass it onto anybody so herd immunity makes absolutely no sense uh with with tetanus

uh pusis let's look at pusis that's a really that's probably the most telling example of where the the medical

community is a little bit deceptive on this point so hooping C pusis is hooping C and that's um from the the bacteria

bordella pusis um it it can't be very nasty you know particularly in the young

um the vaccine for it is usually administered part of that dap vaccine that that we mentioned earlier it's been

around for decades and it's administered at two four and six months and and I think with with uh later boosters so but

the problem is there's tons of hooping cough around um you you might not get the the massive big hoop that the the

reason it got the whoop I think they call it here so you know the the where it gets its name from it might just be

like a bit of a flu or a cold but there's tons of hooping cof around you just don't hear that in the media right

so the the V the the researchers kind of said yeah why is there so much hooping cof still around so they decided to

investigate it in in 2014 and so they ran this big experiment with baboons who

exhibit hooping cough very similar to humans and so they they had a group that had been vaccinated a group that they

had the the natural natural disease they just caught hooping C and they'd recovered and then a group that had

neither had the vaccine nor nor got it naturally and then they just monitored they they they tested various

combinations putting in cages and wait you know looking to see what happens tested the levels of antibodies in their

body all of that and so the experiment basically showed that vaccinated

individuals they didn't get sick but they still had the bacteria in their respiratory tract for 30 days and could

easily pass it on to others if you got the naturally infected and and recovered they they never got infected again and

they they never passed it on to anybody they kept repeating the experiment they repeated it with mice the same results

and even some of those human epidemiological Studies have showed that infection doesn't actually fall in a

population when the vaccine has been rolled out so you know that that's one that's particularly concerning but there

are some that that do confirm some level of her immunity so hepatitis A is is one

for example um but but if you look that this disease has almost zero mortality

you know 90% of people that get infected you know don't even get sick you you could get it as a kid and and then you'd

never get it again and you wouldn't even you know know that you had it but if you get it as an adult after the vaccine is

worn off it could actually cause chronic problem problems in in your liver right um and similarly for Hepatitis B

possibly That vaccine creates her immunity there is some evidence of that um and so you're not going to get

infected but 99% of children it's it's totally irrelevant as Hepatitis B is

only passed through um sexual contact with a carrier or blood blood and and

blood products and so yeah if you're a healthcare worker later in life you know that might make sense to do that um or

by the way um hepatitis has been shown to be passed through contaminated needles and there's a lot of evidence

through actually vaccinate vaccination campaigns especially in the third world and they end up passing on Hepatitis B

so you know it's yes they some of them do provide her her immunity but you know for the vaccines that that sort of make

no sense and you don't really need them anyway um but then there are even other complications so we we look at pacal so

pacal um is a bacteria that has 90 serotypes and some of them cause more

serious disease than others so you might just get an ear infection or some sniffles compared to invasive menitis

right so so the the first vaccine uh was called prear and it seemed to confirm

confer some immunity but only to the strains included I think that one was um

maybe seven strains and so very quickly they they brought out they developed a new one and they call that now prear 13

which covered more strains but out of 90 there's still many strains out there and

so they've removed some of the strains that have maybe gone extinct but has it caused uh more virence in in some of the

strains that are left right so the turtles book does a really great job of

summarizing what do we know of um the the evidence for herd immunity in each of the different vaccines on the

schedule and then it it tabulates it all really clearly and it shows about a third probably confer herd immunity

that's I think five out of 14 um but the rest don't right fascinating so and kind

of piggybacking on what you just said about the new mcole um I'd always kind of wondered based on shingles especially

that I mean that one is I get asked about that all the time and when I was in school we were taught that this

really only people only get shingles if you're elderly or imuno compromised right and that's definitely not true

anymore people are young and healthy and it's just all over the place yeah so I'd always kind of speculated is this

because of the prevalence of the vaccine because that's what we see with antibiotic resistance right like a certain antibiotic works great but then

if you overuse it now the bacteria mutates and you kind of alluded to the fact that at least we know that some

viruses are doing this too so what kind of evidence do we have of this is that even a thing yeah no absolutely so so

chickenpox is a really good example of of when Mass vaccination is actually leading to worst disease so chickenpox

is always a mild virus usually contracted in in childhood I I got it in the UK when I was seven or eight missed

a week of school all good a bad yeah it's great you know a bad bad outcome is extremely rare rare I think it's like

one in a in a 100 thousand you know even you know have any problems at all um but MK introduced their varisella vaccine

and the US requires it um in children um I think one year old they they have to get and I think they get a booster you

know a few years later um it does reduce the incident of chicken pox in in

children you know it does do that but the the evidence is that the effects wear off after 10 or 20 years even

leaving vulnerable adults um in the UK and actually most other Western countries they they analyzed and and

they don't recommend varisella they they say the benefits don't outweigh the harms and the cost of administering it

so it's really kind of a US phenom um but in adults varicella is far more virulent you know as you said so it'll

show up as pneumonia like symptoms and shingles and shingles could be really debilitating you know a lot of pain you

know even blindness you know that that can be really a problem but when you leave it to Mother Nature when children

contract um chickenpox naturally they're then immune for life and then when

you've got um the natural virus circulating amongst all these school age kids that are that are getting it and

recovering it actually seems to boost the natural immunity in adults in older

people but since the vaccine has come out and now you're eliminating it in the children now there's no natural boosting

going on in the adult population and now you're seeing a lot more shingles interesting and so for things like the

flu shots um where you know it mutates every year why do we have some where you need constant boosters like yearly and

now they're doing it for covid as well versus others where it's one and done although occasionally there's boosters

down the line is is from a developmental standpoint why is there a difference in terms of certain certain organisms

versus others yeah I mean that I mean there's really no evidence that any vaccine will will grant immunity for

Life uh the complexity of the human body means we don't really fully understand everything so when you get you know

infected by a bacteria or virus there's so many things going on in the body right so delving into the science really

makes it clear that a natural infection is is going to give you immunity for life for the most part and lot more

robust immunity basically but but some vaccines do seem to confer more or

longer lasting immunity than others there is a difference and and flu as you mentioned that that's a particularly

poor one um it's worth looking at that because people are still getting flu shots everywhere it's it's it's really

bad news and and now they're going to do the same thing for covid so the the influenza virus is is constantly

mutating right so every year there's a different strain or strains circulating in in the population the authorities

don't even pretend that it's going to stop you getting the flu they just say it's going to reduce the severity of the

illness that that you're going to get um but they have to guess the strains that are going to come out six months later

you know because of the manufacturing process and so they say oh for the next season it's going to be these so that's what we'll manufacture and often they

get it really really wrong and the efficacy is well below half you know even 30% sometimes and then so then

you're getting a shot that is not really protecting you against the right strains and you're getting all of those other ingredients that that we mentioned so

you're getting this insult to your very complex immune system uh you know we we call all these different kinds of shots

vaccines but the fact is they they all work really differently in the body and and the illnesses that they're trying to

alleviate or stop you getting really come from many different kinds of creatures so viruses bacteria even the

the illness is from something the bacteria is excreting you know and even parasites that um you know malaria is

you know comes from from parasites essentially and so you know all of these differences um you know are working ve

in very different ways in the body and and sometimes the scientists themselves don't even know how they work so I

always say if if you're being a really uh Discerning consumer of healthcare that's what I try and teach people to be

you need to look at each vaccine on its own merits so you compare the risk of the disease itself with your individual

circumstances and and send of you know the the benefits of the shot the mechanism of action of the shot some of

the risks of the shot um you know there are dependant um sources out there that you can get more information uh the the

national vaccine information center nvic.org is a really good independent source so taking a step back and kind of

looking at population level in terms of like progression of chronic disease in kids since the vaccine schedule has kind

of blown up as you mentioned since the late 80s early 90s so what are some of

the statistics I mean this is correlation not causation because people haven't at least as s far as I know haven't looked in a granular way to say

is there an association but why are we particularly concerned about the progression what's going on yeah so I

mean if if we start back you know one of the first surveys full broad National surveys that was carried out is back in

the the 1960s um and at that time 1.8% of children was found to have some sort

of chronic condition uh you know a vision or hearing problems you know even asthma mental health problems things

like that so 1.8% then the next survey was like 1981 and by then it was already

3.8% of children had had something like that so it already started to double uh the 1994 survey it said 6.4% of children

and by 2010 it was 8% of children so now we see data that says one of every 12

children in the US is disabled due to some sort of of chronic illness there's

different kinds of surveys there's a different one in in 2008 that took a sample of 990,000 children it was a much

more detailed survey so it got into a a lot of different aspects and it found that 43% of children that's nearly half

had some sort of of chronic condition and half of those they they indicated it was it was moderate to severe um and

then there's the surveys of individual conditions and you can look at these over over the decades so the rise of

asthma you know ADHD autism allergies epilepsy uh autoimmune conditions we've

talked about they've all completely skyrocketed over the last um 30 years

you know since since the the the massive expansion but then you can also look at medication data so the the big Pharmacy

you know the big Pharmacy companies not not the pharmaceutical companies the um pharmaceutical management companies that

get you your prescriptions and they deliver those to you mail order they've got a lot of fantastic data and they

show a massive rise in the number of of children and adults that are that are taking medication but particularly

children I mean we've normalized ill health in our children children used to be healthy you know and now that kind of

data shows that one in four American children take regular medication for a

chronic condition they're similar in other countries but it's really really bad in the US just just the way we we love our medications and then you can

look at a survey of um hospitalizations and people getting hospitalized particularly children under the age of

four uh getting hospitalized and again that that's completely skyrocketed so you know it sounds like we've we've

traded the occasional infectious disease you know you're you're sick for a week and then confers lifelong immunity and

actually we we can also see it strengthens the immune system there's a lot of data that shows it's strengthening the immune system and and

uh you know just to listeners our immune system is also protecting us against things like cancer and managing the inflammation in our bodies and other

things that are going on in our bodies Our immune system is absolutely critical and so we've traded this one week of

having some sniffles or not feeling well in bed to you know the normalization of of of chronic disease and and total

Reliance on pharmaceutical medications yeah that's crazy and at the same time we also have had like a massive

explosion in all of the pesticides and all of the additives in our foods and just the world is getting increasingly

toxic in a number of ways but there's certainly a interesting correlation here as well so what have I not asked you

that you want to make sure you leave with our audience um you know maybe two things I

mean you mentioned the name of the book which I think is awesome and and so the one reason is that the the all of the

science science is Turtles all the way down but the other the other reason it's called that which is so clever is that

that scientists used to use that story to show that the the old lady is kind of a lay person and oh Shooks you know

she's a lay person she doesn't know what she's talking about and the scientist has got all this data well they've also used it to show the roles are actually

reversed that it's the the parents and the lay people that are making these you

know very rational assertions based on you know very clear evidence and and

data and it's the scientists that are actually being being a little unreasonable so I did want to mention that but then um I think really I just

really want to leave the audience on on a on a on a positive because uh you know we talked about lot of lot of negatives

here and so you know if there's all these problems with vaccines then what are we going to do about infectious disease right so uh you know it's it's a

whole separate discussion but I I do have a whole chapter in my book um that really covers this and I explain all the

different elements of the of the wonderful immune system and how it works perfectly the way it's been designed to

to keep your health healthy and um just it'll it'll give you a broad understanding of of how to stay healthy

through through more natural re means and I actually refer to the end of flu season you know you don't have to

participate once you understand what really generates Health uh right and all these natural remedies can work in in

conjunction with your body to to keep you strong so so you know don't want to leave on a negative note I want to leave

on you know a really positive note that there's other things you can do and you don't need these vaccines right and our

bodies are designed to heal themselves God knew what he was doing absolutely absolutely absolutely so so I will link

in the show notes to your book and to Turtles all the way down for our listeners and thank you Emma this has

been wonderful and I think really important conversation thank you thank you for the opportunity

- Generated with https://kome.ai

‍