September 30, 2024 • 38 mins
In this episode, Lisa welcomes New York Times best selling author, Dr. Marty Makary. They delve into the medical establishment's handling of health information during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on vaccines and chronic diseases. Dr. Makary criticizes the groupthink in medicine and the influence of politics on healthcare, advocating for addressing root causes of chronic diseases through lifestyle changes rather than medications. The conversation also touches on the need for open discussions about vaccines, the impact of processed foods on health, and systemic issues within the pharmaceutical industry. The Truth with Lisa Boothe is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Monday & Thursday.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
So RFK Junior has really ignited a conversation in the country,
you know, make America healthy again, about what we're eating,
the shots that we're putting in our arms, about the
negative impact it's all having on our nation's health. A
lot of people started having more and more questions because
of COVID as well about the medical establishment, you know,
big Pharma, you know these alphabet agencies, you know nih
(00:23):
CDC won encouraging lockdowns which were wrong and hugely devastating
to Americans, to so many Americans into our country as
a whole, forcing shots in the arms of people didn't
need the vaccine. We've had some of these conversations on
the show previously with people like Kelly Means, but it's
just a topic of conversation that I'm very interested in.
Senator Ron Johnson, who is a friend of the show,
(00:45):
who we've had on who's always willing to engage in
conversations that other people find dangerous. He recently held a
roundtable discussion titled American Health and Nutrition A Second Opinion.
He convened a panel of experts talking about our nation's health,
talking about how big Pharma, you know, they've invested interest
in keeping us unhealthy that you know, they make money. Obviously,
(01:06):
the more people on medicine, the more money they make.
We saw that during COVID with the vaccine as well.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
One of those.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Experts on the panel doctor Marty McCarey. He is a
friend of mine, he's a Fox News colleague, but he's
also super brave. During COVID, he was someone I frequently
went to asking questions about lockdowns, about the vaccine, just
overall health.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
He's a great guy.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
He's also the best selling author of a new book,
Blind Spots, as well, which everyone should go out and get.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
But he's just a really brilliant guy. You know.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
He's a surgeon and public policy researcher at John Hopkins University.
He writes for The Washington Post the Wall Street Journal
as well. He's also written a couple of other New
York Times best selling books, Unaccountable in the Price We Pay.
He was one of those individuals on this panel really
addressing those blind spots in his book, you know, when
medicine gets.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
It wrong and what it means for hell.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
Some of the things that he noted during his testimony,
which we'll get into in this common rotation as well,
is that twenty percent of our nation's kids are now
in medication, that we have the most over medicated, you
get the sickest population.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
In the world.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
He goes on to talk about how they've poisoned or
food supply engineered, highly addicted chemicals that are our put
in our food that we need, that they spray for
pesticides that kill pests, but we're eating them are in
our food. So just so much to discuss in this
conversation with someone I trust, someone who's become a friend
of mine, someone who I've leaned on for advice and
(02:31):
guidance on health related issues. He's just a really brilliant guy,
good guy friend and colleagues. So stay tuned for doctor
Martin McCarey. You know, doctor Martin McCarey.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
Great to have you on this show.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
You're a friend and someone who I whose advice I
saw frequently during COVID, So I appreciate you making the
time to come on the show.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
Good to be with you, Lisa.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
I always appreciated your insight throughout COVID because you know,
I felt like, particularly with not getting the vaccine, you know,
I had a lot of doctors really trying to push
it on me, and you never did when I went
to you, just say hey, this is the information we know,
here are the facts, and you know, just you just
gave information. And it's sad because that's how it should
have been throughout all of COVID is you know, I
(03:17):
think we should have just gotten updates on the numbers
with the data showed and really allowed Americans to decide,
you know, what sort of risk profile they were in
and making the right decisions, whether it was lockdowns or
the vaccine.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
You know, the medical establishment just did not understand what
it meant to be ultra low risk from COVID, and
so it just kind of went into this discombobulated seizure
if somebody said they're not fully on board with the
belief system that every single person needs to be vaccinated.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Was that just mind blowing for you?
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Throughout COVID just to see the public conversations just be
like complete nonsense and really not taking data into account,
and you know, just the lack of common sense and
the fear mongering, and it just seems and so many
doctors engaged in it, which is really anathetical to you know,
(04:15):
what you're supposed to be as you were supposed to
be as a medical professional, so I'm out as someone
who's reasonable and has common sense.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
You know that had to have been really frustrating for you.
Speaker 3 (04:26):
Yeah, I mean the doctors are supposed to use their
best judgment and wisdom and and parts together the best
available evidence and make informed decisions. So yes and no. Yes,
I've seen the bandwagon effect throughout medicine with so many things,
be it the food pyramid, the Peenied allergy abstinence guideline
(04:46):
that was perfectly backwards, the opioids are non addictive. So
I've seen the group think alive and well throughout my career,
and I've seen how it sort of sidelines or dismisses
different opinions. But no, I is one thing I was
not expecting was the second I say President Trump would
support something, you would just have half the medical field
(05:09):
automatically do the say the opposite. If you said, hey,
you could do pancreas surgery laparoscopically with better outcomes and
lower complications, and President Trump said, you know, this is
a good thing, and I'm gonna do it, I kind
of support it. Fifty percent of the country, within say
of the medical field, would say, well, then laparoscpy is
(05:30):
evil and bad and we shouldn't be doing And you
saw this intellectual dishonesty that was, you know, to this day,
it's we're still watching it. We're starting to see a
little bit of it now with our effort to address
chronic diseases in children, as if somebody could be for
chronic diseases in children. So yeah, it's been a little
disappointing to watch.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
So do you think, then, one, would it be a
fair statement to say that the group think has gotten
worse in the medical establishment than it has in years prior.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
I think, so we've got a misinformation police, and we
have political apartheid in medicine. If you don't support the
right political party, you go over here, you don't go
in this room, you go in that room. You're not
on this panel, you're not invited to this conference, and
you don't get to do this and this, you get
to do that and something else. And so that's getting worse.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
So it's the political I mean, we've seen politics sort
of infect all aspects of society. So you're saying now
it's seeped into medicine as well.
Speaker 3 (06:33):
I think So, I mean we have some refreshing moments
where my institution, Johns Hopkins, made a big statement that
they are not going to be taking political positions on
things and they support the free speech of the faculty,
and it's like, wow, where did that come from? That's great.
And then on the flip side, you know, we see
(06:55):
associations put out strong statements and medical journals now endorsing
political candidates for the first time in their two hundred
plus year history, which is disturbing.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
I also, you know, one thing, one discussion that we've
had a lot on here with various people, and what
I've learned throughout COVID is just how much control, like
the nih for instance, has on the research that's being
conducted in the country through grants and through money. And
then also we've just sort of seen the revolving door
with you know, the these heads of the alphabet agencies
(07:28):
go on to you know, control big you know, go
on to big Pharma and these big positions and make
a ton of money. So it's just sort of a
revolving door for them.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Gosh. Yeah, the number of doctors that came up to
me during COVID and said I believe in everything you're saying,
I fully agree, but I'm applying for an NIH grant
or our department is you know, NIH funded, so I
can't say anything. And I thought, gosh, when did we
get central planners in medicine where a small group of doctors,
you know, can rule the kingdom like.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
Some arc Well, and it kind of leads us into
this broader conversation that we're going to have today is
you know, like what percentage of what we are told
about our health and the things we're supposed to do,
what percentage is actually about our health versus you know,
people wanting to make money, like whether it's big pharma
or you know, like, what are we being told that's
(08:22):
actually true in an ora interest versus in the interest
of making money.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Well, for example, most of our chronic diseases are avoidable
if we would address the root causes. And I don't
think there's a diabolical motive. I just think we've developed
giant blind spots where we've allowed big pharma to have
a hammer lock on our research enterprise and for studies
(08:48):
that don't fit the objective is a big pharma. We
have the NIH and the National Institutes of Health are
supposed to be funding the big studies that we need
to fund, but they are sort of now either in
their tunnel vision or have blinders on. You know, what
are they spending their money on. How about studying food
is medicine instead of funding back coronavirus research in China,
(09:12):
you know, and all these crazy grants that they give out.
One in six NIH grants goes to health equity or disparities.
That's an eighty one billion dollar budget over there at
an IH. And it's not interesting to say we have
differences based on race and socioeconomics, as we know that,
(09:33):
we know their health differences based health outcomes are based
on those factors. What's interesting is reducing those disparities. And
for that there's almost no interest. It's almost you know,
make it. The ruling class feels good about themselves by saying,
we're describing these differences in the population, Well, how about
(09:54):
reducing those disparities.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
But I guess maybe I think they're a little bit
more diabolical. I've become very jaded doctor, very very jadd
over the years because.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
There's less money for them to make.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
If you increase the percentage of the population that are healthy, Yeah,
if more Americans are healthy, there's less money to be made.
And you know, whether it's putting everyone on ozempic or
you know, putting vaccines in the arms of everyone, or
you know, giving them medicine. Like, if we're a healthier society,
you're not making as much money. If you're a big
pharma and they want us to be sick, there's a
(10:30):
there's money to be made for a sick Yeah.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
I mean, how about we focus on school lunch programs
instead of putting every overweight kid on ozempic. We've got
half our nation's children overweight or obese. So all we
hear about is this myopic, single strategy of getting these
kids on medication. Where's the conversation about healthy foods. Where's
(10:52):
the conversation about how we strip our wheat of fiber
and chop it up so it functions like sugar in
the bio and all the pesticides and highly engineered food ingredients.
Who's going to study that, Who's aligned to look at
the food supply? And so what we have is we've
did about this giant blind spot where we have the
root cause of so many of our exploding chronic diseases.
(11:17):
I mean, everything is up, autommune diseases, pcos, fertility rates
are going down, cancer and the GI tract, and it's
like no one is interested in actually talking about the
root causes.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
We've got a quick commercial break more with doctor Marty McCarey.
I want to get to that there seems to be,
you know, some desire to shift some of those conversations.
And I really give a lot of credit to carfk
Junior of you know, taking a lot of incoming fire
and bringing you know, the discussion of making America healthy again.
(11:54):
I know that Senator Ron Johnson recently led a roundtable
discussion titled American Health and Nutrition a Second Opinion, you know,
having convening a bunch of experts together to talk about
you know, food processing, health care industries and how it's
all impacting the nation's health.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
You were part of that discussion.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
For those who missed the roundtable discussion, I guess what
should people know and give us a little bit of
insight into you know what took place during that roundtable discussion.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Well, that was an incredible day, Lisa, A milestone in
American healthcare. Basically a group of people interested in health
and chronic diseases and the root causes got together. We
convened at the Senate and testified moms, experts. Physicians Casey
(12:47):
and Kelly Means were there. RFK Junior, and it was incredible.
You saw this passion to finally get at the root causes.
You know, there's discussion about lowering drug prices in America.
The best wait a lower drug costs, or to stop
taking drugs we don't need, and we have this incredibly
expensive healthcare system with the worst outcomes. So we saw
(13:09):
people talking about why is fruit Loops, which is made
by Kellogg's made in two forms, one for Canada where
all these artificial chemicals in them are banned, and another
version for the United States. Don't American kids deserve the
healthiest version of a serial made by an American company?
(13:29):
And so we saw an incredible discussion. I've never seen
it before. It was inspiring. Everyone should watch it. It
was totally apolitical. I posted it on my social media accounts.
But this thing is going around now and I think
we're seeing a new enthusiasm to finally address our poison
food supply.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
You said some things that really just you know, it's
sort of mind boggling that we don't talk about this
more and that this conversation doesn't get a bigger a
national platform. You said that twenty percent of our nation's
kids are on medication, which seems crazy to me, and
then you made the statement of we have the most
over medicated, sikest population in the world, and so it's
(14:11):
you know, at some point, why continue to medicate people
if we continue to be the sickest population. Clearly we're
not addressing those root causes, as you pointed out, and
it doesn't seem that, you know, increasing the percentage of
Americans who are medicated is helping reduce the population that
are are sick.
Speaker 3 (14:31):
Yes, and we we need more research on this, but
we don't need to wait for a ten year randomized
control trial on a new ingredient. Just look at Europe
where they have different standards. They don't allow a lot
of these highly processed, engineered chemicals in their food supply.
You have to show safety first. In the US, we
(14:51):
have this standard called Generally Recognized as Safe for what
we call grass, which basically means no one is watching
what the food industr tree creates and what chemicals they add,
and no one's testing it. There's no standard. And look
at Europe. They're healthier, they have lower rates of all
kinds of chronic diseases. Look at the Amish in the
(15:12):
United States. They're not eating this processed junk. They're eating
whole foods that grow out of great soil from regenerative farming.
And they have lower rates of everything autism, chronic diseases,
autoimmune cancer. They have basically no obesity in their childhood population.
So this is not rocket science, This is not hard.
(15:35):
All we have to do is use some common sense.
And if you look at our medical establishment, they're blind.
I mean sometimes they can't see the forest from the trees.
When the US government acknowledge that settlers and farmers in
New Mexico had destroyed the soil of the Pima Indians
from diverting water and the soil was completely unusable, the
(16:02):
government sent food to the Pima Indians. They sent them
and it wasn't organic kale, It was processed food. It
was junk food, it was spam and things like that,
and guess what, the obesity and diabetes rates went from
one percent to ninety percent. The NIH then dispatches their
scientists to look for a gene. They drew the blood
(16:22):
of the Indians and this big NIH funded project to
figure out why the Pima Indians were obese. Did they
have an obesity gene. It's like you morons, you can't
see the forest from the trees. Sometimes you need to
zoom out and look at the macro and realize that
we have done this to people. It's not the fault
(16:45):
of American children. They're not more lazy or disobedient than
kids in Japan, where childhood obesity is rare. No, maybe
we have poisoned their food supplied. Maybe adults have done
this to children.
Speaker 1 (16:59):
You know, I guess what percentage of cancers are avoidable
through lifestyle changes and the way we liver lives.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
Well, I would say most. Now you'll hear the medical
establishment and say, well, we don't know, and it's probably genetics.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
And all that.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
But look at the rates that are going up and
which cancers are going up. It's the cancers that line
the gas tru intestinal tract, what we call the GI cancers.
And what's unique about the GI cancers it is the
front line of interface of all these chemicals and processed
foods that we ingest Ten to twenty percent of Americans'
calories now are coming from seed oils, which sound healthy
(17:35):
like vegetable oil, but they're not. These are chemicals that
are denatured at high temperatures and changed with the chemical
solvent the body is. These are not naturally occurring molecules.
So when they go down the GI tract, the body's
immune system is reacting to the everyday food that people
are eating. And it's not a big inflammatory storm. It's
(17:56):
a low grade inflammation that's constant, that makes people feel sick.
They don't feel well, they feel low energy, and we
wonder what's going on, and they get sad and we
put them on antidepressants. I mean, we can't keep going
down this road. We've got to look at these root causes.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Yeah, I've recently tried to. I think I turned forty
eight in February. So I've been, you know, just upping
working out. I've been doing like a very like clean
eating food delivery service or I've been posting them on
my social media.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
I do get the food for greep, but I've been
posting it.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
But I've been like really into I just did the
MRI scan, which I was talking to you about. I
was texting you about that you know, detects for five
hundred cancers and diseases of just you know. I think
in part because of the discussions that are happening in
the country.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
About health, do you I guess should we?
Speaker 1 (18:51):
And then I want to switch to your book in
a second, but which I know it's part of the
broader conversation that we're having.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
But is it is it time to.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Revisit vaccines and the vaccines that we're giving children? You know?
You know obviously you know things like MMR or you
know polio that have been around for forever. You know,
polio you look at I think the fatality rate for
adults is something like fifteen to thirty percent, which is
very very serious. But like, are we over vaccinating children?
(19:21):
Are we over vaccinating Americans? Should that be part of
this broader conversation that we're having as a country.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
I think everything should be a part of it. I
think all of it. We need to look at everything
that we're doing that we were not doing one generation ago,
when we had low rates of chronic diseases and low
rates of childhood disease. Do we need a hepatitis B
vaccine upon birth in the hospital when you're born like
(19:48):
the day you're born, do you need a hepatitis B vaccine? Really?
It's es sexually a transmitted infection that you can also
get from ivy drug use. We're giving it to newborns. Really,
do do they need that extra inflammatory response from a vaccine?
I think vaccines to become a religion you have to
be one hundred percent for or they label you an
(20:11):
anti vaccer. They don't tolerate a nuanced discussion. There's so
much absolutism, and for vaccines, the vast majority of them,
But it's okay to ask some questions. It turns out
you didn't need a COVID vaccine second dose three to
four weeks after the first dose. Best time if you
did need the vaccine was three months. That was study
(20:33):
was pretty clear out of Europe early in the COVID
vaccine rollout, but nobody wanted to hear it. It's like
you got to just be obedient, follow the medical leaders.
And when you look at the track record of a
small group of central planners in medicine issuing broad edicts
based on their opinions, they don't have a very good
(20:55):
track record. And that's some a bit of what I
go through in the book is let's look at the
modern health recommendations that a small elite group of medical
establishment leaders have bestowed upon the public, and let's just
see how they've held up with current research. And it
turns out there's one of the greatest propagators of misinformation
(21:17):
has been the United States government.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
Quick break, stay with us.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
You talked about, you know, inflammation, and it seems like
inflammation sort of the you know, driver of you know,
diseases and some of these cancers as well. What can
people do to to try to you know, reduce inflammation
in the body and to you know, I guess what
is a healthy lifestyle, A truly healthy lifestyle look like,
not you know, the lifestyle obviously that the government recommends,
(21:46):
because you know that lead us to being medicated and
probably dying early. But like in the actual you know,
healthy lifestyle, like what steps can people do to mitigate
the risk of cancer and to mitigate the risk of
disease down their life in their.
Speaker 3 (22:00):
I would say, read food labels. We've got about a
thousand ingredients in the United States that are really chemicals
that have been banned in Europe that are allowed in
the US. Food supply and are ubiquitous. Look for those
seed oils and try to avoid them. The vegetable oils canola, soybean,
you'll see them everywhere. Try to cook with the healthy oils,
(22:21):
avocado oil, coconut oil, extra virgin olive oil. Avoid these
highly processed foods, and avoid foods with pesticides on the surface.
If you're eating the surface of a fruit or vegetable
like a strawberry, for example, has been sprayed over a
dozen times with pesticides, and there's seven different types of pesticides,
So you want to buy organic, which means pesticide free.
(22:43):
If pesticides are killing pests, guess what they're doing to
your microbiome. That is the lining of the gaserin intestinal
tract with millions of different bacteria involved in absorption, digestion, training,
the immune system, and some of those bacteria make serotonin,
involving your mood and brain health. So I tell people
(23:03):
to buy organic when it comes to foods and vegetables,
especially when you're eating the surface of them. And you
know these are basic Biblical principles, whole foods from good soil,
clean meats, fasting, meditation. The medical field occasionally feels like
they discovered one of these biblical principles, but really they're
(23:24):
they're very ancient and simple.
Speaker 1 (23:27):
Well, and now, you know, part of the discussion about
your new book New York Times bestselling author blind Spots.
I mean it seems like there are many of them.
You know, you write about how the experts said, for
you know, decades at obiate's were not addictive. Obviously, you know,
we're saying a massive national crisis with that, talking about
(23:48):
how you know, they refuse menopausal women hormone homeown replacement therapy,
causing honcessary suffering. Demonized natural food are natural fat and foods,
you know, driving Americans to process carbohydrates and obesit rates
sword You know, obviously we've gotten into some of the
blind spots. But you know, what else should people know about?
And also, you know what drove you to write this book.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
You know, medicine has a lot of group think. Society
has a lot of group think today. We see it
in politics, you see it, I'm sure in your world
of politics. But we need to be impeccably objective. We
need to recognize our subconscious bias to hold on to
what we believe, not because it's better or more logical
than new information. But just because we heard it first
(24:35):
we think it's correct. We have to recognize that's a
subconscious bias that we all have. And in medicine, the
pride of the medical elites has really resulted in some
tremendous damage. Bad health recommendations were the public still does
not know that some of them were flawed or incorrect.
(24:56):
Now everyone knows that they got opioids wrong for twenty
plus years, but I don't think people know that one
of the biggest screw ups in modern medicine was telling
women going through menopause that starting hormone therapy that is,
replacing your estrogen with estrogen exogenously, that what we call
(25:16):
hormone replacement therapy. They said it caused breast cancer. This
was an NIH scientist from twenty two years ago had
it in a press conference that it causes breast cancer. Well,
fifty million women have been denied this incredible therapy because
of this doctor who made this announcement. He never released
his data at the time of the press conference. Eventually,
(25:37):
when it came out, it turns out there was no
statistically significant increase in breast cancer. But the media had
run with the story, and to this day, eighty percent
of doctors will not prescribe hormone therapy to women dealing
with menopause. And by the way, it doesn't just help
with the menopausal symptoms of night flashes or night sweats,
hot flashes, weight game, mood swings, all of that. Those
(25:59):
are what we call the metopausal symptoms. It doesn't just
alleviate them. Women live longer because it's it makes your
blood vessels healthier, and it helps with your nerves, the neurons,
so there's less cognitive decline fifty to sixty percent less
cognitive decline. The risk of Alzheimers goes down by thirty
five percent. On women who take hormonal replacement therapy, the
(26:22):
risk of heart attacks is cut in half. That's the
number one cause of death in women. And if a
woman falls, they have stronger bones because hormone therapy prevents osteoporosis,
so they're far less likely to have a hip fracture
or need surgery for a broken bone later in life.
There's probably no medication that has improved the health outcomes
of a population more than hormone replacement therapy for perimenopausal women,
(26:46):
if they start it within ten years of menopause. But sadly,
because of this dog must at started by this NIH scientist,
fifty million women and counting are being denied this incredible therapy.
So that's one of the examples in the book what
people need to know about preventing peanut allergies, cancer prevention,
healthy foods, all the stuff we talked about in the
(27:08):
first half here of this conversation. These are things where
people need to know the truth. So a bunch of
us doctors, now Casey means myself, Peter a TV and
I PROSOD, We're going directly to the public to say, look,
you've been lied to about so many important things that
are central to health. That there's no bigger issue in
(27:28):
America than our poison food supply, and it's important to
address these chronic diseases with good information. So that's why
I wrote the book Blind Spots.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
That's I'm still the hormone replacement theory. I'm still that's
that's that is remarkable, you know, and deeply disappointing. Have
we covered the collective of who is poisoning for food?
Speaker 3 (27:57):
You know, it's it's the wild d West. There are
so many factors microplastics, heavy metals, and water that's not
appropriately cleaned and filtered for the public. That you know,
local governments just don't invest in water treatment. In my
(28:19):
area of Washington, DC, that the City of Washington, d C.
Will pour raw sewage into the river the same place
where they draw water for the drinking water. So when
I see this absolutism that every newborn child needs to
get a hepatitis feed vaccine upon delivery in the delivery room,
(28:41):
I think to myself, I wish the medical establishment could
just take five percent of that enthusiasm and absolutism and
talk about our poisoned food supply by in the chronic
disease epidemic and children, or talk about clean water. And
so this is where we see these huge blind spots
(29:02):
in modern medicine where we're just not talking about the
important things. And by the way, I think we've done
a terrible thing to doctors in this country. We've told
them as a medical field, our leaders have said, put
your heads down. Doctors focus on billing and coding, seeing
patients and short visits, and we're going to measure you
by your throughput and guess what, Okay, good job here
(29:22):
you get a bonus and everyone's collecting their paychecks every
two weeks. But who is working on health? Who's talking
about school lunch programs, not just putting every kid on ozempic,
Who's talking about treating diabetes with cooking classes, not just
putting everyone on insulin? And who's talking about the environmental
exposures that cause cancer not just the chemo to treat it.
(29:43):
These are the big issues that we need to confront
and we're starting to see tremendous enthusiasm now to deal
with these things.
Speaker 2 (29:52):
You know, I guess what changes?
Speaker 1 (29:56):
You know, obviously it takes people like you, which you've
been you know, very brave on a lot of different issues,
you know, during COVID all of it, of coming forward
and just really presenting the facts. But I guess, how
do we how do we you know, how do the
Domino's fall?
Speaker 3 (30:10):
Like what?
Speaker 2 (30:10):
You know, what what do we? How do we change things?
You know in government?
Speaker 1 (30:14):
When you know you look at people like Fauci previously
at the helm of you know, the NIH and just
so much distrust there. You know, I guess what changes
need to be made so that America becomes healthy again?
Speaker 2 (30:29):
Well?
Speaker 3 (30:29):
Right now? Big food, Big AG and pharma feel that
they own the government regulatory agencies, and so step number
one is to get rid of so many of these
conflicts of interest that have created not just the disastrous
and catastrophic Food Pyramid, but the revised version which just
(30:49):
came out last year. They an i h unveiled the
replacement for the Food Pyramid. It's the Food Compass, and
the Food Compass concluded that Lucky Charm cereal is healthier
than a state and so we've got to get rid
of the misinformation that is actively put out by the government.
(31:10):
We need to support the school lunch program, not with
unfunded mandates, but with support with good information, with funding,
and to make American schools have healthy food, and we
need to educate the public. There are some things that
can be done at the FDA. I don't want to
(31:32):
see too much about that, but there are things that
can be done. We can learn from some of the
regulators in Europe about how to ensure we have a
healthy food supply and at the same time promote innovation
and encourage No one is anti pharma, it's just pharma
should not have a hammer lock on American health and
(31:55):
allow us to be so myopic that nobody is talking
about the root causes. But we need pharma companies that
are innovating in ways that are not just designed to
get the whole country addicted to a medication. And when
it comes to mental health and children, we need a
new approach. I mean, the road we're on is a
(32:18):
terrible road. Forty percent of American kids will have a
mental health diagnosis by the time they turn eighteen. What's
going on here? Twenty percent are on medications. Right. You
mentioned that maybe kids were not designed by God to
sit in a sedentary debt classroom, to sit sedentary at
(32:39):
a classroom for seven hours a day, messing up their
circadian rhythms, putting them under a fluorescent light, and then
a kid doesn't like it, and then we say, we're
diagnosing you with attention deficit disorder or oppositional defiant disorder.
That's a real thing, and then we put them on medications.
I mean, what somebody has to say, maybe we need
(33:00):
to design the schools for the children, not design the
schools for adults who want to unload their children. And
so we need fresh new ideas.
Speaker 2 (33:13):
Agree with everything you just said. Although the only place
I will disagree.
Speaker 1 (33:16):
Is I think I might be anti pharma.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
I anti a lot of things these.
Speaker 1 (33:24):
Maybe at some point my trust and people will angy
COVID burn me, you know, but my trust is high.
Speaker 3 (33:33):
I get it. I get it. If you just look
at cancer. For example, we spend eighty one billion dollars
at the NIH and probably three hundred billion dollars total
on cancer. What did we get for that money each year?
What are we what's our return on investment? Have we
cured anything? I mean, we are looking at small, incremental,
(33:58):
tiny little steps where the top paper at the big
cancer meeting that I went to was a chemo that's
been around for a long time, applied to another cancer
extends survival by a couple months. And I'm thinking there,
I'm sitting, what's asking what is the cure rate? Did
(34:19):
it cure anyone who was not cured with the other chemo?
And no one discusses that. It's just, oh, we added
a couple months. There was no increase in the cure rate.
What do we need? Big ideas? Okay, we've got a
bunch of dinosaurs right now saying hey, cancer has to
focus on these legacy ideas and an old guard establishment
(34:40):
decides what young people can study in the field of cancer.
Maybe we need big ideas, Maybe we need fresh new ideas.
Maybe we need to encourage young genius scientists to take
here's ten million dollars in a grant. You go study
whatever you think is important for seven years. You can pivot.
You don't have to send us reports two months and
(35:01):
you know, stick to the original plan. We need to
do something different because we're not addressing the root causes
of cancer and we're not making progress with cancer.
Speaker 1 (35:11):
But I guess as you were saying that, I found
myself agreeing, but then also thinking, well, how much money
is there to be made off of cancer? And you know,
what percentage would they lose if you actually cured cancer?
And so perhaps that's why we haven't cured a lot
of these things, is because there's money to be made
off of it. And I hate to be so calloused,
(35:33):
but just given everything we went through with COVID and
just the the you know, push for the vaccine that
so many Americans didn't need, that you know, people have
vaccine injuries that never get discussed. We don't know the
long term impacts of what you know, mRNA is going
to do to Americans because we don't have long term
data for the COVID vaccine.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
So I mean, isn't.
Speaker 1 (35:55):
There more incentive to keep Americans, you know, keep cancer
right up? Then there is secure cancer. And that's the
same to be said for a lot. So I mean,
I hate to be so callous, but that's what I
truly believe.
Speaker 3 (36:08):
Look, I get it, Lisa. I think I can understand
why people would make that observation. I think from the inside.
In my opinion, it's less intentional, but it is still
very much a powerful force of groupthink that prevents us
from from asking the questions we should be asking, and
just to keep being cogs in the wheel and doing
(36:31):
what we're told and allowing pharma to passively control the
research enterprise. There's two hours of nutrition education at most
medical schools, and most of it is misinformation. It's the
old food pyramid and it's the old food industry written stuff.
So as long as we're ignoring the causes of cancer
and the causes of crise, thees is and inflammation and
(36:52):
for mitochondrial health and diabetes, and we're watching all these
conditions explode, I mean a crazy high rates. Now to
the point where one in five women will have an
autoimmune disease and seventy five percent of Americans will have
pre diabetes, diabetes, or metabolic dysfunction. I mean, who is
who's going to say, hey, you know what, guys, as
(37:15):
a medical profession, we're pretty good in emergencies and hot
technical operations, but when it comes to the health of
the public, we have failed for fifty years. And that's
I think a reckoning that we need to say, we
need to try an entirely new approach.
Speaker 1 (37:32):
Well, I appreciate you, doctor Marty McCarey. You've become a
friend and someone I frequently.
Speaker 2 (37:39):
I think I texted you. I went to go get this.
Speaker 1 (37:42):
MRI MRI thing and I texted you. It was like
midnight and like, so doctor, probably, like what is.
Speaker 2 (37:48):
Wrong with you? Are you thanking me these random things?
No one wants to be inside my head. It's it's
an exhausting place.
Speaker 3 (37:56):
You know, It's part of the job of being a doctor.
We get it all the time, my pleasure.
Speaker 1 (38:01):
No. And I went to you with you know, some
family some you know, family health stuff recently and went
to But you've been a friend and you're just a
really great guy, and I really appreciate you being so
bold and brave, and you know, I'm so glad to
see Blind Spots doing so well. Just appreciate everything you do.
So just appreciate you joining the show and just fighting
the good fight.
Speaker 3 (38:21):
Thanks so much. Le's it great to be with you.
Speaker 1 (38:23):
That was New York Times best selling author Doctor Marta McCarey.
Of Blind Spots is his new book.
Speaker 2 (38:28):
Go check it out.
Speaker 1 (38:29):
Appreciate him for taking the time to join the show.
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Monday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
I want to thank.
Speaker 1 (38:35):
John Cassio and my producer for putting the show together.
Until next time.
So RFK Junior has really ignited a conversation in the country,
you know, make America healthy again, about what we're eating,
the shots that we're putting in our arms, about the
negative impact it's all having on our nation's health. A
lot of people started having more and more questions because
of COVID as well about the medical establishment, you know,
big Pharma, you know these alphabet agencies, you know nih
(00:23):
CDC won encouraging lockdowns which were wrong and hugely devastating
to Americans, to so many Americans into our country as
a whole, forcing shots in the arms of people didn't
need the vaccine. We've had some of these conversations on
the show previously with people like Kelly Means, but it's
just a topic of conversation that I'm very interested in.
Senator Ron Johnson, who is a friend of the show,
(00:45):
who we've had on who's always willing to engage in
conversations that other people find dangerous. He recently held a
roundtable discussion titled American Health and Nutrition A Second Opinion.
He convened a panel of experts talking about our nation's health,
talking about how big Pharma, you know, they've invested interest
in keeping us unhealthy that you know, they make money. Obviously,
(01:06):
the more people on medicine, the more money they make.
We saw that during COVID with the vaccine as well.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
One of those.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Experts on the panel doctor Marty McCarey. He is a
friend of mine, he's a Fox News colleague, but he's
also super brave. During COVID, he was someone I frequently
went to asking questions about lockdowns, about the vaccine, just
overall health.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
He's a great guy.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
He's also the best selling author of a new book,
Blind Spots, as well, which everyone should go out and get.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
But he's just a really brilliant guy. You know.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
He's a surgeon and public policy researcher at John Hopkins University.
He writes for The Washington Post the Wall Street Journal
as well. He's also written a couple of other New
York Times best selling books, Unaccountable in the Price We Pay.
He was one of those individuals on this panel really
addressing those blind spots in his book, you know, when
medicine gets.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
It wrong and what it means for hell.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
Some of the things that he noted during his testimony,
which we'll get into in this common rotation as well,
is that twenty percent of our nation's kids are now
in medication, that we have the most over medicated, you
get the sickest population.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
In the world.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
He goes on to talk about how they've poisoned or
food supply engineered, highly addicted chemicals that are our put
in our food that we need, that they spray for
pesticides that kill pests, but we're eating them are in
our food. So just so much to discuss in this
conversation with someone I trust, someone who's become a friend
of mine, someone who I've leaned on for advice and
(02:31):
guidance on health related issues. He's just a really brilliant guy,
good guy friend and colleagues. So stay tuned for doctor
Martin McCarey. You know, doctor Martin McCarey.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
Great to have you on this show.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
You're a friend and someone who I whose advice I
saw frequently during COVID, So I appreciate you making the
time to come on the show.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
Good to be with you, Lisa.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
I always appreciated your insight throughout COVID because you know,
I felt like, particularly with not getting the vaccine, you know,
I had a lot of doctors really trying to push
it on me, and you never did when I went
to you, just say hey, this is the information we know,
here are the facts, and you know, just you just
gave information. And it's sad because that's how it should
have been throughout all of COVID is you know, I
(03:17):
think we should have just gotten updates on the numbers
with the data showed and really allowed Americans to decide,
you know, what sort of risk profile they were in
and making the right decisions, whether it was lockdowns or
the vaccine.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
You know, the medical establishment just did not understand what
it meant to be ultra low risk from COVID, and
so it just kind of went into this discombobulated seizure
if somebody said they're not fully on board with the
belief system that every single person needs to be vaccinated.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Was that just mind blowing for you?
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Throughout COVID just to see the public conversations just be
like complete nonsense and really not taking data into account,
and you know, just the lack of common sense and
the fear mongering, and it just seems and so many
doctors engaged in it, which is really anathetical to you know,
(04:15):
what you're supposed to be as you were supposed to
be as a medical professional, so I'm out as someone
who's reasonable and has common sense.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
You know that had to have been really frustrating for you.
Speaker 3 (04:26):
Yeah, I mean the doctors are supposed to use their
best judgment and wisdom and and parts together the best
available evidence and make informed decisions. So yes and no. Yes,
I've seen the bandwagon effect throughout medicine with so many things,
be it the food pyramid, the Peenied allergy abstinence guideline
(04:46):
that was perfectly backwards, the opioids are non addictive. So
I've seen the group think alive and well throughout my career,
and I've seen how it sort of sidelines or dismisses
different opinions. But no, I is one thing I was
not expecting was the second I say President Trump would
support something, you would just have half the medical field
(05:09):
automatically do the say the opposite. If you said, hey,
you could do pancreas surgery laparoscopically with better outcomes and
lower complications, and President Trump said, you know, this is
a good thing, and I'm gonna do it, I kind
of support it. Fifty percent of the country, within say
of the medical field, would say, well, then laparoscpy is
(05:30):
evil and bad and we shouldn't be doing And you
saw this intellectual dishonesty that was, you know, to this day,
it's we're still watching it. We're starting to see a
little bit of it now with our effort to address
chronic diseases in children, as if somebody could be for
chronic diseases in children. So yeah, it's been a little
disappointing to watch.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
So do you think, then, one, would it be a
fair statement to say that the group think has gotten
worse in the medical establishment than it has in years prior.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
I think, so we've got a misinformation police, and we
have political apartheid in medicine. If you don't support the
right political party, you go over here, you don't go
in this room, you go in that room. You're not
on this panel, you're not invited to this conference, and
you don't get to do this and this, you get
to do that and something else. And so that's getting worse.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
So it's the political I mean, we've seen politics sort
of infect all aspects of society. So you're saying now
it's seeped into medicine as well.
Speaker 3 (06:33):
I think So, I mean we have some refreshing moments
where my institution, Johns Hopkins, made a big statement that
they are not going to be taking political positions on
things and they support the free speech of the faculty,
and it's like, wow, where did that come from? That's great.
And then on the flip side, you know, we see
(06:55):
associations put out strong statements and medical journals now endorsing
political candidates for the first time in their two hundred
plus year history, which is disturbing.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
I also, you know, one thing, one discussion that we've
had a lot on here with various people, and what
I've learned throughout COVID is just how much control, like
the nih for instance, has on the research that's being
conducted in the country through grants and through money. And
then also we've just sort of seen the revolving door
with you know, the these heads of the alphabet agencies
(07:28):
go on to you know, control big you know, go
on to big Pharma and these big positions and make
a ton of money. So it's just sort of a
revolving door for them.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Gosh. Yeah, the number of doctors that came up to
me during COVID and said I believe in everything you're saying,
I fully agree, but I'm applying for an NIH grant
or our department is you know, NIH funded, so I
can't say anything. And I thought, gosh, when did we
get central planners in medicine where a small group of doctors,
you know, can rule the kingdom like.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
Some arc Well, and it kind of leads us into
this broader conversation that we're going to have today is
you know, like what percentage of what we are told
about our health and the things we're supposed to do,
what percentage is actually about our health versus you know,
people wanting to make money, like whether it's big pharma
or you know, like, what are we being told that's
(08:22):
actually true in an ora interest versus in the interest
of making money.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Well, for example, most of our chronic diseases are avoidable
if we would address the root causes. And I don't
think there's a diabolical motive. I just think we've developed
giant blind spots where we've allowed big pharma to have
a hammer lock on our research enterprise and for studies
(08:48):
that don't fit the objective is a big pharma. We
have the NIH and the National Institutes of Health are
supposed to be funding the big studies that we need
to fund, but they are sort of now either in
their tunnel vision or have blinders on. You know, what
are they spending their money on. How about studying food
is medicine instead of funding back coronavirus research in China,
(09:12):
you know, and all these crazy grants that they give out.
One in six NIH grants goes to health equity or disparities.
That's an eighty one billion dollar budget over there at
an IH. And it's not interesting to say we have
differences based on race and socioeconomics, as we know that,
(09:33):
we know their health differences based health outcomes are based
on those factors. What's interesting is reducing those disparities. And
for that there's almost no interest. It's almost you know,
make it. The ruling class feels good about themselves by saying,
we're describing these differences in the population, Well, how about
(09:54):
reducing those disparities.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
But I guess maybe I think they're a little bit
more diabolical. I've become very jaded doctor, very very jadd
over the years because.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
There's less money for them to make.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
If you increase the percentage of the population that are healthy, Yeah,
if more Americans are healthy, there's less money to be made.
And you know, whether it's putting everyone on ozempic or
you know, putting vaccines in the arms of everyone, or
you know, giving them medicine. Like, if we're a healthier society,
you're not making as much money. If you're a big
pharma and they want us to be sick, there's a
(10:30):
there's money to be made for a sick Yeah.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
I mean, how about we focus on school lunch programs
instead of putting every overweight kid on ozempic. We've got
half our nation's children overweight or obese. So all we
hear about is this myopic, single strategy of getting these
kids on medication. Where's the conversation about healthy foods. Where's
(10:52):
the conversation about how we strip our wheat of fiber
and chop it up so it functions like sugar in
the bio and all the pesticides and highly engineered food ingredients.
Who's going to study that, Who's aligned to look at
the food supply? And so what we have is we've
did about this giant blind spot where we have the
root cause of so many of our exploding chronic diseases.
(11:17):
I mean, everything is up, autommune diseases, pcos, fertility rates
are going down, cancer and the GI tract, and it's
like no one is interested in actually talking about the
root causes.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
We've got a quick commercial break more with doctor Marty McCarey.
I want to get to that there seems to be,
you know, some desire to shift some of those conversations.
And I really give a lot of credit to carfk
Junior of you know, taking a lot of incoming fire
and bringing you know, the discussion of making America healthy again.
(11:54):
I know that Senator Ron Johnson recently led a roundtable
discussion titled American Health and Nutrition a Second Opinion, you know,
having convening a bunch of experts together to talk about
you know, food processing, health care industries and how it's
all impacting the nation's health.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
You were part of that discussion.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
For those who missed the roundtable discussion, I guess what
should people know and give us a little bit of
insight into you know what took place during that roundtable discussion.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Well, that was an incredible day, Lisa, A milestone in
American healthcare. Basically a group of people interested in health
and chronic diseases and the root causes got together. We
convened at the Senate and testified moms, experts. Physicians Casey
(12:47):
and Kelly Means were there. RFK Junior, and it was incredible.
You saw this passion to finally get at the root causes.
You know, there's discussion about lowering drug prices in America.
The best wait a lower drug costs, or to stop
taking drugs we don't need, and we have this incredibly
expensive healthcare system with the worst outcomes. So we saw
(13:09):
people talking about why is fruit Loops, which is made
by Kellogg's made in two forms, one for Canada where
all these artificial chemicals in them are banned, and another
version for the United States. Don't American kids deserve the
healthiest version of a serial made by an American company?
(13:29):
And so we saw an incredible discussion. I've never seen
it before. It was inspiring. Everyone should watch it. It
was totally apolitical. I posted it on my social media accounts.
But this thing is going around now and I think
we're seeing a new enthusiasm to finally address our poison
food supply.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
You said some things that really just you know, it's
sort of mind boggling that we don't talk about this
more and that this conversation doesn't get a bigger a
national platform. You said that twenty percent of our nation's
kids are on medication, which seems crazy to me, and
then you made the statement of we have the most
over medicated, sikest population in the world, and so it's
(14:11):
you know, at some point, why continue to medicate people
if we continue to be the sickest population. Clearly we're
not addressing those root causes, as you pointed out, and
it doesn't seem that, you know, increasing the percentage of
Americans who are medicated is helping reduce the population that
are are sick.
Speaker 3 (14:31):
Yes, and we we need more research on this, but
we don't need to wait for a ten year randomized
control trial on a new ingredient. Just look at Europe
where they have different standards. They don't allow a lot
of these highly processed, engineered chemicals in their food supply.
You have to show safety first. In the US, we
(14:51):
have this standard called Generally Recognized as Safe for what
we call grass, which basically means no one is watching
what the food industr tree creates and what chemicals they add,
and no one's testing it. There's no standard. And look
at Europe. They're healthier, they have lower rates of all
kinds of chronic diseases. Look at the Amish in the
(15:12):
United States. They're not eating this processed junk. They're eating
whole foods that grow out of great soil from regenerative farming.
And they have lower rates of everything autism, chronic diseases,
autoimmune cancer. They have basically no obesity in their childhood population.
So this is not rocket science, This is not hard.
(15:35):
All we have to do is use some common sense.
And if you look at our medical establishment, they're blind.
I mean sometimes they can't see the forest from the trees.
When the US government acknowledge that settlers and farmers in
New Mexico had destroyed the soil of the Pima Indians
from diverting water and the soil was completely unusable, the
(16:02):
government sent food to the Pima Indians. They sent them
and it wasn't organic kale, It was processed food. It
was junk food, it was spam and things like that,
and guess what, the obesity and diabetes rates went from
one percent to ninety percent. The NIH then dispatches their
scientists to look for a gene. They drew the blood
(16:22):
of the Indians and this big NIH funded project to
figure out why the Pima Indians were obese. Did they
have an obesity gene. It's like you morons, you can't
see the forest from the trees. Sometimes you need to
zoom out and look at the macro and realize that
we have done this to people. It's not the fault
(16:45):
of American children. They're not more lazy or disobedient than
kids in Japan, where childhood obesity is rare. No, maybe
we have poisoned their food supplied. Maybe adults have done
this to children.
Speaker 1 (16:59):
You know, I guess what percentage of cancers are avoidable
through lifestyle changes and the way we liver lives.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
Well, I would say most. Now you'll hear the medical
establishment and say, well, we don't know, and it's probably genetics.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
And all that.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
But look at the rates that are going up and
which cancers are going up. It's the cancers that line
the gas tru intestinal tract, what we call the GI cancers.
And what's unique about the GI cancers it is the
front line of interface of all these chemicals and processed
foods that we ingest Ten to twenty percent of Americans'
calories now are coming from seed oils, which sound healthy
(17:35):
like vegetable oil, but they're not. These are chemicals that
are denatured at high temperatures and changed with the chemical
solvent the body is. These are not naturally occurring molecules.
So when they go down the GI tract, the body's
immune system is reacting to the everyday food that people
are eating. And it's not a big inflammatory storm. It's
(17:56):
a low grade inflammation that's constant, that makes people feel sick.
They don't feel well, they feel low energy, and we
wonder what's going on, and they get sad and we
put them on antidepressants. I mean, we can't keep going
down this road. We've got to look at these root causes.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Yeah, I've recently tried to. I think I turned forty
eight in February. So I've been, you know, just upping
working out. I've been doing like a very like clean
eating food delivery service or I've been posting them on
my social media.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
I do get the food for greep, but I've been
posting it.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
But I've been like really into I just did the
MRI scan, which I was talking to you about. I
was texting you about that you know, detects for five
hundred cancers and diseases of just you know. I think
in part because of the discussions that are happening in
the country.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
About health, do you I guess should we?
Speaker 1 (18:51):
And then I want to switch to your book in
a second, but which I know it's part of the
broader conversation that we're having.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
But is it is it time to.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Revisit vaccines and the vaccines that we're giving children? You know?
You know obviously you know things like MMR or you
know polio that have been around for forever. You know,
polio you look at I think the fatality rate for
adults is something like fifteen to thirty percent, which is
very very serious. But like, are we over vaccinating children?
(19:21):
Are we over vaccinating Americans? Should that be part of
this broader conversation that we're having as a country.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
I think everything should be a part of it. I
think all of it. We need to look at everything
that we're doing that we were not doing one generation ago,
when we had low rates of chronic diseases and low
rates of childhood disease. Do we need a hepatitis B
vaccine upon birth in the hospital when you're born like
(19:48):
the day you're born, do you need a hepatitis B vaccine? Really?
It's es sexually a transmitted infection that you can also
get from ivy drug use. We're giving it to newborns. Really,
do do they need that extra inflammatory response from a vaccine?
I think vaccines to become a religion you have to
be one hundred percent for or they label you an
(20:11):
anti vaccer. They don't tolerate a nuanced discussion. There's so
much absolutism, and for vaccines, the vast majority of them,
But it's okay to ask some questions. It turns out
you didn't need a COVID vaccine second dose three to
four weeks after the first dose. Best time if you
did need the vaccine was three months. That was study
(20:33):
was pretty clear out of Europe early in the COVID
vaccine rollout, but nobody wanted to hear it. It's like
you got to just be obedient, follow the medical leaders.
And when you look at the track record of a
small group of central planners in medicine issuing broad edicts
based on their opinions, they don't have a very good
(20:55):
track record. And that's some a bit of what I
go through in the book is let's look at the
modern health recommendations that a small elite group of medical
establishment leaders have bestowed upon the public, and let's just
see how they've held up with current research. And it
turns out there's one of the greatest propagators of misinformation
(21:17):
has been the United States government.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
Quick break, stay with us.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
You talked about, you know, inflammation, and it seems like
inflammation sort of the you know, driver of you know,
diseases and some of these cancers as well. What can
people do to to try to you know, reduce inflammation
in the body and to you know, I guess what
is a healthy lifestyle, A truly healthy lifestyle look like,
not you know, the lifestyle obviously that the government recommends,
(21:46):
because you know that lead us to being medicated and
probably dying early. But like in the actual you know,
healthy lifestyle, like what steps can people do to mitigate
the risk of cancer and to mitigate the risk of
disease down their life in their.
Speaker 3 (22:00):
I would say, read food labels. We've got about a
thousand ingredients in the United States that are really chemicals
that have been banned in Europe that are allowed in
the US. Food supply and are ubiquitous. Look for those
seed oils and try to avoid them. The vegetable oils canola, soybean,
you'll see them everywhere. Try to cook with the healthy oils,
(22:21):
avocado oil, coconut oil, extra virgin olive oil. Avoid these
highly processed foods, and avoid foods with pesticides on the surface.
If you're eating the surface of a fruit or vegetable
like a strawberry, for example, has been sprayed over a
dozen times with pesticides, and there's seven different types of pesticides,
So you want to buy organic, which means pesticide free.
(22:43):
If pesticides are killing pests, guess what they're doing to
your microbiome. That is the lining of the gaserin intestinal
tract with millions of different bacteria involved in absorption, digestion, training,
the immune system, and some of those bacteria make serotonin,
involving your mood and brain health. So I tell people
(23:03):
to buy organic when it comes to foods and vegetables,
especially when you're eating the surface of them. And you
know these are basic Biblical principles, whole foods from good soil,
clean meats, fasting, meditation. The medical field occasionally feels like
they discovered one of these biblical principles, but really they're
(23:24):
they're very ancient and simple.
Speaker 1 (23:27):
Well, and now, you know, part of the discussion about
your new book New York Times bestselling author blind Spots.
I mean it seems like there are many of them.
You know, you write about how the experts said, for
you know, decades at obiate's were not addictive. Obviously, you know,
we're saying a massive national crisis with that, talking about
(23:48):
how you know, they refuse menopausal women hormone homeown replacement therapy,
causing honcessary suffering. Demonized natural food are natural fat and foods,
you know, driving Americans to process carbohydrates and obesit rates
sword You know, obviously we've gotten into some of the
blind spots. But you know, what else should people know about?
And also, you know what drove you to write this book.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
You know, medicine has a lot of group think. Society
has a lot of group think today. We see it
in politics, you see it, I'm sure in your world
of politics. But we need to be impeccably objective. We
need to recognize our subconscious bias to hold on to
what we believe, not because it's better or more logical
than new information. But just because we heard it first
(24:35):
we think it's correct. We have to recognize that's a
subconscious bias that we all have. And in medicine, the
pride of the medical elites has really resulted in some
tremendous damage. Bad health recommendations were the public still does
not know that some of them were flawed or incorrect.
(24:56):
Now everyone knows that they got opioids wrong for twenty
plus years, but I don't think people know that one
of the biggest screw ups in modern medicine was telling
women going through menopause that starting hormone therapy that is,
replacing your estrogen with estrogen exogenously, that what we call
(25:16):
hormone replacement therapy. They said it caused breast cancer. This
was an NIH scientist from twenty two years ago had
it in a press conference that it causes breast cancer. Well,
fifty million women have been denied this incredible therapy because
of this doctor who made this announcement. He never released
his data at the time of the press conference. Eventually,
(25:37):
when it came out, it turns out there was no
statistically significant increase in breast cancer. But the media had
run with the story, and to this day, eighty percent
of doctors will not prescribe hormone therapy to women dealing
with menopause. And by the way, it doesn't just help
with the menopausal symptoms of night flashes or night sweats,
hot flashes, weight game, mood swings, all of that. Those
(25:59):
are what we call the metopausal symptoms. It doesn't just
alleviate them. Women live longer because it's it makes your
blood vessels healthier, and it helps with your nerves, the neurons,
so there's less cognitive decline fifty to sixty percent less
cognitive decline. The risk of Alzheimers goes down by thirty
five percent. On women who take hormonal replacement therapy, the
(26:22):
risk of heart attacks is cut in half. That's the
number one cause of death in women. And if a
woman falls, they have stronger bones because hormone therapy prevents osteoporosis,
so they're far less likely to have a hip fracture
or need surgery for a broken bone later in life.
There's probably no medication that has improved the health outcomes
of a population more than hormone replacement therapy for perimenopausal women,
(26:46):
if they start it within ten years of menopause. But sadly,
because of this dog must at started by this NIH scientist,
fifty million women and counting are being denied this incredible therapy.
So that's one of the examples in the book what
people need to know about preventing peanut allergies, cancer prevention,
healthy foods, all the stuff we talked about in the
(27:08):
first half here of this conversation. These are things where
people need to know the truth. So a bunch of
us doctors, now Casey means myself, Peter a TV and
I PROSOD, We're going directly to the public to say, look,
you've been lied to about so many important things that
are central to health. That there's no bigger issue in
(27:28):
America than our poison food supply, and it's important to
address these chronic diseases with good information. So that's why
I wrote the book Blind Spots.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
That's I'm still the hormone replacement theory. I'm still that's
that's that is remarkable, you know, and deeply disappointing. Have
we covered the collective of who is poisoning for food?
Speaker 3 (27:57):
You know, it's it's the wild d West. There are
so many factors microplastics, heavy metals, and water that's not
appropriately cleaned and filtered for the public. That you know,
local governments just don't invest in water treatment. In my
(28:19):
area of Washington, DC, that the City of Washington, d C.
Will pour raw sewage into the river the same place
where they draw water for the drinking water. So when
I see this absolutism that every newborn child needs to
get a hepatitis feed vaccine upon delivery in the delivery room,
(28:41):
I think to myself, I wish the medical establishment could
just take five percent of that enthusiasm and absolutism and
talk about our poisoned food supply by in the chronic
disease epidemic and children, or talk about clean water. And
so this is where we see these huge blind spots
(29:02):
in modern medicine where we're just not talking about the
important things. And by the way, I think we've done
a terrible thing to doctors in this country. We've told
them as a medical field, our leaders have said, put
your heads down. Doctors focus on billing and coding, seeing
patients and short visits, and we're going to measure you
by your throughput and guess what, Okay, good job here
(29:22):
you get a bonus and everyone's collecting their paychecks every
two weeks. But who is working on health? Who's talking
about school lunch programs, not just putting every kid on ozempic,
Who's talking about treating diabetes with cooking classes, not just
putting everyone on insulin? And who's talking about the environmental
exposures that cause cancer not just the chemo to treat it.
(29:43):
These are the big issues that we need to confront
and we're starting to see tremendous enthusiasm now to deal
with these things.
Speaker 2 (29:52):
You know, I guess what changes?
Speaker 1 (29:56):
You know, obviously it takes people like you, which you've
been you know, very brave on a lot of different issues,
you know, during COVID all of it, of coming forward
and just really presenting the facts. But I guess, how
do we how do we you know, how do the
Domino's fall?
Speaker 3 (30:10):
Like what?
Speaker 2 (30:10):
You know, what what do we? How do we change things?
You know in government?
Speaker 1 (30:14):
When you know you look at people like Fauci previously
at the helm of you know, the NIH and just
so much distrust there. You know, I guess what changes
need to be made so that America becomes healthy again?
Speaker 2 (30:29):
Well?
Speaker 3 (30:29):
Right now? Big food, Big AG and pharma feel that
they own the government regulatory agencies, and so step number
one is to get rid of so many of these
conflicts of interest that have created not just the disastrous
and catastrophic Food Pyramid, but the revised version which just
(30:49):
came out last year. They an i h unveiled the
replacement for the Food Pyramid. It's the Food Compass, and
the Food Compass concluded that Lucky Charm cereal is healthier
than a state and so we've got to get rid
of the misinformation that is actively put out by the government.
(31:10):
We need to support the school lunch program, not with
unfunded mandates, but with support with good information, with funding,
and to make American schools have healthy food, and we
need to educate the public. There are some things that
can be done at the FDA. I don't want to
(31:32):
see too much about that, but there are things that
can be done. We can learn from some of the
regulators in Europe about how to ensure we have a
healthy food supply and at the same time promote innovation
and encourage No one is anti pharma, it's just pharma
should not have a hammer lock on American health and
(31:55):
allow us to be so myopic that nobody is talking
about the root causes. But we need pharma companies that
are innovating in ways that are not just designed to
get the whole country addicted to a medication. And when
it comes to mental health and children, we need a
new approach. I mean, the road we're on is a
(32:18):
terrible road. Forty percent of American kids will have a
mental health diagnosis by the time they turn eighteen. What's
going on here? Twenty percent are on medications. Right. You
mentioned that maybe kids were not designed by God to
sit in a sedentary debt classroom, to sit sedentary at
(32:39):
a classroom for seven hours a day, messing up their
circadian rhythms, putting them under a fluorescent light, and then
a kid doesn't like it, and then we say, we're
diagnosing you with attention deficit disorder or oppositional defiant disorder.
That's a real thing, and then we put them on medications.
I mean, what somebody has to say, maybe we need
(33:00):
to design the schools for the children, not design the
schools for adults who want to unload their children. And
so we need fresh new ideas.
Speaker 2 (33:13):
Agree with everything you just said. Although the only place
I will disagree.
Speaker 1 (33:16):
Is I think I might be anti pharma.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
I anti a lot of things these.
Speaker 1 (33:24):
Maybe at some point my trust and people will angy
COVID burn me, you know, but my trust is high.
Speaker 3 (33:33):
I get it. I get it. If you just look
at cancer. For example, we spend eighty one billion dollars
at the NIH and probably three hundred billion dollars total
on cancer. What did we get for that money each year?
What are we what's our return on investment? Have we
cured anything? I mean, we are looking at small, incremental,
(33:58):
tiny little steps where the top paper at the big
cancer meeting that I went to was a chemo that's
been around for a long time, applied to another cancer
extends survival by a couple months. And I'm thinking there,
I'm sitting, what's asking what is the cure rate? Did
(34:19):
it cure anyone who was not cured with the other chemo?
And no one discusses that. It's just, oh, we added
a couple months. There was no increase in the cure rate.
What do we need? Big ideas? Okay, we've got a
bunch of dinosaurs right now saying hey, cancer has to
focus on these legacy ideas and an old guard establishment
(34:40):
decides what young people can study in the field of cancer.
Maybe we need big ideas, Maybe we need fresh new ideas.
Maybe we need to encourage young genius scientists to take
here's ten million dollars in a grant. You go study
whatever you think is important for seven years. You can pivot.
You don't have to send us reports two months and
(35:01):
you know, stick to the original plan. We need to
do something different because we're not addressing the root causes
of cancer and we're not making progress with cancer.
Speaker 1 (35:11):
But I guess as you were saying that, I found
myself agreeing, but then also thinking, well, how much money
is there to be made off of cancer? And you know,
what percentage would they lose if you actually cured cancer?
And so perhaps that's why we haven't cured a lot
of these things, is because there's money to be made
off of it. And I hate to be so calloused,
(35:33):
but just given everything we went through with COVID and
just the the you know, push for the vaccine that
so many Americans didn't need, that you know, people have
vaccine injuries that never get discussed. We don't know the
long term impacts of what you know, mRNA is going
to do to Americans because we don't have long term
data for the COVID vaccine.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
So I mean, isn't.
Speaker 1 (35:55):
There more incentive to keep Americans, you know, keep cancer
right up? Then there is secure cancer. And that's the
same to be said for a lot. So I mean,
I hate to be so callous, but that's what I
truly believe.
Speaker 3 (36:08):
Look, I get it, Lisa. I think I can understand
why people would make that observation. I think from the inside.
In my opinion, it's less intentional, but it is still
very much a powerful force of groupthink that prevents us
from from asking the questions we should be asking, and
just to keep being cogs in the wheel and doing
(36:31):
what we're told and allowing pharma to passively control the
research enterprise. There's two hours of nutrition education at most
medical schools, and most of it is misinformation. It's the
old food pyramid and it's the old food industry written stuff.
So as long as we're ignoring the causes of cancer
and the causes of crise, thees is and inflammation and
(36:52):
for mitochondrial health and diabetes, and we're watching all these
conditions explode, I mean a crazy high rates. Now to
the point where one in five women will have an
autoimmune disease and seventy five percent of Americans will have
pre diabetes, diabetes, or metabolic dysfunction. I mean, who is
who's going to say, hey, you know what, guys, as
(37:15):
a medical profession, we're pretty good in emergencies and hot
technical operations, but when it comes to the health of
the public, we have failed for fifty years. And that's
I think a reckoning that we need to say, we
need to try an entirely new approach.
Speaker 1 (37:32):
Well, I appreciate you, doctor Marty McCarey. You've become a
friend and someone I frequently.
Speaker 2 (37:39):
I think I texted you. I went to go get this.
Speaker 1 (37:42):
MRI MRI thing and I texted you. It was like
midnight and like, so doctor, probably, like what is.
Speaker 2 (37:48):
Wrong with you? Are you thanking me these random things?
No one wants to be inside my head. It's it's
an exhausting place.
Speaker 3 (37:56):
You know, It's part of the job of being a doctor.
We get it all the time, my pleasure.
Speaker 1 (38:01):
No. And I went to you with you know, some
family some you know, family health stuff recently and went
to But you've been a friend and you're just a
really great guy, and I really appreciate you being so
bold and brave, and you know, I'm so glad to
see Blind Spots doing so well. Just appreciate everything you do.
So just appreciate you joining the show and just fighting
the good fight.
Speaker 3 (38:21):
Thanks so much. Le's it great to be with you.
Speaker 1 (38:23):
That was New York Times best selling author Doctor Marta McCarey.
Of Blind Spots is his new book.
Speaker 2 (38:28):
Go check it out.
Speaker 1 (38:29):
Appreciate him for taking the time to join the show.
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Monday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
I want to thank.
Speaker 1 (38:35):
John Cassio and my producer for putting the show together.
Until next time.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
1. Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
2. Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
3. Crime Junkie
If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people.