Retsef Levi was early, not wrong on COVID vaccines

0:00We've learned anything from these past couple of years. My fellow Americans, it's that personal medical freedom and liberty are in crisis. America, our love, close brings together the top experts in healthcare-related fields to keep you a beat ahead. Do listen to America's Outlaw of Pulse Radio on the I part radio network. I'm the America Outlaw of Apps for Apple Android and Alexa. Don't miss a moment on the 7th Friday at 5 p.m. Eastern. I'm Dr. Wanda Bock here on Pack Nits. It's born of patients and give you action insights into the world of medicine and health. I'm Dr. Randall Bock in February 2023. I interviewed MIT professor Retseth Levy about his call to suspend COVID-19 vaccination because the safety evidence in the longer supported continuing it. The interview was in Cindy area at the time. It wasn't to me, mind you, but YouTube effectively

1:00killed my channel and LinkedIn expelled me. Yet within weeks, the WHO, the World Health Organization placed healthy children at adolescents in its low priority vaccination group echoing what Retseth Levy had said. In 2025, the Secretary of Health and Human Services appointed Levy to be the CDC's advisory committee on immunization practices ACP, ACIP on that board along with Dr. Robert Malone. Three and a half years later, this interview sounds less like forbidden misinformation and more like an early warning. Here's MIT professor Retseth Levy. Yes, I'm a faculty at the MIT and I my PhDs in the operations research and over the years I've been working on the application of advanced analytics to and risk management approaches to different areas, but particularly a lot of work with health systems with in the context of

2:00manufacturing of biological drugs and issues related to work in safety in this context and a lot of work also on food and agriculture systems. Again, thinking about other things, thinking a lot about risk management and how you can use data to assess risk and mitigate risk. And since the pandemic has started, I've been working quite extensively in this area as well, both as part of my research, but also supporting different governments, state governments here in the US, as well as some support to the government and some politicians in Israel. And one of the things, for example, that I've been working on was to think about the safety protocols of nursing homes in Massachusetts. So I've been thinking about different aspects of risk management and how you can use data and operationalize use data to operationalize effective risk management and safety approaches.

3:04Okay, so that's a mouthful. So how did it come down and what's been kind of on your mind, occupying you lately? I know you've been some thoughts on your part about the efficacy or safety of vaccines. How did the process work for you and how are your thoughts kind of involved or not evolved over time? Very early on from the start of the pandemic, I was very concerned that the policies of, you know, universal lockdowns and that were employed were very harmful. And I was thinking very strongly that we should have a much more risk-based approach and really consider the fact that the COVID-19 virus is posing a great risk to some populations specifically, all people and people with serious comorbidities, but on the other hand, it was very little risk, in fact, maybe no

4:07risk to very young people or healthy people and definitely for children. So that was something that I was concerned about from the very beginning. When the vaccines came about, I was surprised to be honest. I was based on what I know from working with quite a few pharmaceutical companies and having some sense about what the development phases and manufacturing phases of these type of drugs. I was bearing with people that there's no way this can be done before the end of 2021 and I was surprised that, wow, this is kind of remarkable. But to be honest, my first gut feeling or gut reaction was, no way, if that was approved by the FDA, it cannot be that bad, right? Like, okay, so maybe it's not completely matching what we usually do, but probably the compromises are not very significant. As time elapsed and both the discussions about the booster started

5:14and also the first data about myocarditis started to emerge, I became more and more concerned that something is not right here, that when you think about it, and I'm really kind of someone that thinking about systems and complex systems. So one thing that I think that I usually ask myself is, okay, what is the paradigm of safety here and what is the paradigm of efficacy here, right? And I think that over the last two years, starting maybe April 2021 and going forward, I became more and more concerned that the advertised and promised paradigms of what efficacy and safety of these vaccines are completely collapsed. And they don't basically, they don't hold true to what was promised. And let me maybe get

6:16into the details. So when we think about the efficacy part, right? I think that there was a very big push at the beginning that everybody should be vaccinated, what high risk people and low risk people under the premise that these vaccines are going to stop infections and stop the virus. And that we will get what was called vaccine-induced herd immunity. I think that by now, by now it's clear that that's been a false profit, right? So, and you know, by now that everybody got infected, that these vaccines are not stopping infection, infection, in fact, if you, you know, now, after I analyze that, the fact of the matter that was never a real hope for these vaccines to stop infection because they are basically generating antibodies in the blood and not in the

7:19eucus. And we know that if you don't do the latter, you're probably not going to stop the virus. You probably brought up Dr. Fauci just cosine of a paper to get that effect. It was out in January, I guess, more. Too late, a little bit too late. So, okay. So now, what was the other fundamental idea of the efficacy premises was, oh, this is such a fast rapid technology that we would be able to catch up with the variance of the virus as the end of the day, right? We know now that that thing worked out and we are constantly falling behind the virus, changing far, far faster than what we, what we are able to, in the pace by which we are able to update the vaccine. And also just the premise of getting a vaccine every four months is, it's not something I think that that was not the

8:21conversation to when we started the conversations about these vaccines. Now, so now we're coming to a very, you know, the last resort on efficacy saying, hey, these vaccines prevent severe illness and death. And I think the fact of the matter is that we never, not only that we, this was never shown to be the case, but in fact, if what I consider a pivotal paper study that was published in the journal vaccines by Freeman et al, re-analyzed the clinical trials of Moderna and Pfizer, the MRI vaccines, and which is the best, the highest quality data that we have randomized control experiments, right? And when they analyzed the number of serious health events, that means that's a speed ofization and life-changing medical events from a very well-defined

9:24list that actually the work of the organization set up. So what they did is that they took that list and they analyzed how many events of this type happened in the vaccine arm and the placebo arm, right? And unlike what you would hope, not only that the number of events in the vaccine arm was, were not lower, it was not lower than the placebo arm. In fact, it was actually statistically significantly higher. So in fact, what they concluded is that on every 800 vaccine is, you are likely to see one more serious event like that, serious health, hopefully event like that. So what we end up now is with the prediction from the clinical trials that for some reason was not shared and was basically ignored, that if you are going to launch these vaccines to the overall population, that is represented in the kick-out-try population, right? You are likely to see more harm than the benefits, right? So that leads me to the safety paradigm of

10:31the vaccine. And second, I will talk about that. I talk about that. But fast forward two years from when these vaccines were launched, we actually see staggering population level indicators that are consistent with this prediction. We see tremendous excess mortality in the US, in Europe, in many highly vaccinated countries. Three years of continuous increase in all kinds of mortality that is actually spanning all age groups, including the younger ages, including the working ages. And this is not just excess death, this is also high rates, dramatic increase in high rates of disability, and other indicators that are very concerning because many of them, if not all of them, have temporal correlation with the vaccination programs. Now, again, this is not a proof by several. When I connect that with the prediction from the clinical trials and what I see now, that's very, very concerning, right?

11:36So that's kind of a high level view. One thing that I've done, one piece of research that I've done, once we started to hear about myocarditis was basically to read a little bit about this condition. Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart. And it's, in fact, when you read about this, there are decades of research about this condition. You find out that it's very hard to diagnose a myocarditis. In fact, in many cases, people may not even know that they have an inflammation of the heart. They may not have any symptom. And in those cases, if the person heart was harmed, and the person is not aware of that, and the person goes about their life, and maybe goes working out, running, this is often a reason, a primary reason, it's a primary reason for sudden theft out of the hospital, especially young people. And at the time,

12:37I'm going to talk about April, April, mid-2021, we knew that the vaccine is in, it can cause myocarditis, and there were also some indications that the COVID-19 infections can cause myocarditis. So what I wanted to see is whether I will see in EMS code data, whether I'm going to see a signal of an increase in out of hospital adverse events, because if you think about that, most of the adverse events out of their hospitals, or that, or serious cardiac arrest, or events like that, are reporting an ambulance, right? So we actually did this study in Israel, and we looked on two, two and a half years from 2019 throughout the middle of 2021. In Israel was one of the first countries to start the vaccination program at the end of 2020, and most of the people were vaccinated at the early part of the first quarter of 2021. And when we actually looked on the number of calls,

13:44Israel has a national service, so you actually can get access to all the calls. When we looked on the number of calls with the cardiac arrest diagnosis based on the diagnosis of the EMS teams in the field, we detected an increase of 25% of the number of cardiac arrest calls among the ages 16 to 39, and a smaller increase among the older ages. So that was a very concerning because we saw that increase only at the period of time when vaccination started, like when COVID happened over 2020, over 2020, we actually saw a decrease compared to 2020 in 19, then this dramatic increase of cardiac arrest calls in 2021. And we also did some more analysis that again, cannot prove any causal mechanism, right? Because the underlying cause of such an increase could be very complex because they can involve the vaccines, they can involve the infections,

14:45they can involve some interactions between the vaccines and the infection, they can involve other other reasons. But nevertheless, that leads you very, very concerned, and we actually call what the Ministry of Health and other health authorities to investigate very thoroughly what is happening based on individual level data that will take into account the vaccine vaccination status and the infection status of the individuals that are affected. And also maybe use autopsies, of course, this was dismissed and was not followed through. And since then we actually see similar data in many other countries, like Scotland, that the UK in Australia, but we also see even more concerning data. One of the things that actually the FDA itself was concerned about is what again, what I call subtlinical myoparditis, this again, the scenario when you have myoparditis, but you don't have very visible symptoms, you may have no symptoms at all, very vague symptoms. And the FDA actually asked Moderna and Pfizer to conduct

15:49studies among children and young people post approval of the vaccine in August 2021. And in fact, there were supposed to report back about the results of these studies just this month in February 2023, and they just got like another six months to report. So that's kind of what's going on. But two teams, two research teams in Thailand and Switzerland did actually quite a good study. They tested people hard before and after receiving the vaccine. So they test all the hard indicators just before you get the vaccine and just before you just after you go the vaccine and compare for each individual, the baseline compared to what happened after the vaccination, both for the Thailand one was the second dose of the vaccine and the Switzerland one was the booster. And in both cases, they found dramatic impact of cardiovascular indicators and in particular, they found in one in 30, 150 elevated troponine, which is the number one indicator to damage in

16:55the harm muscles. This is the number one test that you're going to have if you have a heart attack. They're going to test you for elevated troponine to see if your heart is being damaged, your muscle, your heart is being damaged. So this is a staggering rate. When people say that marker disease is rare, even the clinical rates we're talking about in the highest risk population, which are young people, are young males, is one to 2500, one in five thousand people have to understand. This is very high. We took vaccines off the market for one bad event per 100,000 or per one per 10,000. We kind of took the immediately off the market. Here we're talking about even the clinical rates are one to 2500. That's already very high, but now we're talking about maybe one in 50, one in 30. And every time you take this vaccine, every dose, you're rolling a, it's basically a Russian roulette, where are you going to, where are you going to be damaging your heart? And then

17:55who knows what the long term implications are. Brett Safflevy has laid out the cardiac safety signals that prompted his calls to stop the COVID-19 vaccination program, especially for kids. After the break, we examined what those signals meant and why health authorities refused to investigate them adequately. I'm Dr. Randall Bach. You're listening to America. I'll pulse always be the head. Feeling off since COVID, try the wellness company Spike Detox Trio, packed with nato kinase, bromelain, and turmeric to help boost your immune system and fight off harmful spike proteins, bounce back with energy and clarity. Go to TWC.health-forward-slash-out loud and use promo code out loud for 20% off your first order. You wouldn't go a day without brushing your teeth or washing your hands. What about washing your nose? I mean, your nose does filter the air you breathe. Air loaded with bacteria, viruses, and irritants. Make nasal hygiene part of your routine with clear. No messy bottles to fill, no drowning sensation. Clear is a natural drug-free sailing with the added benefit of xyletol,

18:56which blocks bacterial and viral adhesion. Available in stores and online at clear.com. That is x-lear.com. Well, I challenge you to find a broader array of great voices, a deeper bench of experience or a more dedicated collection of passionate patriots than here on americaoutloud.niz. Now is our time, my fellow Americans, AmericaOutloud.niz, liberty, and justice for all. I'm Dr. Randall Bach, back with MIT professor at Seth Levy. We continue with the autopsy evidence, the behavior of the mRNA platform inside the body, and suppression of legitimate scientific questions. Now, just to complete the picture, there are now multiple autopsies that studies based on autopsies that

19:58are conducted. These autopsies on people that died shortly after being vaccinated. And they find in a high percentage of them indications of inflammation of the heart that can be consistent with the molecular diet is based on the vaccine. Because for some of them they actually find antibodies against the spike, which is part of the vaccine, but they also don't find antibodies other parts of the virus, which basically tells you that it has to be the vaccine. Because the vaccine only has the point of the spike. Now, so when I put all of these together, this is something unprecedented that you will continue even such evidence and not stop immediately, especially when we're talking about a population that has zero risk for COVID. And now most of the population is already exposed. And the Omicron, as you probably know, is a much minor version of the virus.

20:59So, going forward, continue to going forward at this point, seems like really, really, really hard to explain and really against every basic principles of first to no harm that we've had. Now, one thing that people have to understand, this is just one mechanism of harm. And again, now I want to go back to the very high level system level paradigm of safety of these vaccines. Because these vaccines, they are called vaccines, but they are, they work very differently than traditional vaccines. Traditional vaccines, they basically take the virus that you want to protect against and show you the body either a dead or a denuated virus. So they stimulate your immune system just like it would be stimulated if you would be exposed to the virus itself. What is happening in the mRNA vaccines that they are being injected into your muscle cells

22:05with a code that teaches these cells to produce inside the cell, on the membrane of the cell, the spike protein or parts of the spike protein with some modification. And basically, the hope is that the body, the body will see that as a foreign body, we learn how to develop antibodies to that and we'll be ready for that. What is the problem? The problem is that the assumption was that this is injected locally into your muscle in the shoulder and then stays there and clears away. However, we know that that's not the case in a relatively high number of cases. There are multiple studies now that found what the mRNA, the entire package that is being put around the RNA code to keep it stable, as well as spike protein produced expressed in

23:11cells in the body of people way after they were vaccinated, in fact even months after they were vaccinated. So if that fundamental assumption that it doesn't stay in the body and locally in the muscle and clears away, that's not true anymore. And now we can have people going around with mRNA in their body and maybe cells that produce spike in their body. That can explain the range of side effects that we see people that are really covering every organ system, and neurological problems, muscle problems, autoimmune problems, because the body now is doing foreign material, foreign body inside its own cells and it's going to attack it. That's kind of what the body is trying to do. And this is very, very concerning. So this is why people say, oh, this paper doesn't prove it, and that paper doesn't prove it, yes, it's not one paper. It's not one piece of evidence.

24:15But you have to look on the overall evidence and you also have to look on what was the systematic paradigm of this vaccine safety. And is it being supported by the data that you see? And if it's not supported by the data that I see as a safety person, someone that from age of 18, I'm essentially working and thinking about how do you think about safety or high risk high risk activities, how you understand the signals from the environment to tell you whether you're okay or not. And I think that we are now at the stage where there is a mounting evidence that we are not okay, that actually doesn't go right direction. I agree with you completely. There's been so much, there's a concept, well, I'll leave it to you, a print copy, which is begging the question, so much of what has been put in front of us, it has false assumptions within the way that it's presented. The first year we were told to lock down, as if you went scuba diving with a mosquito net instead of

25:16something structural that you could somehow not get wet. The masks were never appropriate. Lockdowns don't stop viruses. We're all rebreeding the same area with a mask without. So everything was kind of set in place. I know you posted that Woody Harrelson video from Saturday Log, which was sort of for SNL admission against interest. I mean, he's typically from the left, and I don't think they expected his... Nobody laughed if you saw that. There was an embarrassing silence, upward silence, right? Because New Yorkers have totally purchased into this, and it's a silliness, but for people who are unaware of, they should go watch it. He does about an eye, he does a better Woody Harrelson than I do, but basically said, imagine a drug cartel that locked you in your house until you go by their drug. And everything was pretty much arranged to that purpose. There was no reason in 2020 not to be able to try medications. I mean, Rogaine... Early, early, early treatment. That's the basic stuff that we do for any virus,

26:17right? For any respiratory virus. We have all kinds of indications like Rogaine and Viagra, which had original different purposes, and then they were repurposed when the other uses were found. So there was no reason to think that Iver Mechner, which had had antiviral activity, and actually one, it's invented the Nobel Prize a couple decades prior. It's FDA approved, safe, and HCQ, the same thing. There's no reason not to try those things, even if they don't work. And I'm not gnostic on whether they do work or not. I'm not here to promote them per se, but in the absence of anything else, certainly you have the right to try. And that was actually a medical build under the Trump administration, where for cancer patients, you have nothing else going, the right to try something. Everything seemed to be geared towards sitting there waiting, holding your breath, and then finding you feel as if you're rescued. As if you're in a house on fire, and you can open the windows, you can't leave, you can't do this, and finally the fireman coming rescue, you're like so grateful for them. But guess what? You might have been able to just open the door

27:17and leave in the first place. And those options were taken away from people, and it was acidiously done. It's really sad. And I totally on board with what you say. I don't want to spend too much time here, but I was literally yelled at at my tennis club. Guy was an MD and an MPH. He screamed at me because I was talking with a mother about when vaccines were already had been out for a while, and she was debating whether to give it to her child. And I said, well, you know, children, you know, basically stuff we've already spoken about. And he came, he wasn't even part of this conversation. He came in, Eve's dropped and screamed at me, like literally, like jumping up and down, it's kind of screaming, that I was killing people, blah, blah, blah. And so I tried to take this offline. I got him in the side room and we exchanged some emails. And he said, well, you know, COVID-19 calls more and more like, I said, I said, well, that may or may not be true. But in point of fact, if you're giving it to people who have already had COVID-19, you know, young people, then, and if you, if what you say is right, let's stipulate, you're right, then why would you re-expose them to

28:22the same bad thing? That makes no sense. And so most of these people, why don't you antibody test people first? And so, anyway, there was no stratification. It was all kind of one-size-fits-all. And everything, as you're kind of, you're, you're, you're 20 cents, you know, military intelligence analytics were correct throughout. I mean, I don't think, I think most of the good stuff that's come out of this has not been from people who are medically credentialed. Mark. Yeah, I want to say maybe two talks about relating to what just said. So one thing that I tell people all the time that I, that, oh, you're deviating from the narrative. I say, you know, I'm mainstream. I'm speaking the mainstream up to three years ago. Electricity, risk-based, never do lockdowns when you have respiratory virus, never give a vaccine to not the high risk population. First do no harm. Right? You know, monitor, monitor very carefully. Be willing to change course if you see that the, you know, your assumption is not correct. I think that the people that

29:26deviated and became very extreme and I think you kind of pointed out how ridiculous this was at times were actually the people that are now calling themselves the narrative on the mainstream. Not they're not mainstream. They may call themselves mainstream. Sorry, we and people, you know, I think you interviewed other people on your show. I actually think that we are the mainstream. They are they're extreme. We are not the extreme. We are we are representing the balance, the risk-based approach that we would approve. This, this is the textbooks. A lot of what I'm saying is not like, oh, I'm not the genius to think about it. This is just like, I'm just reading the textbooks of what we've known forever and are just saying it back to people, right? And the, I think that I wouldn't kind of relate to that. And I think that that kind of was a lesson to me is how much fear you know, how powerful fear is. Once you inject the fear in the heart of people, it shuts down logic, it shuts down ethics, it shuts down empathy. And I think, you know,

30:34I'm working with a lot of doctors over 17 years and I really think that most doctors are good people that really want to help and save their patients. But people have to understand most doctors are such in such, they're working such a hard environment, like very stressful environment. They don't have the time to read all the literature. They are being told, this is the algorithm. And like, you know, and well, I think they usually they don't have reasons to believe that they are being told the wrong thing. Yeah. But I think that historically, we, especially when we didn't have a protocol that was validated, we actually relied on the common wisdom, the collective wisdom of doctors trying and experimenting and doing sensible things based on their best judgment to come up with best practices. That best practices usually evolve in medicine from people trying different things. And the best practices win at the end because they have the best outcomes.

31:36For some reason, in the last three years, we adopted a very centralized to the extreme, not only that we try to impose forces, we actually going after people that are asking questions and experimenting. We're going after them just for the reason that they try, not even regardless of whether they were successful or not. So I think that I want to highlight here the process that I think medicine has evolved over the years through the collective wisdom that emerged from the frontline experience of people. It was never like one source of kind of wisdom, centralized source of wisdom that kind of, oh, yeah, we're going to tell you how to do that. It's the contrary. It's actually a root-grass knowledge that is coming from frontline and being kind of integrated over a year and some experimentation. And till the moment when you say, okay, this is a clear evidence, right, this is the best practice. That's the way science works, generally. Science is too big. But in medicine in particular, I just want to emphasize the people.

32:37The art of medicine where you're supposed to work on your clinical judgment, your own kind of receptacle, the way you filter things and so forth. And science has always been two things. There's a scientific body, knowledge is also a scientific process of validation. And historically, you know, sometimes it's hard to do things medically because one person has a rash, another person has a rash is the same rash, they have the same physiology. It's very difficult to do these kind of things. And so we've relied on the literature and kind of an accretion of knowledge through process. I'm talking to the patient as well. So the other part of this is that it's really the doctor and the patient's working together to help the patients to get better. And that interaction leads insights, failures, successes, and kind of this collective wisdom is what kind of creates the advancements in medicine. Yeah, but I think you're on to something there. I would add two things. One is that in this particular case, you know, it's been socialized. When I say that, not only in socialized medicine, for say, I mean, I mean, the focus away from the individual

33:38to the social group. So it was collectivized. I guess might be a better word kind of a Soviet kind of word. That medical care was decided that it's not so much you. It's like what you were doing for other people. I get this. If this were a zombie apocalypse, where our horrible smallpox or maybe, you know, anthrax by my respiratory vector or something like that, that's genuinely horrible. I think, you know, we could make the argument that one's actions do impede our effect another. But in this particular case, there are clearly huge blocks of population that had nothing going on. So this was known early on from the Diamond Princess, January 2020. If it was really nothing going on for the, you know, walking, talking, you know, if you're pharmacy, if you're, if you what, wake up in the morning and you're young and your medicine chest is empty of pills, likely COVID is not going to affect you. So I had a very early, easy test for COVID efficacy or for COVID worries, which is the look at your driver's license. I take 2000, you know, take 2021 and subtract from the date of birth. If it's a low number, then you're pretty much healthy. You know, check your medicine cabin. So, anyway, that, that was not really adopted. And, and we wound up having this, this, you

34:44know, draconian, top down system of, of collectivizing medical care. And I'm just going to add a second point, which is kind of put the heat on medical doctors, of which I am one. But I have, I mean, it's available to have friends. I have acquaintances for sure. But one of my friends, long term friends is a medical doctor. He's a pretty notable guy in the medical scene here. He's been on TV, talking stuff over the years. And during COVID, he and I talked, and he had COVID very early on. So to this white, his family, they're all fine. They, they had it was, you know, a cop sneeze, whatever they moved on with their lives. And so I said to him, I said, you know, so this is a good time, you know, he had, he was, he's, he's young children. And I said, this is a good time to take the mask off with him because, you know, I mean, he says, no, I'm not going to be active. Why, you're, you, you think you can get it again? He said, no, absolutely not. I said, are you worried? You're going to get it to somebody else because you're already, no, it's just mind blowing on it in two weeks. I said, well, what's the, why wouldn't you, you know, take the mask off as well?

35:44You know, I said to be a good measure, you know, to show the kids that there's an end at the end of this. There's a, there's a light at the end of the tunnel, rainbow at the end of the storm. All that kind of stuff. He said, well, it's not really politically time yet. I'm like, what politically time? He says, yeah, you know, we have to get, basically, we have to get Trump out. And, and we don't keep the pressure on it, you know, politically, but I said, you know, I just think that this is a total misapprehension. And, and, you know, I, they are literally changing hypocritical right now. So he's probably going to be in accord with the new, new, new, new hypocritical or whatever they call it. But in point of fact, this is not the, the relationship position should have. And again, I, absent extreme circumstances, the zombie apocalypse, I think you have to be treating that patient and deciding what's best for that patient and be honest with the person that, you know, there is no mysterious virus. I already, I already had it. I live so forth, your kid is no reason for any of us to be wearing masks at all and so forth. But to take your, your marching orders to think you're part of a political team, I think it pollutes the whole

36:46relationship and it damages the science. And I think we've seen that, you know, not just from this government, you know, all throughout top the bottom. In 2023, this analysis was considered dangerous enough to damage my YouTube channel and get me expelled from LinkedIn. The institutions have since moved much closer to levees position, although the admissions and apologies remain scarce. I'm Dr. Randall Bach. You're listening to America. I'll always be there. During treatment, the structure of tap water gets messed up. Yes, we have to purify water, but what are we doing to fix the water structure so the body can actually absorb it? That is why we created our lab certified structured water devices. These devices restore water molecules back to their natural structure, just like a mountain stream, making them highly absorbable. It's not how much you drink. It's how much you absorb that counts. Better hydration, better energy all day. Get one for your home or on the go at chemicalfreebody.com, Fortslash Out Loud for an exclusive discount. That's chemicalfreebody.com, Fortslash Out Loud. In a world of rising prices, you can still grow abundance. I'm Doug Evans, author of the National

37:48Best Seller, The Sprout Book. Sprouts grow in three to five days without soil, sunshine, or fertilizer on your kitchen countertop for under a dollar serving. Take control of your food and your future. Visit thesproutingcompany.com, slash out loud, and use the code out loud for an exclusive offer. Grow food, not fear. Welcome back for our third and final segment. I'm Dr. Randall Black. I'm Randall Block. Back with MIT professor Redseth Levy. We turn now to Dr. Patient Autonomy, the sacrifice imposed upon children, and the loss of trust caused by censorship and politicized medicine. The way I would phrase it is that we basically broke one of the most secret principles of effective medicine, which is the autonomy of the doctor and the patient. We injected to that autonomy also, other considerations that are not relevant,

38:48like political considerations fear. But at the end of the day, I believe that the way someone that really works for 17 years with many else's, he says, and many doctors, I always tell people with all the technology, with all the drugs at the end, it's about humans, taking care of humans. And this human interaction is at the center of what I consider effective medicine. And the autonomy of the decisions there, like they can be informed, they can get information, they can be informed, they can be advised. But at the end of the day, it's between the doctor and the patient to make a decision what is best for the patient. And ultimately, the patient needs to make the decision. And the safety of the patient. You know, I'm doing some out of patient medicine as a physician practicing. And there is still a mask mandate in all outpatient doctors' offices. So if somebody, if I have a nine-year-old coming in with an elbow, fracture, a fall, whatever, and the 35-year-old mom, everybody's healthy, nobody's got a cold, nobody's got a sniff, everybody has to wear a mask for the entire interaction. Part of the medical interaction is trust.

39:53And this is face-to-face interaction. We're doing Zoom here, and we get to see each other, we're not near each other physically right to the second. But there's a certain aspect I can gauge, or feel limited expressions by looking at their face. This is what's going on. Yeah, this is actually a very narrow, I mean, the other thing that happened to us, that we took help, which is the holistic definition of health. And we never did down to whether you have positive or negative to some one virus, a single virus. And we forgot about mental health, we forgot about other viruses, we forgot about, you know, trust, we forgot about many things that impact health. And we know that the impact health, and what we've done to the kids, what we've done today, one of the things that I think is the major, one of the most major failures of the last three years, is we as a society, we sacrifice the young and the kids in favor of the older and the sick. And that's to be the opposite. Society should do exactly the

40:53opposite. They should put, societies with the right value system should put kids always as a first priority, because that's the future. And I don't think we've done that. I don't think we've done that. That's a major failure. No, it's definitely. And I think six kids, I feel very personal. Well, Mazda talked to you. And congratulations. You know, the amazing thing, you know, people have watched the movie Titanic. There's kind of a no-blessed oblige. There's a standard where, you know, women and children first on the light boats. And, you know, we didn't accord them the same courtesy. Now, my, I've said this before in my podcast, but my now late mother-in-law was in her, you know, late 80s, early 90s throughout COVID. She lived the entire time. She died a couple months ago from other reasons. We kept her in the house, and she was fine. She was not mobile at that point anyway. We didn't isolate her. She was already self-isolating for quite a few years prior. But we, you know, we were careful around her. You know, frankly,

41:58we didn't wear masks all the time. We weren't sick and so forth because the interaction was important. You know, that she would die from a loneliness. Yeah. Much faster than you would have. I literally, I literally know families who did that to their old people or with their old people. I really want to do it. You know, where this one, now late mother, a friend of mine, she was indoors for a couple of years and nobody saw her at all. Maybe her husband now, then. I'm sure she's inclined to intellectually and mentally. She did go out and see that. She literally once until somebody said it was okay to go outside. And as I've said this before, there's a beautiful photograph of her feeling the sun for the first time like in a year and a half. Which is wonderful, but it was not necessary. You know, this same kind of thing of like holding somebody's head under, I mean, I love breathing. I don't really think about it that much, but somebody held my head underwater for like, I don't know, 90 seconds, but I'd be like, so grateful for breath. That's the kind of what happened. It's like, aren't you happy we're letting you breathe now? You know, we used to have this joke. What's the best thing about

43:02getting hit on the head? Beat, not, you know, is that it feels good when it stopped. And this is kind of the mentality. It's kind of the mentality of the abused. And that, you know, we will let you have your freedom. We will let you walk around. We'll let you do the, we're not going to let you go to school, but you have to do this. You know, it was as it craziness. I'm just going to one separate example. You know, I'm a pro-vax person. I took the flu shot every single year. I'm a physician. I found it was efficacious for me. I could go to work more often. I didn't get as sick. You know, my own personal experience of the flu shots were awesome. I took them from pretty, you know, moderately young age in the 20s, whatever, onward, and they work. Fine. Yellow fever, there's a vaccine for yellow fever. I've never ever taken that vaccine. And it's probably equally good vaccine, but they don't give it to people who haven't had yellow fever. They don't give it to the endemic regions. They give it to you. If you haven't been going there, you have to get risk and so forth. And it's like there's no reason just because there is a vaccine to give that. And this, this kind of judgment and application and and and striation triage, whatever you want to call it, was never, you know,

44:04done. It was always a matter of everybody. It's a brute force method. And then at some point, we have to think, we bono. Like, who's benefiting? It became a matter of fact. I would argue that until three years ago, we used to have, you know, science on one hand and in very extreme people that objected almost religiously to all vaccines whatsoever, right? And I think that unfortunately, now we have the opposite religion that says, hey, you know, I'm not in favor. All vaccines must be good for everybody every time. And I think that the truth is that every vaccine, like every drug should be examined over time based on the data available with respect to the person at stake. Because I would say like, it's okay to give sometimes a drug that has a 20% chance of killing you. If that drug is given to a terminal cancer patient that maybe has no chance whatsoever, and they it might be their only hope, right? But that might be okay to do, but it's definitely not okay to give it to a to a healthy child, right? So my point is like, we lost track

45:08of, we kind of went away from the fundamental principles of risk-based science and medicine, where basically personalized the treatment to the person based on their choices, their risk factors, and so forth. Like, there is nothing that is good for everybody, like almost nothing in life, including medicine is good for everybody. By the way, even in food now, the new, the state-of-the-art studies show that maybe tomatoes are really great for you, and maybe are not very great for me, depending on our personalized biome composition. You make some excellent, preventing was labeled misinformation, but almost everything that was misinformation then is turning out to be true now. And this concept of misinformation is one of the most destructive concepts that we've had over the last three years. And I think that, you know, it sounds great, but I think you get to the question of who gets to decide what misinformation is. And then sort of the, the sensor already kind of breaks it down. It's always

46:10like democracy is not a perfect system, but like maybe it's the least worse system that we have. And I'm saying that because you also mentioned other vaccines and other and you mentioned the word trust, you know, one thing that I'm most concerned about is, you know, there are many issues about the COVID-19 pandemic management and we need to really learn the lessons, and we need to actually take care of the people that were injured and invest in understanding better how we actually know how to understand the mechanisms better and develop some treatments, but I think that all of this is important, not only because of the specific issues related to COVID-19, but in a broader context, if we believe that medicine and science and public health are important elements of a healthy society are important for the well-being of individuals in our societies. I think that if we don't, I think that what happened over the last three years

47:14has completely demolished the trust of most people in what they're being told, in what this being reliable information. You know, I think that we are now in a situation when you kind of believe what the CDC is saying because most of the time that's something completely wrong. These are very, very destructive situations and I think that we have to work hard to change the systems that we have with that respect and regain the trust in science and medicine because as a scientist, I still believe very strongly and very passionately that science and medicine have a very, very important role of enhancing well-being of people in the world. You just need to be used according to the basic principles that we have embraced throughout many decades, but it also needs to be kept out of both political and commercial interests because it should be kind of

48:16something that we really defend and have very good boundaries from boundaries so we can actually advance science and advance medicine and translate it out to some of the other people. There's a big problem when these things are misused. I have a term of art called a conspiracy of interest. So I think conspiracies don't necessarily form in deep dark rooms where people are, you know, smoky cigars rule and have to plan so where they think something happens and some flag gets pulled up a flag called metaphorically. I mean, certain people, and certain people don't. It's either four or against. I'm going to touch on this at the end, but I'm the author of a book called Over-Turning Zeca, which is the last previous great pandemic and that just fizzled away. It's just nothing there. People are still spending money. There's a billion dollar research industry on it. They're literally working on a vaccine right now, but the science wasn't there, but the origin story is fascinating. I started only with a small article and went to, got it, got it, became a book

49:19because every time I looked, be more deeply at this, I was like, oh my word, there's more, more, more oddities underneath the oddities. And it turns out that, you know, Zeca microcephaly came about through basically bad science. It was conjecture. They got leaked to the press and a couple different occasions. And that's not science. That's panic. And it wound up kind of like steamroll into a bigger thing than it was because there were people who actually believe or not were in favor of Zeca microcephaly. It's a miserable problem. If it happens to your child, it's not a death sentence, but it's a cognitive sentence. But who could be in favor of this? Well, it turns out a good portion of the population on the left, in this case, changed the applause in Brazil. And so this became a bandwagon, the change metaphor on which they could jump to affect change. And so everyone, you know, and there were lots of groups throughout who kept,

50:22you know, the pressure on to, you know, anyway, the diagnosis took on greater life than it might otherwise have had without certain political allies. And I think that we have to be very careful. And in fact, in Zeca, the origin of the Zeca part had a political motivation as well. I'm not going to say that for my readers to find out. But when... Thank you. When things are put backwards, it doesn't work as well, you know. And that happens. But the funny thing is there's no apology. This one is, you know... I think it will take time before people will apologize in the COVID context, because there's so much on the stake. Once you launch this vaccine to everybody and you didn't just give it to their high risk people, you have basically no way back. What are you going to say now? Oh, we made a mistake. This vaccine calls more causes, causing more harm. The like, you cannot, it's going to take a long time before people will even end up meeting wrong. I'm patient. So I think

51:26it's going to take time, but the truth is going to come out. All right. So I'm going to... We're going to... We're nearing the end of your vulnerability. And I very much appreciate it with your time. And I'm honored that... I just pleasure. That's expensive with me and us in the TV land as it works. But so what has been the result of your proclamations or your videos? Have you garnered any momentum? What are your next steps and what's your advice to people? You know, it got some quite a lot of exposure. I think, you know, to be honest, I... Until very recently, I was not on social media. So this world is new to me. I'm still learning that. It seems that unfortunately, the scientific channels are often censored and being blocked. Steve Locke, so it's very hard to convey messages through the regular scientific channels. So it's being left to the more social media outlets, which is good. And I think that maybe that's a new age where

52:26people consume information in different ways. But I really hope... And I'm looking forward to working hard to really start to have back an environment. A scientific environment where you can actually get together and have debates. Because I think that the way forward has to go through regaining the ability to disagree and look at the facts together and have different interpretation without the expectation of apologies and admissions of errors, I think that... That's the time for that to come. I think that what matters more is that we start to have, again, a data because currently for many people, as you said, it's highly politicized, not necessarily between Democrats and Republicans, but for vaccine, anti-vaccine, it's like it's your minute classified. And it's more about your label rather than what you're saying and facts. And I think I hope that we

53:26can break that. And I think there will be some political pressure to break that I expect. But also, I hope that within academia, it's time progresses. There is more and more openness for just kind of discussions. And I think that that's... That's going to be hopefully something I can contribute to as an individual. But I'm expecting a long journey. And doing the last three years is not going to take three years. It's going to take maybe 10 to 15 years. I'm getting ready for a marathon. I know it's a sadness isn't it? So... It is what you need. Yeah, I'm just going to just end by... Well, I always like to do my own it's a shameless self-promotion. So I'm just going to... Sure, number. And for the people at home, with a copy of my book here, I'll make it a little bit bigger. This is Over-Turning Zika, the pandemic that never was. That's my name, that's mosquito.

54:28I'm not a mosquito. I don't identify as a mosquito anyway. And it's on Amazon. It's coming out in Brazil within the next few weeks. I've got some good feedback on this. Dr. J. Boudachariath, read my review in American Journal of Medicine. I think it's a really fascinating story because it gives... It's more of an isolated one like a Faber J.A. I think it's its own thing. That can be analyzed and so forth from a distance. But I think the major message... Everyone knows Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. And I think if you ask people on the street, who is right, who is wrong, how much he should have paid. People are like voluminously knowledgeable about Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. Back in the day, same thing O.J. Simpson. But these were adjudicated in a court of law and was public. And so, the lawyer's got up there and I don't know which lawyer you like better whether you like Amber, you like Johnny, whatever. But people are knowledgeable about this. So here's my idea. I just

55:29kind of occurred to me is that you should have a court of law. There should be a science judge and people have to present their arguments. And then I don't know what they're going to be an answer or not. But people maybe have... I don't know. That's back to the debates we're talking about. Let's record the debate. You should be a debate. Yeah. All right. I'm going to leave it to you. Thank you very much. Any last last words? No, I hope if anything, we all probably more appreciate the fact that health is the most important thing in life. So I wish everybody that is listening and watching us and we'll watch us just keep your health intact and do whatever it takes to leave healthy and hopefully that will help. Okay. And you have an unusual name. So I'm just going to tell people they want to follow you. They can just copy the name. Yeah. I'm on Twitter so they can follow me on Twitter. And I find your feed stimulating and you're working your thoughts as well. So thank you, Sam.

56:31That's all for today. Remember every myth has a solution and every truth has the power to transform your health. Find us on America, Alon, Pulse Radio every Friday at 5 a.m. Eastern, or on demand. Wherever you get your podcasts, stay curious, stay informed and we'll see you next week. America, Alon, Pulse, always be the head.