October 3, 2022 • 41 mins
We were told demonstrable lies during COVID, from masks work to the vaccines would stop the spread. People were denied cheap generic drugs, which could have made a difference in the fight against COVID, and lockdowns had devastating effects. And we still aren’t getting the truth about the vaccines. Yale epidemiologist Dr. Harvey Risch joins Lisa to talk about it all, and he does not hold back. He also talks about why he launched the Wellness Company.
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 first of all, I just wanted to let you
know I apologize for a little bit of the delay
in the last episode. The reason was my producer John
cast you, who you guys know from listening to the show,
him and his family there in the path of hurricane,
and so obviously his safety is more important as family
safety is more important than you know, getting a podcast
out on time. And look, I love being a Floridian.
(00:22):
I love our state. It's a free state, amazing people
I've I've loved being a Floridian. It's an honor to
be a Floridian. And so for those of you listening,
if if you were in the path of the hurricane,
and if your family was in the path of hurricane,
if you lost to love the one, I just want
to let you know that we're praying for you and
or even you know, if you lost a house. You
know that's a significant life event as well. So I
(00:44):
just wanted to let you guys know that thinking about you,
praying for you. I know it's tough times financially right
now and this economy. If you like to give um
Florida Disaster of fund dot org is a place to
do so. If you're trying to local a family member.
Florida Disaster dot org slash report is a place where
(01:06):
you can go to try to locate a family member
as well. You like to volunteer, Volunteer Florida dot org
is a resource for you to do that, to try
to sign up if you want to go and help
and volunteer your time, which is another way to help
out as well. So I just wanted to make sure
to mention that and let you guys know that you know,
we're thinking of you a we love our state and uh,
(01:28):
you know it's the rebuilding process is going to be
a long but what we're gonna do it. For this episode,
we've got Dr Harvey Rish. He has been one of
those brave warriors out during COVID speaking the truth about lockdown,
speaking the truth about a lot of these you know,
generic drugs that could have saved lives, but instead the
(01:48):
media and our public health officials lied to them because
big Pharma didn't stand to profit off of generic drugs.
He is someone who has been honest about vaccines and
what we don't know about them. So he is brave
as a warrior, and we are so fortunate to have
people like him and a handful of others who spoke
the truth bravely during COVID and Harpy Rish is someone
(02:09):
who knows what he's talking about. Is a prep Professor
Emeritus of Epidemiology and the Department of Epidemiology and Public
Health at the Yale School Public Health and Yale School
of Medicine. Try saying that five times fast. The guys
the author of more than four hundred original, pure reviewed
research publications. Those research papers have been cited by other
(02:30):
scientific publications more than forty six thousand times. And so
what's crazy is you have someone as esteemed as Dr
Harvey Rish, yet some in the media, some of these
public health officials try to shut people like him down,
someone who knows what he is talking about, try to
shut him down, try to ruin his credibility and what
(02:50):
you don't know with a lot of these guys who
are brave enough to speak the truth, they faced so
much a personal assault by people, right, I mean folks,
try to get a lot of these guys fired. I
know some of them had death threads simply for bringing
you the truth at a time when we've been lied
about everything, We've been lied about generic drugs that could
have stayed alive. We were lied to about lockdowns and
(03:12):
and we're being lied to about vaccines. We don't even
know if they're safe. Most most vaccines have five to
ten years of safety data. These had less than a year.
And the number of adverse reactions are adding up. You know,
they want to tell us all these sudden deaths that
we're seeing in young people that, oh, and there's no correlation.
Don't worry, it has nothing to do with COVID vaccines.
(03:32):
But but is that the truth? I mean, do we
even know that these are staying? So we're going to
get into all of this with Dr Harvey Rish, who
has been a truth teller. It was exactly the kind
of person we like to have on this show. So
we're gonna get into all of this, the truth about COVID,
the truth about the vaccines, and what you need to know.
So stay tuned for Dr Harvey Rish. You're learning. Before
(04:02):
we get started, I just wanted to thank you for
being so brave and speaking up during COVID. So many
were fearful to do so, and I really do believe
that it's because of you and a handful of others
that you know our country was able to break free
of lockdowns and some of the craziness that we were saying.
So I just wanted to thank you for being so brave.
(04:24):
Thank you. I have to imagine as someone like you
in such a prestigious position that you are in. I
was watching COVID just crazy for you to just see
so many people pushing, you know, demonstrable lies and things
that were easily disproven, and people who are supposed to
be in similar positions as you in telling us the
(04:46):
truth about data and information. Well, when I started with
this in about April of I couldn't understand why media
we're reporting things that were flatly wrong. Uh. At first
I thought it was that they just reporters being sloppy,
(05:06):
you know, and I dealt with reporters and reporting my
scientific research for forty years, so I have a sense
of whether reporters are detail oriented or not, whether they
you know, they have a message that they're trying to
put out separate from what the science shows or not.
So at first I thought it was just sloppin us,
but it soon became apparent that this was systematic. That
(05:30):
the early outpatient medications that were being used by doctors,
uh up through April and May that we're working. Um,
we're being castigated as not working. And the problem was
that the studies that were claiming that they showed that
these medications and were hospital patients and the doctors were
(05:54):
using them successfully in outpatients. And it's two separate diseases,
two different treatments, and two different conditions, two different biological ideologies.
And yet the media we're saying these drugs don't work,
when in fact they worked perfectly well. And um So,
after I realized that this was a systematic misrepresentation, I
(06:17):
started seeing how large scale this whole thing was, and
that led to the media and government suppression of generic
medications for outpatient COVID treatment and all of the negative consequences.
That was, in fact the big lie of the pandemic.
(06:37):
That these medications don't work. Hydroptic workman iver mectin and
others do work, and they work very well for keeping
people out of the hospital and for keeping people from
dying from COVID, and they had to be suppressed at
all accounts by economic interests that, um, we're trying to
(07:00):
wrench the marketplace for their own gigantic economic benefit and
so these um medications generic without big pharma company backing
and support, we're just pushed off to the to nowhere
by propaganda. And the media was completely complicit in that.
(07:24):
And I'll leave that to you and your investigative team
to figure out who and why and what was involved
in that. But that was what happened. People lied about
eric drugs that could have saved lives because they're cheap
and big pharma wanted to make money. That is my impression,
and the there's empirical evidence that this is obvious today. Still,
(07:49):
the FDA has a website warning against the use of
hydroxic flor quin for outpatients, and it's been up for
more than two years. On their website, doesn't big black
letters wren don't use hydroxic gloric want to treat um
out COVID out patients, And then in small print underneath
it says, we based this on adverse events we've observed
(08:09):
in hospital patients in one study of hospital patients. So
not only was that cherry pick, but it's irrelevant. And
you can understand that if f d A actually had
adverse um events information on COVID outpatients treated with hydroxic chlorice.
They would decided that the fact that they didn't cite
what would have been the most important and relevant evidence
(08:32):
to make the case for their warning means that they
didn't have that those data. They still don't have those data,
and they're still lying about this on their website to
this day. And we're really lied to you about everything,
you know, I mean you're talking about the media sort
of pushing you know, fear and being very dishonest. Look.
I was able to figure out, you know, basically at
the beginning, right after the fifty days to slow the spread,
(08:55):
because I read Dr John the needy use of Stanford
his outbed and stat news, and what he was saying
made perfect sense to me that the fatality rates were
totally skewed because we were only testing the people who
are showing up at hospitals and essentially dying, and we're
missing the cases in the country by something like sixty
five fold. And if we had captured all those cases,
(09:15):
then the fatality rate would have been much less than
what we're being told. I'm not a doctor or scientist,
I was able to figure this out. So it was
it was very frustrating to me that more people weren't
able to just use simple, basic common sense and figure
out that we were pushing unnecessary fear from the beginning. Well,
that's right, that it's that kind of reasoning that has
(09:38):
been apparent every time you turn around practically throughout the
whole pandemic, that things don't make sense there. We're being
spoon fed them as if there's science, but they're they're not.
They're just plausibility. And even the plausibility has been shaky
at times. You know, masks work, they don't work, they
do work, they don't work, they do work, they don't work,
and so on, and in fact they don't work. Um,
(10:01):
and we've known that for decades, and um, we're still
fighting this stupid battle about whether maths do anything or
not when it's it's been established for a long time
that they don't. John Hopkins had came up with that
study a little while ago showing that lockdowns, school closures,
limiting gatherings, all these things only reduced COVID mortality by
(10:22):
point two percent, which is, you know, nothing in comparison
to the amount of lives lost from overdoses suicides. You know,
the delayed care and all those things. At what point,
did our leaders know that lockdowns weren't working? Well, the
question is who are the leaders? I? You know, I
think that Burk's and FOUCHI knew that this was all
(10:44):
theater and destructive and part of intimidating the population, propagandizing,
you know, fear porn as they say, of the propagate
of the population to make them docile, uncontrollable. And whether
President Trump knew this or not, I don't know. But
Burke's talks about this in in her book, that that
(11:06):
it was known that lockdowns do nothing, and the lockdowns
did not reduce mortality from COVID. That most the lockdowns did,
as we saw in Australia is delayed the inevitable. And
I was saying this all along, that the lockdowns are
not going to save anybody, They're only going to prolong everything.
(11:28):
And what happened in Australia, of course, is as soon
as they opened up, the kind of the population was
a sponge for the infection and it just sped spread
wildly throughout the whole population and the mortality pop right
back at the time. And so none of these things
had any public health science behind them. There's never been
(11:50):
in any Western country in the Western world, the use
of lockdowns for pandemics for healthy people. This was an
artifact of use in Asia, where it didn't work in fact,
but was still part of their cultural baggage if you
put as it were, and the fact that it was
adopted here had no benefit of any scientific evidence for
(12:13):
it at all and no history in in Western news
Quick commercial break back with Dr Harvey Rish On the
other side, do we know how many deaths were actually
caused by COVID in the country, Because when we started
differentiating between with COVID versus from COVID for hospitalizations, we
saw things like almost half of the reported New York
(12:36):
COVID hospitalizations were not actually due to COVID. People just
happened to have COVID that was not the driver bringing
them into the hospital. So I mean, wouldn't that same
logic then be applied to death And do you think
we'll ever get an accurate number? I think the answer
is yes, the same problem arises. This has been a
classical problem in death certificates in general, as people have
(12:58):
multiple meta co conditions and it's hard sometimes to know
which is the one that you know. Well, put the
straw the broke camels back, so to speak, put them
over the top and not being able to survive. And
it's hard to know in COVID as a cause of
death whether it was the straw that broke the camel's
(13:21):
back or it was just there and something else did
them in And and this this requires very careful analysis,
and a casual general practitioner who you know, who has
to sign or deskertificate or something may not be able
to make that, let alone the CDC when it tries
to code it as a cause of death. I think
there's a lot of uncertainty as to the with COVID
(13:45):
as as opposed to from COVID. I agree with you,
and I think there are a few studies, the three
or four studies that have looked at that that showed
in the pre omicron era that it was about fifty fifty,
about half of death where were COVID and half we're
from COVID. It's probably much less now from COVID in
(14:06):
the O macron era because O macron is a much
less fatal illness than the original COVID was. We're hospitals
financially motivated to calculate hospitalizations and deaths as co related.
My understanding is that hospitals have gotten so much money
for every different possible COVID related UH charge that they
(14:29):
can build, that they have specialized in coming up with
protocols that maximize how much money they make on COVID patients.
And so to label somebody is having COVID gives them
another tens or whatever thousands of dollars on that patients.
So they of course are going to label people with
COVID as being for COVID to the degree that that
(14:53):
that goes into the building system. Why haven't we seen
m R and A vaccines before COVID? To my knowledge,
the m R and A vaccines have been under development
for a decade, They've been in use in veterinary of medicine,
and in that context have not worked all that well.
That none of them have worked for more than a
(15:14):
year or something like that, and so they haven't really
captured that marketplace very well for animal usage. And I
think that the problem is that it's a biological material
that works in a way that was intended, but it
(15:36):
works in other ways in additions, and those additional things
that it does we're not well understood, have not been
well understood have been largely disregarded and um, and you know,
and the products have been pushed at all costs, regardless
of the effects that they've had. Do you think they
used the fog of war, so to speak, at time
(16:00):
of crisis to essentially get something to the market where
they obviously failed to do so previously. Um, It's it's
hard to know. I think that we went into this
with a dramatic amount of hubris that President Trump was
must have been fooled and in fact still seems to
(16:21):
be fooled, that the vaccines have been a major benefit
to our society as a whole. I think that that
has not been accurate. And the vaccines have created a
lot of damage, and it's not clear that they lives
that they supposedly have saved have has been an accurate
(16:45):
estimate of that fact or not. And we know now
something that I was saying a year ago, which is
that the vaccines do not suppress infection transmission between people.
That the vaccines the verse two weeks, they increase risk
of getting COVID. After two weeks after the job, then
(17:05):
you start to see some benefit. That benefit lasts for
a variable amount of time after the after the second
dose it lasts for twelve to fifteen weeks or so.
After the first boosters last for six to ten weeks
or so, and then after the fourth booster last for
four to six weeks. And after these variable amount of
(17:26):
time the benefit goes to zero and and it may
go negative. There's evidence of that it goes negative, meaning
that after long periods of time after having taken the vaccines,
people are at increased risk of getting and transmitting COVID. Now,
the issue is if you're doing to take a vaccine
that you think is going to save you from dying
or from getting hostilized, then to your choice, you know
(17:47):
it might be rational. You evaluate it for yourself. It's
your treatment as your choice. It's not the government's choice
to force you to do that. The government only has
an interest in having people keep from spreading the action
to other people. And that's the only rationale for a
government interest in vaccination. And the vaccines have failed in that.
(18:08):
And the CDC said on August eleven that two doses
of the vaccine do not prevent transmission, and that the
booster dose UH provides only a transient benefit that wanes
and the fact of their statement of a transient benefit
that wanes means that the vaccines have failed as a
(18:28):
tool for managing the pandemic. Is as a public health tool,
they fails. So the only rationale for our government to
mandate vaccination is to suppress transmission. And the CDC has
now said that the vaccines do not do that, which
we knew. We've known for a year anyway, but now
(18:48):
the CDC made it official to it speak, And so
there is no rationale for taking the vaccine other than
one's personal choice. If you have informed consent, If if
you think that you're in a condition where your risks
of doing poorly from COVID are are higher than your
(19:09):
risks of being injured from the vaccine, then that's your
rational choice as long as you can get accurate information. Uh,
you know, in both directions, that's the kind of choice
that people are supposed to have, not to be forced
to do something that conveys nut does not necessarily convey
benefit to themselves and certainly isn't working for its intended
(19:31):
governmental sanction, which is to prevent transmission. Well see, I remember,
you know, a year ago to your point saying that
the vaccines weren't stopping the spread of COVID because that
was the only justification for young and healthy people to
get it was, oh, we'll protect your neighbors, protect your family,
and then of course we're allied to about that because
I think they wanted people to go out and get
(19:52):
it in and people would be like, oh, you don't
know that, and I'm like, well, there's anecdotal evidence of
a growing list of public our public figures, celebrities who
you know, say they're like these breakthrough cases, right, and
and the list keeps growing. So anecdotally, I can see
for myself that the vaccine is not stopping the spread.
But but you know, we're told that these vaccines are safe,
(20:15):
but most vaccines have five the ten years of safety data.
So how do we actually know that these vaccines are safe. Well,
not only do we not know that they're safe, we
know that they're not safe. So here's the here's the problem.
Suppose you design a bridge over a river and one
car and in two thousand falls into the river. You know,
(20:37):
day in, day out there's cars falling into here, but
that's only one in two thousand. You know, does that
mean the bridge is unsafe or or or what would
you drive across the bridge. Probably. See as for an individual,
a risk that's at that low level would be construed
to be relatively safe. If you had such a dire
circumstance where you have to make a life threatening the
(20:59):
city Asian, and you had a risk like that, you'd say,
I'll go for it. That's a low risk. On the
other hand, if you vaccinate million people multiple times was
something that has a risk of one and two thousands,
you're gonna have tens of thousands of people who are injured,
you know, seriously or or killed over it, even with
such a low risk. And in vaccinating the United States,
(21:23):
we have never allowed for vaccines to be widely used
that have had anything like that high level of risk.
So it's a low risk for an individual, it's a
big risk for the society in the public, and we've
never allowed that. And that's why the vaccines now within
the numbers of adverse events that's astronomic. It's still, you know,
(21:45):
not a big risk for most individuals, but there are
some who are you know, very seriously hurt from the
vaccines and some who have died. And you know, the
daily theater of some sports person who dies on the field,
or or a media person who dies, you know, one
way or the other, a young person without a parent.
Cause we were seeing this day and day out for
(22:06):
months or years now that people are just saying, oh,
I don't know why they're dying, you know, I mean,
as if there's no interest in even trying to figure
it out. It's absurd that we know that these vaccines
are doing damage. We know that the mortality has increased
for non COVID causes of death in middle aged people
(22:27):
in the end and into that is almost certainly attributable
to the vaccination programs, the widespread vaccination programs, and we're
just as a society ignoring this because all of the
(22:47):
media propaganda is basically pushing that. The amount of media
propaganda today is so absurd. I don't see how any
rational person could watch any of the regular media and
think that these people have any idea what they're talking about.
Their mouths are moving, but they're making they make no sense,
you know. Here and there, I watched some commentators saying something,
and it's absurd. These commentators are saying things written for
(23:12):
them that were that were written by commissars, you know,
in in in somebtalitarian regime trying to make theater and
make people believe that the public theater. This is not
the way our society is supposed to work. People are
supposed to have brains, they're supposed to ask questions, and
they're supposed to try to make things make sense for them,
and our society has just totally given up on that
(23:33):
as far as I can tell. Quick break more on
the COVID craziness. I got so much the first thing,
I wasn't going to get vaccinated, but it was based
off of that simple premise of why am I going
to inject something into my body that doesn't stop me
from giving it to other people for a virus that
(23:55):
is not a threat to my life when I have
no idea what this thing whatever and A would do
to me in the long term, or if it's even safe.
And sadly, to your point, we have forced so many
people to get a vaccine that is unsafe, that they
do not need, for virus that is not statistically a
threat to their life. And I heard you say one
in two thousand, what are those numbers for the flu
(24:17):
shot for for instance? Because my understanding is the adverse
reactions to covid vaccine is significantly higher than what it
is for for something like the flu shot. Well, the
one in two thousand I was I was just using
as an example. I wasn't saying that there's anything specific
about the covid vaccine that's one in two thousands. It's
(24:38):
just an example. But you're right that the adverance events
from all of the flu shots recorded in the Bear's
database up to the present are in order of magnitude
left and just one or a year and a half
worth of adverse events recorded for the covid vaccines, So
they are definitely orders of magnitude less safe the on
(25:00):
them the flu vaccines well, and to that point, you know,
when you cite BEARS, you get shut down by the media,
when in reality, BEARS is a national vaccine safety surveillance
program that is post sponsored by the f d A
and the c d C. And if you look at
the numbers, there have been more adverse reactions, permanent disabilities
and deaths reported to BEARS for the covid vaccine since
(25:22):
December alone then all other vaccines combined from nineteen to present.
Yet for media is uninterested in getting to the bottom
of it. The or public health officials don't seem to care,
and the politicians don't seem to care, and in a
lot of instances they're still pushing these vaccines on people.
When you know, if you look at theirs and you
(25:44):
look at these different things like you mentioned, you know
a lot of reports of young people seemingly to get
you know, bells PAUSI or whenever it is, or or
a dying of cardiac arrest, and yet no one seems
interested in wondering why, right, I mean, it's all gaslighting.
I think this is all, you know, attempts to distract
(26:05):
people from asking these questions as to what's going on
and who's responsible. And I just don't really know what
country we're living in anymore. If if you people cannot
address the questions of concern in the in the population
that anyone takes them seriously, and people see them with
(26:27):
their own eyes, and nobody takes those concerns seriously. You know,
this is not a society that I envisioned the United
States ever being in, where it sees the government sees
its role to misrepresent everything for some ulterior purpose against
the population. And the new COVID booster was tested on mice.
(26:49):
Is that normal? Oh, it's silly. UM. I think that
that that that's all just theater again more theater that. Um.
The COVID have the half new booster, it's only half new. Um.
If people take it now, it'll be useless by the
time we actually get to have a wave in the
winter if we have one. And I don't know that
(27:09):
we're going to have a wave of COVID in the
winter or not. If we do, of course it's going
to be o maicron. The likelihood is the CDC's own
data now are showing that the B A four point
six variant is going is pushing out the current b
A five, that the half new booster was calibrated to
work against B A five and won't be very effective
(27:31):
against B A four point six, And furthermore that after
four to six weeks after getting that booster, it will
be useless, as all of the previous boosters have been
after four to six weeks, and therefore taking something now
to head off um, you know, a possible wave of
a different strain in that will be apparent in December.
(27:54):
The B A four point six will be the majority strain.
Most likely sometime in the middle of December, if there's
a wave and then, you know, and the current booster
will not address it, it will be it will have
failed by them, just like the CDC has said, the
current boosters are transient in wane and fail, and that's
(28:14):
where we'll be. And so the current booster is a
useless product. If somebody actually were to think about what
they should do about it, if they were really concerned,
the answer is wait till the end of November, see
what's happening, and then decide whether to take the booster
or not, to see whether the booster actually might still
work when it's taken fresh, as opposed to a month
and a half in the you know, earlier, when it
(28:35):
it's already lost all of its efficacy. So there's the
whole booster premise now is absurd again, as as everything else.
If people don't use their common sense, they let the government,
you know, tell them these things that make no sense,
and nobody's asking questions, do we know what the fatality
(28:56):
rate of COVID is today? The fatality rate of COVID,
my understanding is it's about across the board, it's about
less than point two two. So that's just slightly more
than the flu, right, it's comparable to the flu. I
don't think I think it's probably less than the flu.
(29:18):
I think that in very elderly individuals, meaning older than me,
that's a joke. Um people, people over age eight or
eighty five, who are you know, have more serious risks
of doing poorly with any respiratory illness, any respiratory infection,
including COVID. Those are the ones who need to address
(29:39):
what their risks are and what their their treatments optimally
should be. And for everybody else, the the risk of
doing poorly from the infection is vanishing lee small unless
people have co morbidity, so you know, obesity, chronic cardiovascular disease,
chronic kidney disease, having had cancer, things like that. Those
(30:01):
are the things you discussed with your doctor, you know,
to get informed consent about what to do. For most
healthy people, there's there's no point in worrying about any
of this. It's less than a clue. It really raises
some serious questions about what is the true motivation of
these bad things being approved by some of these people. Well,
(30:23):
you know, I've watched um Fauci's interview UH Congressional testimony
and the question about whether the people on these committees
are have conflicts of interest. The answer is that a
large number of them have conflicts of interest because they
(30:45):
have to sign agreements saying to reveal the relationships they've
had with pharma companies. And they've done that, and about
half of them have been honest about it, and half
of them have concealed their their relationships. But those relationships
were determined because they're they're the paper trail of a
(31:07):
lot of this, and people have been investigated the individuals.
Now you have to realize that that the government makes
a justification for having these conflicted people on these committees,
to say, well, these are the people who work in
the industry, are the ones who know the most about
the products. You know, we're not going to pick somebody
off the street. It's got no experience, and just because
(31:28):
they're not conflicted. And the answer of that, of course,
is there's plenty of people who have expertise who are
not conflicted. The the numbers of conflicted people on these
committees is way too large. It's been tolerated by the
uh f DA and the CDC for years as part
(31:50):
of their corruption. They're they're complete control by the pharma industry,
that those UH agent sees basically are not doing objective review.
They are making it look like they've done something like
a scientific review when they're not. The fact that that
(32:11):
they think that measuring antibody levels has any relationship to
adult immunity is absurd. That adults maintain immunity even when
their antibody levels go to zero. That's what happens over
a long time. Otherwise our blood will all be filled
up with all the antibodies of every infection we've ever had.
We stay are are cells stay ready to make antibodies.
(32:34):
But the antibody levels go to drop over time, and
that doesn't mean you lose immunity. We still have immunity
to all those past infections that we've had. And so
for the f d A and you know and CDC
to hold up UH antibody levels and mice as as
a statement that people are going to make immunity for
(32:58):
this infection is just part of beyond absurd aftring theater.
It has no relationship to actual science. It's not even plausible.
And Dr fouching his way if their net worth increased
by five billions during COVID as so many Americans suffered
financially and with the loss of life as a result
of him pushing blockdowns that he knew didn't work, yet
(33:21):
pushed them anyways, and pushing the vaccine that he knew
didn't work, get pushed it anyways. So it's just a
sad statement of someone who is supposed to be in
a position where he's guiding us with transparency and truth
and instead it's been nothing but lies in personal profit
for himself. But I wanted to get into something that
you just launched and give you some time to talk
about this. Um So you've launched the Wellness Company, which
(33:44):
is a telehealth company focused on prevention and medical freedom.
Why did you launch it and and what are you
hoping to accomplish with it? Well? Over the last two
and a half years, um uh, as I've had some
media exposure and tention, lots of doctors have emailed me
(34:05):
and formed a discussion group, and now it's about two
hundred fifty positions and the amount of frustration that's registered
over doctors who have wanted to treat COVID patients, who
you know, who have had to do it secretly, who
have to get these medications hydroxic work and ivermecton and
others to their patients that where pharmacies refused to fill them,
(34:29):
or the medical boards if they found out, would would
remove their their fellowships there, you know, their specialty fellowship
certifications and things like that. Is just been a total
work of suppression against medical care, and so there is
a large amount of frustration among doctors who know that
(34:49):
COVID can be treated as an outpatient illness very successfully,
that those medications were suppressed, and Fauci was at the
head of that suppression when he said that the evidence
for hydroxic orpin was his word anecdotal. That's a lie um.
(35:11):
Epidemiologic evidence in the form of non randomized but control
trials are not anecdotes. That is not not a an
accurate statement. His use of that statement to me is
a fraud and should be prosecuted because it's set the
tenor of the government regulation and suppression of that medication,
which led to the deaths of half a million Americans unnecessarily.
(35:34):
That is the climate that doctors have been trying to
deal with of being wanting to be able to use
these medications and not being able to being in medical
practices that has said you can see patients, but you
can only use the medications that the practice allows you
to use, and and so on, and there's so much
of this frustration that this led a number of us
(35:57):
to work through the idea of setting up a telemedicine
company that would be free from these constraints UH and
being able to use any legal approved medications for the
purpose of treating COVID and any other illness that patients
present with. And this idea was enabled by the entrepreneur
(36:22):
Foster Coulson, who has been working with Dr zelenka on
On who started the patient treatment with hydroxy for quin
and other medications back in in early and Colson had
basically organized the day to day aspect of making a
(36:46):
company to do the telemedicine and that's the Wellness Company
that I and Dr Peter McCullough, doctor Richard Amling doctor
how their guestling are for physicians and scientists involved in
providing guidance to the company to be able to use
(37:06):
best available scientific evidence. And we've just gone online about
a week ago starting to UH do patient appointments, provide
vitamins and supplements that patients might want to use. And
UM we also have a whole educational component of the
company that provides access to original scientific papers of all
(37:31):
the papers of the treatments that we that our doctors
are using, and both doctors can read them and lay
people can read them and try to make sense for
themselves where medicine is ad and what medical evidence is
ad and and read the originals and question the originals
(37:51):
and not what people with vested interests are telling them
the science says when it doesn't. So we're very optimistic.
The patients have started receiving care through our talentedan UH group.
It's a person to person in person by zoom telemedicine,
which means you actually have an interaction with the doctor.
(38:13):
It's UM very cost effective. We're trying to make this
reasonably priced so that people can afford it when they
need it and that it provides the service that is
worthwhile to them. And I think, you know, we've had
a very large amount of interest already and it's it's
been UM expanding rapidly. And the other thing I would
(38:34):
say is we've also written a book UM the the
four of us a medical scientists, clinicians UM, and I
think We also have a clinical pharmacist who's involved. The
book how written chapters on our experience as to why
(38:55):
we came to needing wanting an un centered medical care
system that allows patients to get care that will help
them and not because some government suppressive clerks says, no,
this medication we don't want you to use. It's you know,
(39:15):
it works for lucas, but it's not not it's not
safe for COVID, this sort of nonsense. And so you know,
we're UM really excited that that our system is going on.
The book is called UM the Next Wave is Brave,
and it's available on Amazon and for it's a download.
(39:42):
So explains a lot about our personal philosophies as each
of us clinicians and scientists and so on, how we
came to supporting the company. Where can people go to
find the wellness company? Wellness company is t WC dot health,
the wellness Company p WC dot health, and uh if
(40:04):
you google the wellness company all three words that it
comes up there. Also there's other wellness companies. Is not
a a copyrighted name, but it's easy to find us.
The p WC dot health will find us. Dr Harvey wish.
Thank you so much for your honesty and for what
you've done and what you're doing. I truly appreciate your
time and I appreciate what you're doing, so I just
(40:26):
want to thank you, Thank you, my pleasure to be
with you. That was Dr Harvey Rish. I really appreciate
his honesty. He was really one of the few during
all of this who was being brave and outspoken, so
I appreciate him, appreciate his time as well. And also
(40:47):
I just wanted to UM, thank you to thank Through
Steel for stepping in. UM. As I mentioned during the intro,
uh my producer John Cassio, you know from the shows,
his family. They are in the past this form. So
we've had some interruption as we was trying to get
this out obviously as safety is the main priority. So
thanks to throw Still for stepping in. I appreciate you
(41:08):
guys for listening every Monday Thursday, but you can listen
throughout the week. Please leave us review on Apple Podcasts.
Give us five stars. Well. I love hearing what you
have to say, so thanks again. Take care,
So first of all, I just wanted to let you
know I apologize for a little bit of the delay
in the last episode. The reason was my producer John
cast you, who you guys know from listening to the show,
him and his family there in the path of hurricane,
and so obviously his safety is more important as family
safety is more important than you know, getting a podcast
out on time. And look, I love being a Floridian.
(00:22):
I love our state. It's a free state, amazing people
I've I've loved being a Floridian. It's an honor to
be a Floridian. And so for those of you listening,
if if you were in the path of the hurricane,
and if your family was in the path of hurricane,
if you lost to love the one, I just want
to let you know that we're praying for you and
or even you know, if you lost a house. You
know that's a significant life event as well. So I
(00:44):
just wanted to let you guys know that thinking about you,
praying for you. I know it's tough times financially right
now and this economy. If you like to give um
Florida Disaster of fund dot org is a place to
do so. If you're trying to local a family member.
Florida Disaster dot org slash report is a place where
(01:06):
you can go to try to locate a family member
as well. You like to volunteer, Volunteer Florida dot org
is a resource for you to do that, to try
to sign up if you want to go and help
and volunteer your time, which is another way to help
out as well. So I just wanted to make sure
to mention that and let you guys know that you know,
we're thinking of you a we love our state and uh,
(01:28):
you know it's the rebuilding process is going to be
a long but what we're gonna do it. For this episode,
we've got Dr Harvey Rish. He has been one of
those brave warriors out during COVID speaking the truth about lockdown,
speaking the truth about a lot of these you know,
generic drugs that could have saved lives, but instead the
(01:48):
media and our public health officials lied to them because
big Pharma didn't stand to profit off of generic drugs.
He is someone who has been honest about vaccines and
what we don't know about them. So he is brave
as a warrior, and we are so fortunate to have
people like him and a handful of others who spoke
the truth bravely during COVID and Harpy Rish is someone
(02:09):
who knows what he's talking about. Is a prep Professor
Emeritus of Epidemiology and the Department of Epidemiology and Public
Health at the Yale School Public Health and Yale School
of Medicine. Try saying that five times fast. The guys
the author of more than four hundred original, pure reviewed
research publications. Those research papers have been cited by other
(02:30):
scientific publications more than forty six thousand times. And so
what's crazy is you have someone as esteemed as Dr
Harvey Rish, yet some in the media, some of these
public health officials try to shut people like him down,
someone who knows what he is talking about, try to
shut him down, try to ruin his credibility and what
(02:50):
you don't know with a lot of these guys who
are brave enough to speak the truth, they faced so
much a personal assault by people, right, I mean folks,
try to get a lot of these guys fired. I
know some of them had death threads simply for bringing
you the truth at a time when we've been lied
about everything, We've been lied about generic drugs that could
have stayed alive. We were lied to about lockdowns and
(03:12):
and we're being lied to about vaccines. We don't even
know if they're safe. Most most vaccines have five to
ten years of safety data. These had less than a year.
And the number of adverse reactions are adding up. You know,
they want to tell us all these sudden deaths that
we're seeing in young people that, oh, and there's no correlation.
Don't worry, it has nothing to do with COVID vaccines.
(03:32):
But but is that the truth? I mean, do we
even know that these are staying? So we're going to
get into all of this with Dr Harvey Rish, who
has been a truth teller. It was exactly the kind
of person we like to have on this show. So
we're gonna get into all of this, the truth about COVID,
the truth about the vaccines, and what you need to know.
So stay tuned for Dr Harvey Rish. You're learning. Before
(04:02):
we get started, I just wanted to thank you for
being so brave and speaking up during COVID. So many
were fearful to do so, and I really do believe
that it's because of you and a handful of others
that you know our country was able to break free
of lockdowns and some of the craziness that we were saying.
So I just wanted to thank you for being so brave.
(04:24):
Thank you. I have to imagine as someone like you
in such a prestigious position that you are in. I
was watching COVID just crazy for you to just see
so many people pushing, you know, demonstrable lies and things
that were easily disproven, and people who are supposed to
be in similar positions as you in telling us the
(04:46):
truth about data and information. Well, when I started with
this in about April of I couldn't understand why media
we're reporting things that were flatly wrong. Uh. At first
I thought it was that they just reporters being sloppy,
(05:06):
you know, and I dealt with reporters and reporting my
scientific research for forty years, so I have a sense
of whether reporters are detail oriented or not, whether they
you know, they have a message that they're trying to
put out separate from what the science shows or not.
So at first I thought it was just sloppin us,
but it soon became apparent that this was systematic. That
(05:30):
the early outpatient medications that were being used by doctors,
uh up through April and May that we're working. Um,
we're being castigated as not working. And the problem was
that the studies that were claiming that they showed that
these medications and were hospital patients and the doctors were
(05:54):
using them successfully in outpatients. And it's two separate diseases,
two different treatments, and two different conditions, two different biological ideologies.
And yet the media we're saying these drugs don't work,
when in fact they worked perfectly well. And um So,
after I realized that this was a systematic misrepresentation, I
(06:17):
started seeing how large scale this whole thing was, and
that led to the media and government suppression of generic
medications for outpatient COVID treatment and all of the negative consequences.
That was, in fact the big lie of the pandemic.
(06:37):
That these medications don't work. Hydroptic workman iver mectin and
others do work, and they work very well for keeping
people out of the hospital and for keeping people from
dying from COVID, and they had to be suppressed at
all accounts by economic interests that, um, we're trying to
(07:00):
wrench the marketplace for their own gigantic economic benefit and
so these um medications generic without big pharma company backing
and support, we're just pushed off to the to nowhere
by propaganda. And the media was completely complicit in that.
(07:24):
And I'll leave that to you and your investigative team
to figure out who and why and what was involved
in that. But that was what happened. People lied about
eric drugs that could have saved lives because they're cheap
and big pharma wanted to make money. That is my impression,
and the there's empirical evidence that this is obvious today. Still,
(07:49):
the FDA has a website warning against the use of
hydroxic flor quin for outpatients, and it's been up for
more than two years. On their website, doesn't big black
letters wren don't use hydroxic gloric want to treat um
out COVID out patients, And then in small print underneath
it says, we based this on adverse events we've observed
(08:09):
in hospital patients in one study of hospital patients. So
not only was that cherry pick, but it's irrelevant. And
you can understand that if f d A actually had
adverse um events information on COVID outpatients treated with hydroxic chlorice.
They would decided that the fact that they didn't cite
what would have been the most important and relevant evidence
(08:32):
to make the case for their warning means that they
didn't have that those data. They still don't have those data,
and they're still lying about this on their website to
this day. And we're really lied to you about everything,
you know, I mean you're talking about the media sort
of pushing you know, fear and being very dishonest. Look.
I was able to figure out, you know, basically at
the beginning, right after the fifty days to slow the spread,
(08:55):
because I read Dr John the needy use of Stanford
his outbed and stat news, and what he was saying
made perfect sense to me that the fatality rates were
totally skewed because we were only testing the people who
are showing up at hospitals and essentially dying, and we're
missing the cases in the country by something like sixty
five fold. And if we had captured all those cases,
(09:15):
then the fatality rate would have been much less than
what we're being told. I'm not a doctor or scientist,
I was able to figure this out. So it was
it was very frustrating to me that more people weren't
able to just use simple, basic common sense and figure
out that we were pushing unnecessary fear from the beginning. Well,
that's right, that it's that kind of reasoning that has
(09:38):
been apparent every time you turn around practically throughout the
whole pandemic, that things don't make sense there. We're being
spoon fed them as if there's science, but they're they're not.
They're just plausibility. And even the plausibility has been shaky
at times. You know, masks work, they don't work, they
do work, they don't work, they do work, they don't work,
and so on, and in fact they don't work. Um,
(10:01):
and we've known that for decades, and um, we're still
fighting this stupid battle about whether maths do anything or
not when it's it's been established for a long time
that they don't. John Hopkins had came up with that
study a little while ago showing that lockdowns, school closures,
limiting gatherings, all these things only reduced COVID mortality by
(10:22):
point two percent, which is, you know, nothing in comparison
to the amount of lives lost from overdoses suicides. You know,
the delayed care and all those things. At what point,
did our leaders know that lockdowns weren't working? Well, the
question is who are the leaders? I? You know, I
think that Burk's and FOUCHI knew that this was all
(10:44):
theater and destructive and part of intimidating the population, propagandizing,
you know, fear porn as they say, of the propagate
of the population to make them docile, uncontrollable. And whether
President Trump knew this or not, I don't know. But
Burke's talks about this in in her book, that that
(11:06):
it was known that lockdowns do nothing, and the lockdowns
did not reduce mortality from COVID. That most the lockdowns did,
as we saw in Australia is delayed the inevitable. And
I was saying this all along, that the lockdowns are
not going to save anybody, They're only going to prolong everything.
(11:28):
And what happened in Australia, of course, is as soon
as they opened up, the kind of the population was
a sponge for the infection and it just sped spread
wildly throughout the whole population and the mortality pop right
back at the time. And so none of these things
had any public health science behind them. There's never been
(11:50):
in any Western country in the Western world, the use
of lockdowns for pandemics for healthy people. This was an
artifact of use in Asia, where it didn't work in fact,
but was still part of their cultural baggage if you
put as it were, and the fact that it was
adopted here had no benefit of any scientific evidence for
(12:13):
it at all and no history in in Western news
Quick commercial break back with Dr Harvey Rish On the
other side, do we know how many deaths were actually
caused by COVID in the country, Because when we started
differentiating between with COVID versus from COVID for hospitalizations, we
saw things like almost half of the reported New York
(12:36):
COVID hospitalizations were not actually due to COVID. People just
happened to have COVID that was not the driver bringing
them into the hospital. So I mean, wouldn't that same
logic then be applied to death And do you think
we'll ever get an accurate number? I think the answer
is yes, the same problem arises. This has been a
classical problem in death certificates in general, as people have
(12:58):
multiple meta co conditions and it's hard sometimes to know
which is the one that you know. Well, put the
straw the broke camels back, so to speak, put them
over the top and not being able to survive. And
it's hard to know in COVID as a cause of
death whether it was the straw that broke the camel's
(13:21):
back or it was just there and something else did
them in And and this this requires very careful analysis,
and a casual general practitioner who you know, who has
to sign or deskertificate or something may not be able
to make that, let alone the CDC when it tries
to code it as a cause of death. I think
there's a lot of uncertainty as to the with COVID
(13:45):
as as opposed to from COVID. I agree with you,
and I think there are a few studies, the three
or four studies that have looked at that that showed
in the pre omicron era that it was about fifty fifty,
about half of death where were COVID and half we're
from COVID. It's probably much less now from COVID in
(14:06):
the O macron era because O macron is a much
less fatal illness than the original COVID was. We're hospitals
financially motivated to calculate hospitalizations and deaths as co related.
My understanding is that hospitals have gotten so much money
for every different possible COVID related UH charge that they
(14:29):
can build, that they have specialized in coming up with
protocols that maximize how much money they make on COVID patients.
And so to label somebody is having COVID gives them
another tens or whatever thousands of dollars on that patients.
So they of course are going to label people with
COVID as being for COVID to the degree that that
(14:53):
that goes into the building system. Why haven't we seen
m R and A vaccines before COVID? To my knowledge,
the m R and A vaccines have been under development
for a decade, They've been in use in veterinary of medicine,
and in that context have not worked all that well.
That none of them have worked for more than a
(15:14):
year or something like that, and so they haven't really
captured that marketplace very well for animal usage. And I
think that the problem is that it's a biological material
that works in a way that was intended, but it
(15:36):
works in other ways in additions, and those additional things
that it does we're not well understood, have not been
well understood have been largely disregarded and um, and you know,
and the products have been pushed at all costs, regardless
of the effects that they've had. Do you think they
used the fog of war, so to speak, at time
(16:00):
of crisis to essentially get something to the market where
they obviously failed to do so previously. Um, It's it's
hard to know. I think that we went into this
with a dramatic amount of hubris that President Trump was
must have been fooled and in fact still seems to
(16:21):
be fooled, that the vaccines have been a major benefit
to our society as a whole. I think that that
has not been accurate. And the vaccines have created a
lot of damage, and it's not clear that they lives
that they supposedly have saved have has been an accurate
(16:45):
estimate of that fact or not. And we know now
something that I was saying a year ago, which is
that the vaccines do not suppress infection transmission between people.
That the vaccines the verse two weeks, they increase risk
of getting COVID. After two weeks after the job, then
(17:05):
you start to see some benefit. That benefit lasts for
a variable amount of time after the after the second
dose it lasts for twelve to fifteen weeks or so.
After the first boosters last for six to ten weeks
or so, and then after the fourth booster last for
four to six weeks. And after these variable amount of
(17:26):
time the benefit goes to zero and and it may
go negative. There's evidence of that it goes negative, meaning
that after long periods of time after having taken the vaccines,
people are at increased risk of getting and transmitting COVID. Now,
the issue is if you're doing to take a vaccine
that you think is going to save you from dying
or from getting hostilized, then to your choice, you know
(17:47):
it might be rational. You evaluate it for yourself. It's
your treatment as your choice. It's not the government's choice
to force you to do that. The government only has
an interest in having people keep from spreading the action
to other people. And that's the only rationale for a
government interest in vaccination. And the vaccines have failed in that.
(18:08):
And the CDC said on August eleven that two doses
of the vaccine do not prevent transmission, and that the
booster dose UH provides only a transient benefit that wanes
and the fact of their statement of a transient benefit
that wanes means that the vaccines have failed as a
(18:28):
tool for managing the pandemic. Is as a public health tool,
they fails. So the only rationale for our government to
mandate vaccination is to suppress transmission. And the CDC has
now said that the vaccines do not do that, which
we knew. We've known for a year anyway, but now
(18:48):
the CDC made it official to it speak, And so
there is no rationale for taking the vaccine other than
one's personal choice. If you have informed consent, If if
you think that you're in a condition where your risks
of doing poorly from COVID are are higher than your
(19:09):
risks of being injured from the vaccine, then that's your
rational choice as long as you can get accurate information. Uh,
you know, in both directions, that's the kind of choice
that people are supposed to have, not to be forced
to do something that conveys nut does not necessarily convey
benefit to themselves and certainly isn't working for its intended
(19:31):
governmental sanction, which is to prevent transmission. Well see, I remember,
you know, a year ago to your point saying that
the vaccines weren't stopping the spread of COVID because that
was the only justification for young and healthy people to
get it was, oh, we'll protect your neighbors, protect your family,
and then of course we're allied to about that because
I think they wanted people to go out and get
(19:52):
it in and people would be like, oh, you don't
know that, and I'm like, well, there's anecdotal evidence of
a growing list of public our public figures, celebrities who
you know, say they're like these breakthrough cases, right, and
and the list keeps growing. So anecdotally, I can see
for myself that the vaccine is not stopping the spread.
But but you know, we're told that these vaccines are safe,
(20:15):
but most vaccines have five the ten years of safety data.
So how do we actually know that these vaccines are safe. Well,
not only do we not know that they're safe, we
know that they're not safe. So here's the here's the problem.
Suppose you design a bridge over a river and one
car and in two thousand falls into the river. You know,
(20:37):
day in, day out there's cars falling into here, but
that's only one in two thousand. You know, does that
mean the bridge is unsafe or or or what would
you drive across the bridge. Probably. See as for an individual,
a risk that's at that low level would be construed
to be relatively safe. If you had such a dire
circumstance where you have to make a life threatening the
(20:59):
city Asian, and you had a risk like that, you'd say,
I'll go for it. That's a low risk. On the
other hand, if you vaccinate million people multiple times was
something that has a risk of one and two thousands,
you're gonna have tens of thousands of people who are injured,
you know, seriously or or killed over it, even with
such a low risk. And in vaccinating the United States,
(21:23):
we have never allowed for vaccines to be widely used
that have had anything like that high level of risk.
So it's a low risk for an individual, it's a
big risk for the society in the public, and we've
never allowed that. And that's why the vaccines now within
the numbers of adverse events that's astronomic. It's still, you know,
(21:45):
not a big risk for most individuals, but there are
some who are you know, very seriously hurt from the
vaccines and some who have died. And you know, the
daily theater of some sports person who dies on the field,
or or a media person who dies, you know, one
way or the other, a young person without a parent.
Cause we were seeing this day and day out for
(22:06):
months or years now that people are just saying, oh,
I don't know why they're dying, you know, I mean,
as if there's no interest in even trying to figure
it out. It's absurd that we know that these vaccines
are doing damage. We know that the mortality has increased
for non COVID causes of death in middle aged people
(22:27):
in the end and into that is almost certainly attributable
to the vaccination programs, the widespread vaccination programs, and we're
just as a society ignoring this because all of the
(22:47):
media propaganda is basically pushing that. The amount of media
propaganda today is so absurd. I don't see how any
rational person could watch any of the regular media and
think that these people have any idea what they're talking about.
Their mouths are moving, but they're making they make no sense,
you know. Here and there, I watched some commentators saying something,
and it's absurd. These commentators are saying things written for
(23:12):
them that were that were written by commissars, you know,
in in in somebtalitarian regime trying to make theater and
make people believe that the public theater. This is not
the way our society is supposed to work. People are
supposed to have brains, they're supposed to ask questions, and
they're supposed to try to make things make sense for them,
and our society has just totally given up on that
(23:33):
as far as I can tell. Quick break more on
the COVID craziness. I got so much the first thing,
I wasn't going to get vaccinated, but it was based
off of that simple premise of why am I going
to inject something into my body that doesn't stop me
from giving it to other people for a virus that
(23:55):
is not a threat to my life when I have
no idea what this thing whatever and A would do
to me in the long term, or if it's even safe.
And sadly, to your point, we have forced so many
people to get a vaccine that is unsafe, that they
do not need, for virus that is not statistically a
threat to their life. And I heard you say one
in two thousand, what are those numbers for the flu
(24:17):
shot for for instance? Because my understanding is the adverse
reactions to covid vaccine is significantly higher than what it
is for for something like the flu shot. Well, the
one in two thousand I was I was just using
as an example. I wasn't saying that there's anything specific
about the covid vaccine that's one in two thousands. It's
(24:38):
just an example. But you're right that the adverance events
from all of the flu shots recorded in the Bear's
database up to the present are in order of magnitude
left and just one or a year and a half
worth of adverse events recorded for the covid vaccines, So
they are definitely orders of magnitude less safe the on
(25:00):
them the flu vaccines well, and to that point, you know,
when you cite BEARS, you get shut down by the media,
when in reality, BEARS is a national vaccine safety surveillance
program that is post sponsored by the f d A
and the c d C. And if you look at
the numbers, there have been more adverse reactions, permanent disabilities
and deaths reported to BEARS for the covid vaccine since
(25:22):
December alone then all other vaccines combined from nineteen to present.
Yet for media is uninterested in getting to the bottom
of it. The or public health officials don't seem to care,
and the politicians don't seem to care, and in a
lot of instances they're still pushing these vaccines on people.
When you know, if you look at theirs and you
(25:44):
look at these different things like you mentioned, you know
a lot of reports of young people seemingly to get
you know, bells PAUSI or whenever it is, or or
a dying of cardiac arrest, and yet no one seems
interested in wondering why, right, I mean, it's all gaslighting.
I think this is all, you know, attempts to distract
(26:05):
people from asking these questions as to what's going on
and who's responsible. And I just don't really know what
country we're living in anymore. If if you people cannot
address the questions of concern in the in the population
that anyone takes them seriously, and people see them with
(26:27):
their own eyes, and nobody takes those concerns seriously. You know,
this is not a society that I envisioned the United
States ever being in, where it sees the government sees
its role to misrepresent everything for some ulterior purpose against
the population. And the new COVID booster was tested on mice.
(26:49):
Is that normal? Oh, it's silly. UM. I think that
that that that's all just theater again more theater that. Um.
The COVID have the half new booster, it's only half new. Um.
If people take it now, it'll be useless by the
time we actually get to have a wave in the
winter if we have one. And I don't know that
(27:09):
we're going to have a wave of COVID in the
winter or not. If we do, of course it's going
to be o maicron. The likelihood is the CDC's own
data now are showing that the B A four point
six variant is going is pushing out the current b
A five, that the half new booster was calibrated to
work against B A five and won't be very effective
(27:31):
against B A four point six, And furthermore that after
four to six weeks after getting that booster, it will
be useless, as all of the previous boosters have been
after four to six weeks, and therefore taking something now
to head off um, you know, a possible wave of
a different strain in that will be apparent in December.
(27:54):
The B A four point six will be the majority strain.
Most likely sometime in the middle of December, if there's
a wave and then, you know, and the current booster
will not address it, it will be it will have
failed by them, just like the CDC has said, the
current boosters are transient in wane and fail, and that's
(28:14):
where we'll be. And so the current booster is a
useless product. If somebody actually were to think about what
they should do about it, if they were really concerned,
the answer is wait till the end of November, see
what's happening, and then decide whether to take the booster
or not, to see whether the booster actually might still
work when it's taken fresh, as opposed to a month
and a half in the you know, earlier, when it
(28:35):
it's already lost all of its efficacy. So there's the
whole booster premise now is absurd again, as as everything else.
If people don't use their common sense, they let the government,
you know, tell them these things that make no sense,
and nobody's asking questions, do we know what the fatality
(28:56):
rate of COVID is today? The fatality rate of COVID,
my understanding is it's about across the board, it's about
less than point two two. So that's just slightly more
than the flu, right, it's comparable to the flu. I
don't think I think it's probably less than the flu.
(29:18):
I think that in very elderly individuals, meaning older than me,
that's a joke. Um people, people over age eight or
eighty five, who are you know, have more serious risks
of doing poorly with any respiratory illness, any respiratory infection,
including COVID. Those are the ones who need to address
(29:39):
what their risks are and what their their treatments optimally
should be. And for everybody else, the the risk of
doing poorly from the infection is vanishing lee small unless
people have co morbidity, so you know, obesity, chronic cardiovascular disease,
chronic kidney disease, having had cancer, things like that. Those
(30:01):
are the things you discussed with your doctor, you know,
to get informed consent about what to do. For most
healthy people, there's there's no point in worrying about any
of this. It's less than a clue. It really raises
some serious questions about what is the true motivation of
these bad things being approved by some of these people. Well,
(30:23):
you know, I've watched um Fauci's interview UH Congressional testimony
and the question about whether the people on these committees
are have conflicts of interest. The answer is that a
large number of them have conflicts of interest because they
(30:45):
have to sign agreements saying to reveal the relationships they've
had with pharma companies. And they've done that, and about
half of them have been honest about it, and half
of them have concealed their their relationships. But those relationships
were determined because they're they're the paper trail of a
(31:07):
lot of this, and people have been investigated the individuals.
Now you have to realize that that the government makes
a justification for having these conflicted people on these committees,
to say, well, these are the people who work in
the industry, are the ones who know the most about
the products. You know, we're not going to pick somebody
off the street. It's got no experience, and just because
(31:28):
they're not conflicted. And the answer of that, of course,
is there's plenty of people who have expertise who are
not conflicted. The the numbers of conflicted people on these
committees is way too large. It's been tolerated by the
uh f DA and the CDC for years as part
(31:50):
of their corruption. They're they're complete control by the pharma industry,
that those UH agent sees basically are not doing objective review.
They are making it look like they've done something like
a scientific review when they're not. The fact that that
(32:11):
they think that measuring antibody levels has any relationship to
adult immunity is absurd. That adults maintain immunity even when
their antibody levels go to zero. That's what happens over
a long time. Otherwise our blood will all be filled
up with all the antibodies of every infection we've ever had.
We stay are are cells stay ready to make antibodies.
(32:34):
But the antibody levels go to drop over time, and
that doesn't mean you lose immunity. We still have immunity
to all those past infections that we've had. And so
for the f d A and you know and CDC
to hold up UH antibody levels and mice as as
a statement that people are going to make immunity for
(32:58):
this infection is just part of beyond absurd aftring theater.
It has no relationship to actual science. It's not even plausible.
And Dr fouching his way if their net worth increased
by five billions during COVID as so many Americans suffered
financially and with the loss of life as a result
of him pushing blockdowns that he knew didn't work, yet
(33:21):
pushed them anyways, and pushing the vaccine that he knew
didn't work, get pushed it anyways. So it's just a
sad statement of someone who is supposed to be in
a position where he's guiding us with transparency and truth
and instead it's been nothing but lies in personal profit
for himself. But I wanted to get into something that
you just launched and give you some time to talk
about this. Um So you've launched the Wellness Company, which
(33:44):
is a telehealth company focused on prevention and medical freedom.
Why did you launch it and and what are you
hoping to accomplish with it? Well? Over the last two
and a half years, um uh, as I've had some
media exposure and tention, lots of doctors have emailed me
(34:05):
and formed a discussion group, and now it's about two
hundred fifty positions and the amount of frustration that's registered
over doctors who have wanted to treat COVID patients, who
you know, who have had to do it secretly, who
have to get these medications hydroxic work and ivermecton and
others to their patients that where pharmacies refused to fill them,
(34:29):
or the medical boards if they found out, would would
remove their their fellowships there, you know, their specialty fellowship
certifications and things like that. Is just been a total
work of suppression against medical care, and so there is
a large amount of frustration among doctors who know that
(34:49):
COVID can be treated as an outpatient illness very successfully,
that those medications were suppressed, and Fauci was at the
head of that suppression when he said that the evidence
for hydroxic orpin was his word anecdotal. That's a lie um.
(35:11):
Epidemiologic evidence in the form of non randomized but control
trials are not anecdotes. That is not not a an
accurate statement. His use of that statement to me is
a fraud and should be prosecuted because it's set the
tenor of the government regulation and suppression of that medication,
which led to the deaths of half a million Americans unnecessarily.
(35:34):
That is the climate that doctors have been trying to
deal with of being wanting to be able to use
these medications and not being able to being in medical
practices that has said you can see patients, but you
can only use the medications that the practice allows you
to use, and and so on, and there's so much
of this frustration that this led a number of us
(35:57):
to work through the idea of setting up a telemedicine
company that would be free from these constraints UH and
being able to use any legal approved medications for the
purpose of treating COVID and any other illness that patients
present with. And this idea was enabled by the entrepreneur
(36:22):
Foster Coulson, who has been working with Dr zelenka on
On who started the patient treatment with hydroxy for quin
and other medications back in in early and Colson had
basically organized the day to day aspect of making a
(36:46):
company to do the telemedicine and that's the Wellness Company
that I and Dr Peter McCullough, doctor Richard Amling doctor
how their guestling are for physicians and scientists involved in
providing guidance to the company to be able to use
(37:06):
best available scientific evidence. And we've just gone online about
a week ago starting to UH do patient appointments, provide
vitamins and supplements that patients might want to use. And
UM we also have a whole educational component of the
company that provides access to original scientific papers of all
(37:31):
the papers of the treatments that we that our doctors
are using, and both doctors can read them and lay
people can read them and try to make sense for
themselves where medicine is ad and what medical evidence is
ad and and read the originals and question the originals
(37:51):
and not what people with vested interests are telling them
the science says when it doesn't. So we're very optimistic.
The patients have started receiving care through our talentedan UH group.
It's a person to person in person by zoom telemedicine,
which means you actually have an interaction with the doctor.
(38:13):
It's UM very cost effective. We're trying to make this
reasonably priced so that people can afford it when they
need it and that it provides the service that is
worthwhile to them. And I think, you know, we've had
a very large amount of interest already and it's it's
been UM expanding rapidly. And the other thing I would
(38:34):
say is we've also written a book UM the the
four of us a medical scientists, clinicians UM, and I
think We also have a clinical pharmacist who's involved. The
book how written chapters on our experience as to why
(38:55):
we came to needing wanting an un centered medical care
system that allows patients to get care that will help
them and not because some government suppressive clerks says, no,
this medication we don't want you to use. It's you know,
(39:15):
it works for lucas, but it's not not it's not
safe for COVID, this sort of nonsense. And so you know,
we're UM really excited that that our system is going on.
The book is called UM the Next Wave is Brave,
and it's available on Amazon and for it's a download.
(39:42):
So explains a lot about our personal philosophies as each
of us clinicians and scientists and so on, how we
came to supporting the company. Where can people go to
find the wellness company? Wellness company is t WC dot health,
the wellness Company p WC dot health, and uh if
(40:04):
you google the wellness company all three words that it
comes up there. Also there's other wellness companies. Is not
a a copyrighted name, but it's easy to find us.
The p WC dot health will find us. Dr Harvey wish.
Thank you so much for your honesty and for what
you've done and what you're doing. I truly appreciate your
time and I appreciate what you're doing, so I just
(40:26):
want to thank you, Thank you, my pleasure to be
with you. That was Dr Harvey Rish. I really appreciate
his honesty. He was really one of the few during
all of this who was being brave and outspoken, so
I appreciate him, appreciate his time as well. And also
(40:47):
I just wanted to UM, thank you to thank Through
Steel for stepping in. UM. As I mentioned during the intro,
uh my producer John Cassio, you know from the shows,
his family. They are in the past this form. So
we've had some interruption as we was trying to get
this out obviously as safety is the main priority. So
thanks to throw Still for stepping in. I appreciate you
(41:08):
guys for listening every Monday Thursday, but you can listen
throughout the week. Please leave us review on Apple Podcasts.
Give us five stars. Well. I love hearing what you
have to say, so thanks again. Take care,
Host
Lisa Boothe
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.