October 2, 2024 • 29 mins
Israel says Iran ‘will pay’ for launching major missile attack against it. Takeaways from last night’s BP debate. Dr. Jim Keany, Co-Director of the Emergency Room at Mission Hospital in Mission Viejo, joins The Bill Handel Show for 'Medical News'! Dr. Keany talks with Bill about Newsom banning some kids' favorite food from schools, today's unhealthy foods being brought to you by big tobacco, and breast cancer awareness month.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
You're listening to bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty and this is KFI bill Handle here. It
is a day, Wednesday, October two. All right, two huge
stories that we're going to cover this morning. One Israel
and Iran and the debate last night. So let's start
with Israel and Iran and what's happening. As you know,
(00:24):
Israel has attacked Hezbolah, not boots on the ground, although no,
actually the incursion actually did start an incursion. Basically, they're
at war, even though both countries say we're not at war.
They're at war now at this point. It's the limited war,
as you know, and as we all know, what Israel
did to Hezbollah, which controls the southern part of Lebanon
(00:48):
is blow up these pagers next to people's ears, caused
several hundred deaths, thousands of injuries, and then the walkie
talkies were blown up. And then the attack on the
leadership Nozrala and his lieutenants, the top leadership who were underground,
and the bunker busters went in and just blew the
place up. So the top leadership is gone. His belaw
(01:09):
is spinning right now. Israel did this because October seventh
happened with the attack by.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
The terrorists of Hamas.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Civilian Israel and killing fourteen hundred Israelis and raping and maiming, etc.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
Did all the crazy stuff.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
So the next day the war started or the next
day the yeah, actually the war started between Hamas and Israel.
And now we're talking to where forty thousand people have
died as a result of that war. A third of
those militants. So don't talk about forty thousand dollars innocent people,
talk about two thirds, which is still huge.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
So now when that happened October eighth, Israel goes after
Hamas his Bellah starts sending the missiles into Israel. By
the there were over one hundred a day sometimes and
the whole northern part of Israel.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Had to be evacuate, evacuated.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
So now Israel is going ball to the wall against Hezbollah,
which is the organization, the terrorist organization that controls all
of southern Lebanon, and like Hamas, it is not only
a fighting force, it is a government that controls that area.
And I think Hesbelah was crazy because Israel doesn't really
(02:27):
have an issue with Lebanon.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
Doesn't want Lebanon. It's not occupying Lebanon. It's Lebanon did.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
This, or Chasbola did this in solidarity with Hamas. Okay,
now you have Iran that decided to jump into this,
and they sent yesterday one hundred and eighty ballistic missiles,
which are a whole different level of armaments, the whole
(02:54):
different level of missile.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Ballistic missiles go.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Much higher, they go much faster, and they as they're
coming down the rockets kick in, so they're coming down
very fast, very difficult to defend against. Although Israel has
the Iron Dome, it has its allies, America has a
lot of anti defense missiles or anti missile defenses in Israel,
(03:18):
and so it is fair to say that the vast
majority of those missiles didn't cause any damage. Matter of fact,
one person died and it was a Palaestinian who died
in the West Bank. There were eight Israeli desks, But
that was a terrorist attack by a single person who
came out with submachine.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
Gun, mowed down a group of people, and of course
he was killed instantly. So now what does Israel do?
Speaker 1 (03:44):
Retaliation is going to happen, even though Iran said, after
sending one hundred and eighty missiles into Israel direct attack
into Israel, said if you retaliate, then we're going to
come back, and we are going to retally eight back.
Their position is it's okay for us to send missiles,
you do not at all fight back. Well, this is
(04:07):
Benjamin Netanyahu, and they've already said, oh we're going. We
are going after Iran. Now what a choice is do
they have some more sanctions? They're sort of sanctioned out. Now,
Israel has two big military targets and this is what
(04:28):
we're hearing. Number One, all of the oil facilities for Iran.
Iran exports oil. Israel takes out everything that allows the exportation.
We're talking about terminals, we're talking about pipelines, all of
that gone. Israel can do that. The other thing is
Israel can go after the nuclear not nuclear plants, but the.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Science, well the building of.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
The nuclear weapons, which we know are going to happen
in a year or they're going to have the bomb.
And then what does Israel do with Iran having the bomb?
Are they crazy enough to unleash a nuclear weapon against Israel?
If that's the case, Tehran is a parking lot. And
that's what everybody's frightened of. I mean, no one's frightened
of Israel just arbitrarily going after an Arab enemy, but
(05:21):
everybody is frightened of Iran. So those are the two
big choices. And you're taking out taking out those nuclear facilities.
It's kind of hard to do it all underground, and
they have a lot of a lot of nuclear facilities
manufacturing science underground. But you can't do it all underground,
and Israel can take it all out. So is it
(05:43):
going to be boots on the ground? Is there going
to be an invasion? Not from Iran to Israel, and
certainly not Israel to Iran.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
There will be no boots.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Why how does Iran put boots on the ground and
invade Israel. It has to go through a rock and
then Jordan, or it has to go through Iraq, Saudi
Arabia and then Jordan. None of those countries are going
to let an invasion come in either way. So what
(06:12):
is the flight going to be about? On Iran side, it's.
Speaker 2 (06:16):
All missiles, that's what they have.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
They don't have artillery, they don't have an air force
worth anything.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Israel has both of.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Those Israel is one of the most well equipped, well
trained armies on the planet. And as much as damage
as Iran can cause Israel, Israel has that iron dome.
Can you imagine one hundred and eighty missiles, not one
person was killed except for a poor Palestinian who some
(06:48):
hows in the wrong place at the wrong time on
the West Bank. And so right now Israel, as well
as the Allied Powers, the Western Powers, are saying it
was a not only a not successful attack on Israel,
it was a total failure. So we don't know what's
going to happen at this point. Israel's going to retaliate.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
We don't know how.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
They're not going to just sit back and follow Iran's demands.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
You if you attack us, then it's really going to
blow up.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
Really, we can send one hundred and eighty missiles into
Israel and you don't retaliate. Well, we just don't know
which way it's going to be. Israel is calm about it.
Israel doesn't come back, It doesn't react instantly. It plans
it although plans are already in place, and we don't
(07:44):
know what's going to happen. I have, if I had
to guess it's not going to be any kind of
financial sanctions. It's going to be an outright attack on facilities.
The most vulnerable are those oil facilities where Iran, like
ninety percent of Iran is making its money selling oil.
(08:04):
And the economy of Iran is already in the toilet.
And then Lebanon, where a war has started, already the
economy of Lebanon has disappeared. The currency of Lebanon is
now worth one percent of what it was a few
(08:26):
years ago.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
One percent. Can you imagine? So you used to.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
Buy a sandwich for four bucks, Now that same sandwich
is going to cost you in your own currency, what
four hundred dollars?
Speaker 2 (08:42):
That's about right. It's devastating.
Speaker 1 (08:46):
And so the world is watching, but the Western powers
are and Israel is saying nope, this is We're not
going to let you get away with it. I don't
know why Iran did this for quote solidarity with with Hamas.
I don't know why has Blah did this with quote
for solidarity. You got to tell you they're going to
(09:09):
pay a huge price for solidarity.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
And everybody scared to death. Okay. Last night was vice
presidential debate.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Which normally no one pays attention to this one. I
can't wait for the ratings to come out. I'm sure
it did better than vice presidential debates in the recent past.
I'm convinced of that, and I watched every every minute
of it. And so what happened, Well, first of all,
(09:40):
if you want to talk about win and lose, Walls
did not lose Vance, I think one because Vance was
able to do something that I didn't think it was possible,
and to show his prowess as a debater, although that
was not debate.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
And I'll explain why none of this is a debate.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
He was able to humanize Donald Trump, and I didn't
know how that was possible. Now, a couple of things
he said were just blatant, outright lies that Walls should
have nailed him on and did not. One of them
is that in the end it was a peaceful transfer
(10:26):
of power. Did not mention as Walls did. Is that
Trump fought every bit of that to this day, it
is it was a rigged election. Over sixty lawsuits were
filed in various states to undo the election.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
He asked.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
Mike pens to not certify because it was a rigged election,
and he just said no, oh, and then the peaceful
transfer of power. And another thing Advance said is that
January sixth was a peaceful demonstration. As we watched police
(11:08):
officers that were beaten to a pope, as we saw
the overrunning of the capitol, that is a peaceful demonstration.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
And Walls did not really call him on it.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
And the other thing that Walls did not do when
Vance refused to say that the election was legitimate and
Joe Biden won, Wow, how could Walls have left that
on the table. And so let me tell you how
Vance spun that he was the election won by Joe Biden.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
That's not the issue.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
The issue is Kamala Harris and the First Amendment has
been violated because she is asking or promoting the fact
that the big tech companies should not publish, should not
be able to should not be able to post misinformation.
And that's the problem with the country. Not an election
that's either fair or not. That's not a problem whether
(12:05):
an election was rigged, and it was rigged. The problem
is Kamala Harris and the Democratic administration who is responsible
for everything. If you listen to the Bay, the Bay
last night, Kamala Harris, the Harris administration, not the Biden administration.
The Harris administration created the crime, created the illegal aliens
(12:29):
crossing the border, which they did do to a great extent,
created inflation, created all the problems in this in this country.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
The only thing and I'm.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Surprised that Vance did not mention that Harris was also
responsible for kidnapping the Limberg baby.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
That's the only thing that was left out.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Walls really didn't answer a lot of questions. They both spun,
just spun, and every time there was a tough question,
Walls went, well, in Minnesota, here's what we do, here's
it's it was just spinning and just pivoting.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And it was And here I gotta tell you, if
I had.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
To do these debates i I were moderators, I would say
at the beginning, here are the rules.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
No microphones or microphones turn on.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
Or off, or no studio audience. A question will be asked.
If it is not answered, it will be followed up
with you did not answer the question. If it is
not answered, again the response from the moderators for the record,
you refuse to answer the question. And at the end
(13:43):
of this broadcast we will note how many questions were
refused to be answered by each candidate, also fact checking.
Now it was done in real time last time, not
this time, and that is the shame of it.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
JD.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
Vance was polished. He was able to spin very professionally.
He was humanizing Donald Trump. Everything good about America was
during the Trump administration, everything good.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
As far as Trump was concerned.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
They saved the Lindbergh baby, which, of course the Lindberg
baby was found dead. It's just, well, you want to
go back in history, and I don't know why I'm
going there, mainly because of claims that were made.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
So Walls, I think, started haltingly. He was nervous.
Speaker 1 (14:40):
The first few questions, he didn't do well, and then
he sped it up.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
The reproductive.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
Position that Walls has and Kamala Harris has. Vance was
able to spin that and talk about how life is
sacrisanct and he just he he sounded like he cared
and at the same time women should not have a choice,
and somehow that's a good thing. Now, I don't know
(15:11):
what side of the coin you're on, because that is
a legit By the way, that is a legitimate.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
Argument among conservative Republicans.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
That one I'll buy truly because it is a moral issue.
But the bottom line was anything decided last night.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I don't think so. Was Trump humanized? That was JD.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
Vance's position. Yeah, it was, and he did. He absolutely
did Obamacare right. The Trump type tried to kill over
and over again. It was saved by Donald Trump. See
it's what's here, is really there? What up is down Obamacare?
And they still want to undo Obamacare and they will
(15:57):
come up with a different way of doing Obamacare. Well
what is the different way. Well, we're going to come
up with a different way. We're going to come up
with making sure that people are covered.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
But you tried to kill it. No, we didn't. We
saved it again.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
Well, well he did somewhat of a job, but should
have just kept on pushing and pushing and pushing. And
I wish the moderators fact checked and said Vance, actually, Senator,
the president did try to kill Obamacare and he did
nothing to save it. But of course moderators don't do this.
(16:36):
So in the end, who do I blame the whole system?
That's not a debate, by the way, a debate is
you take a position, here is the question, you argue
both sides, and in a real debate, if someone spins,
the moderator said, you are not answering the question.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Go to the point, what is the question? And they stopped.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
In a real debate, I mean, the moderator of a
real debate will stop it and say you're not answering
the question. I wish they would do that more forcefully.
If you're talking about the job that Vance did, I
think Vance had a harder job to do, and I
think he pulled it off, did it very very well.
(17:23):
And Tim Walls was not as bad as was anticipated.
Knowing that he is not a debater the way that
Vance did. So I'm going to go back to the
original position, Tim Walls did not lose jd Vance won.
I know that seems a contradiction in terms, but I
think that describes what.
Speaker 2 (17:44):
Happened last night. All right now, Jim Keeney is with us.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
Jim is chief medical officer for Dignity Saint Mary Medical
Center in Long Beach.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
Jim, good morning, morning Bill.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
All right, a story we're going to do that we
have done is the governor banned some of those kids'
favorite foods.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
No more fruit.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
Loops at school. School menus, they're done with various dies.
How big a deal is that. I mean, what kind
of damage do those dies do to a kid?
Speaker 3 (18:20):
Well, I mean, unfortunately, the research is kind of mixed
on this thing. You know, FDA considers all these dies
to be safe, but there is some research that shows
when you remove these things from kids with ADHD, their
ADHD improves. So, I mean that's that definitely impacts learning.
I think if they're going to do it in schools,
(18:41):
the bigger issue is that you know, school programs, school
lunch programs and all that is big money, huge money,
and then the schools turn around with that money.
Speaker 4 (18:50):
And buy foods that are affordable and.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
Cheap, and a lot of that is crappy, ultra processed foods.
So by the government stepping in and saying, look, we're
not going to allow this crappy food in our food
chain for children that the government's paying for, I think
that's a huge step in the right direction.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
Yeah, there are some companies that have contracts with thousands
of school districts and it's you know, you're right, it's
big money school lunches. When I went to school, the
only way you could describe them you had to start
with inedible, and no one ate goes school lunches, and
then I.
Speaker 4 (19:30):
Mean all they go ahead, go ahead.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
Well, I mean now at least they're you know, they're edible,
but they're super edible. Right before they were just there,
even though they were inedible, they were just like milk
and spaghetti. You know, there's only so much you can
do as far as damage to your body with that.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
Yeah, none of it was very good. And so you
bring a sack lunch because I remember, and the other thing.
And I don't know if they do this anymore. When
I was in junior high, I happen to like the
grilled cheese sandwiches they did just for some crazy reason,
and they were either a quarter or ten cents depending
on when the government would give a surplus cheese, which
we used to call government cheese.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
They cheat g OV the NT government.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
And I don't know if that program is still going on.
I just thought i'd throw that out, but there.
Speaker 3 (20:20):
Is no I mean, they're they're buying stuff like lunchables
with you know the fude, and you know, lunchables are
famous for really not being lunchable. You know, they're kids
love the parents love them because you just throw it
at the kid. It's like a little TD dinner with
crackers and cheese and everything. But even though the manufacturers
(20:40):
that there was some internal emails with them joking, you know,
the most the healthiest thing in that lunchable container has
the napkin.
Speaker 4 (20:47):
So you know, it's just it's.
Speaker 2 (20:51):
I understand how bad it look.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Put it this way, they're not pushing, they're pushing for
nutrition and now they're getting rid of certain dies. But
the base it's a premise that the food has way
too much sodium, sugar breaded. Even though they're arguing one
way or the other or arguing to try to stop that,
you don't see laws being passed to you or maybe
I have it wrong.
Speaker 3 (21:13):
No, no, I kind of I mean that's what I'm saying.
Is it kind of misses the mark, but maybe right
direction that the government is willing to intervene and say, look,
if we're paying for this food, it should have some
nutritional value to the children that are getting it. We
shouldn't be giving this crappy food to children. Now, the
die issue is probably not the biggest issue, but there's
(21:36):
that's some of it. But if they are willing to
head in the direction of look, it can't have you know,
because that's the deal. And I don't know if you
want to start down this road, but that whole the
story about how tobacco companies in the eighties bought all
these food companies and then used their ability to flavor
and their ability to make things addictive through textures, a
(21:58):
combination of textures and ultra processed chemicals that create cravings.
You know, there's there's articles in Addiction magazine. Why is
Addiction magazine writing articles about food?
Speaker 4 (22:11):
It's because they it was.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Very intentionally, according to these researchers, made to be addictive.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
Yeah, I remember when they took cigarettes out of the
school lunches in high school. Doctor Jim Keeney, chief medical
officer for Dignity Saint Mary Medical Center in Long Beach
and a board certified er doc, has been our go
to for how long now, Jim, you've been We've been.
Speaker 4 (22:37):
Doing long time? Yeah, a long time years, almost thirty years.
Speaker 2 (22:43):
Yeah, God, you've gotten old.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
I really have. From Julio the pool Boy too.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Oh yeah, exactly. Now, let's talk about something that is
pretty scary. In this age of huge advances in medicine
in the world of cancer, breast cancer continues to go
up among younger women.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
What is going on.
Speaker 3 (23:09):
Jen, right is that we see breast cancer is definitely
as you age, the risk increases. We know that, and
that's still true. Breast cancer has gone up slightly in
certain subgroups, even in the older age groups like Pacific Islanders,
and it's probably because as they integrate into a normal,
you know, a more typical US diet and everything else,
(23:31):
that they're being exposed to the exact same chemicals and
everything else that we're being exposed to. But the story
here is that while breast cancer is increasing at about
one percent or less with every other age group, it's
it's increasing by two percent or more per year and
people under fifty significant because you know, for a while
there they had backed off the recommendations for mimography to
(23:53):
be after age fifty, and just this year they changed
it again the US to the US Preventative Service Task Force,
they change the recommendation and said that we should start
between age forty and forty four. Is kind of optional,
and especially if you have risk factors or family history,
but forty five and older should start getting screened.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
That's a big deal.
Speaker 1 (24:16):
And the reasons for it is it lifestyle for the
most part when we talk about, you know, a bad
eating good way. If it is inaccurate or horrible eating,
then you and I've gone to lunch. I died a
long time ago of cancer. So is it lifestyle? Is
(24:38):
it what we eat? Is it the environment just breathing
the crap and the plastics that we're now ingesting, any
rhyme or reason or any connection.
Speaker 3 (24:48):
Yeah, I think it's likely all of the above, right,
because we have so many environmental factors now that influence estrogen.
A lot of these cancers are estroge insensitive. So what
happens is as we alter estrogen metabolism than we you know,
we affect how these cancers may grow. There's a difference
now in the population where women are getting pregnant later
(25:11):
in life, and so that's exposing them to more estrogen
as they go through more menstrual cycles and are spending
less time pregnant.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
So you know, that's that could be an issue. But
I mean linking it to the last segment we talked about, there's.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
The changes in food and what we call food and
what we eat since the eighties is so dramatic that
it really is wouldn't be shocking that a lot of
the chemicals now that end up in our food have
some level of connection to this cancer.
Speaker 4 (25:41):
And then you mentioned.
Speaker 3 (25:41):
Plastics and the things that now food is everything's wrapped
in plastic. You can't even get stuff from Trader Jove's
that oftentimes that fresh vegetables that are wrapped in plastics. So,
you know, there's so many environmental factors that have just
exploded that it's hard to really pin it down.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
So let me ask you about the silver lining here.
If there is one where the increase in breast cancer
is apparent, how about the cure or the prognosis of
breast cancer.
Speaker 2 (26:14):
What has happened to that in the last twenty years.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
Right, So survival rates have improved and that's probably due
to improve detection, improve screening, and improve treatments. So you know,
survival rates have significantly improved over the last twenty years.
Speaker 4 (26:29):
That's the good side of this, and it's.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
Also the reason why you know, being very attuned to
changes in breast tissue and then seeking out medical attention
to look for screening or other testing to evaluate that
is super.
Speaker 1 (26:43):
Important any big breakthroughs in cancer treatment.
Speaker 3 (26:48):
Lately, it seems like every day they're coming out with
something new, but I don't know off the top of
my head.
Speaker 4 (26:56):
I'm not thinking of anything specific.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
Yeah, I mean, there's no huge and I'm assuming that
you know, certain for example, radiation techniques, those are big
breakthroughs there's been. Is it all incremental now that we've
reached a point where it's there before doing the gene stuff?
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Well, I mean yeah, I think that it's the gene
stuff or the targeted you know, therapies that really are
able to target tumor cells. And we're talking about all
those those like we talked about it on a prior
segment where you can now harness viruses that will target
specific cancer cells and wipe out only those cancer cells,
(27:38):
and we talked about.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
You know, treatments like that.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
So I think that that we're on the It seems
like we're on the verge, but it does. It's seem
like we've been on the verge for like twenty years now,
so hopefully we'll get some good breakthroughs.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
Yeah, all right, guessing now, of course you don't know
the answer to this, but you've been around medicine for
as long as you have and have studied this. When
does the magic bullet occur? Because we do have magic
bullets and other diseases.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Yeah, it might have already occurred. You know, those car
T cell therapies which we've talked about before, they produce
proteins that specifically use the patient's cancer cells to just
I mean the patients T cells to destroy cancer cells.
It is kind of a laser guided bullet. There's immunotherapy
(28:28):
drugs that are also somewhat laser guided. So there's all
kinds of things that are happening.
Speaker 4 (28:34):
And then for.
Speaker 3 (28:36):
The estrogen specific breast cancers, we've got all kinds of
new technologies there. So I think there's a lot out there,
and that's why cancer centers now are really popping up everywhere,
because there is specific cancer treatment that holds out hope
for a lot of these people.
Speaker 1 (28:54):
All right, Jim, thank you. We'll catch you again next week.
As oh, I won't be here next week. Yeah, you
get to talk to Neil. No, you get to talk
to Neil in two weeks. And next week it is uh,
I'm going to be who the hell is Cicillion?
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Wayne? That's right?
Speaker 1 (29:10):
Yeah? Wayne?
Speaker 2 (29:11):
Yeah, all right, week me the following week.
Speaker 4 (29:14):
I just Jim the whole time.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
That's what I said.
Speaker 4 (29:18):
I'm looking forward to it, all right, Jim, thank you.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
Take care, take care. Yeah didn't I say that. By
the way, Neil, you're correcting me.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
So next week it's Wayne. The following week it's Neil.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
Not correcting you. Just a tiny bit of a rudder.
Speaker 1 (29:34):
This is kf I am six forty Live everywhere on
the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
You've been listening to the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Catch my Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
You're listening to bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty and this is KFI bill Handle here. It
is a day, Wednesday, October two. All right, two huge
stories that we're going to cover this morning. One Israel
and Iran and the debate last night. So let's start
with Israel and Iran and what's happening. As you know,
(00:24):
Israel has attacked Hezbolah, not boots on the ground, although no,
actually the incursion actually did start an incursion. Basically, they're
at war, even though both countries say we're not at war.
They're at war now at this point. It's the limited war,
as you know, and as we all know, what Israel
did to Hezbollah, which controls the southern part of Lebanon
(00:48):
is blow up these pagers next to people's ears, caused
several hundred deaths, thousands of injuries, and then the walkie
talkies were blown up. And then the attack on the
leadership Nozrala and his lieutenants, the top leadership who were underground,
and the bunker busters went in and just blew the
place up. So the top leadership is gone. His belaw
(01:09):
is spinning right now. Israel did this because October seventh
happened with the attack by.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
The terrorists of Hamas.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Civilian Israel and killing fourteen hundred Israelis and raping and maiming, etc.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
Did all the crazy stuff.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
So the next day the war started or the next
day the yeah, actually the war started between Hamas and Israel.
And now we're talking to where forty thousand people have
died as a result of that war. A third of
those militants. So don't talk about forty thousand dollars innocent people,
talk about two thirds, which is still huge.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
So now when that happened October eighth, Israel goes after
Hamas his Bellah starts sending the missiles into Israel. By
the there were over one hundred a day sometimes and
the whole northern part of Israel.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Had to be evacuate, evacuated.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
So now Israel is going ball to the wall against Hezbollah,
which is the organization, the terrorist organization that controls all
of southern Lebanon, and like Hamas, it is not only
a fighting force, it is a government that controls that area.
And I think Hesbelah was crazy because Israel doesn't really
(02:27):
have an issue with Lebanon.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
Doesn't want Lebanon. It's not occupying Lebanon. It's Lebanon did.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
This, or Chasbola did this in solidarity with Hamas. Okay,
now you have Iran that decided to jump into this,
and they sent yesterday one hundred and eighty ballistic missiles,
which are a whole different level of armaments, the whole
(02:54):
different level of missile.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Ballistic missiles go.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Much higher, they go much faster, and they as they're
coming down the rockets kick in, so they're coming down
very fast, very difficult to defend against. Although Israel has
the Iron Dome, it has its allies, America has a
lot of anti defense missiles or anti missile defenses in Israel,
(03:18):
and so it is fair to say that the vast
majority of those missiles didn't cause any damage. Matter of fact,
one person died and it was a Palaestinian who died
in the West Bank. There were eight Israeli desks, But
that was a terrorist attack by a single person who
came out with submachine.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
Gun, mowed down a group of people, and of course
he was killed instantly. So now what does Israel do?
Speaker 1 (03:44):
Retaliation is going to happen, even though Iran said, after
sending one hundred and eighty missiles into Israel direct attack
into Israel, said if you retaliate, then we're going to
come back, and we are going to retally eight back.
Their position is it's okay for us to send missiles,
you do not at all fight back. Well, this is
(04:07):
Benjamin Netanyahu, and they've already said, oh we're going. We
are going after Iran. Now what a choice is do
they have some more sanctions? They're sort of sanctioned out. Now,
Israel has two big military targets and this is what
(04:28):
we're hearing. Number One, all of the oil facilities for Iran.
Iran exports oil. Israel takes out everything that allows the exportation.
We're talking about terminals, we're talking about pipelines, all of
that gone. Israel can do that. The other thing is
Israel can go after the nuclear not nuclear plants, but the.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Science, well the building of.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
The nuclear weapons, which we know are going to happen
in a year or they're going to have the bomb.
And then what does Israel do with Iran having the bomb?
Are they crazy enough to unleash a nuclear weapon against Israel?
If that's the case, Tehran is a parking lot. And
that's what everybody's frightened of. I mean, no one's frightened
of Israel just arbitrarily going after an Arab enemy, but
(05:21):
everybody is frightened of Iran. So those are the two
big choices. And you're taking out taking out those nuclear facilities.
It's kind of hard to do it all underground, and
they have a lot of a lot of nuclear facilities
manufacturing science underground. But you can't do it all underground,
and Israel can take it all out. So is it
(05:43):
going to be boots on the ground? Is there going
to be an invasion? Not from Iran to Israel, and
certainly not Israel to Iran.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
There will be no boots.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Why how does Iran put boots on the ground and
invade Israel. It has to go through a rock and
then Jordan, or it has to go through Iraq, Saudi
Arabia and then Jordan. None of those countries are going
to let an invasion come in either way. So what
(06:12):
is the flight going to be about? On Iran side, it's.
Speaker 2 (06:16):
All missiles, that's what they have.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
They don't have artillery, they don't have an air force
worth anything.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Israel has both of.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Those Israel is one of the most well equipped, well
trained armies on the planet. And as much as damage
as Iran can cause Israel, Israel has that iron dome.
Can you imagine one hundred and eighty missiles, not one
person was killed except for a poor Palestinian who some
(06:48):
hows in the wrong place at the wrong time on
the West Bank. And so right now Israel, as well
as the Allied Powers, the Western Powers, are saying it
was a not only a not successful attack on Israel,
it was a total failure. So we don't know what's
going to happen at this point. Israel's going to retaliate.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
We don't know how.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
They're not going to just sit back and follow Iran's demands.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
You if you attack us, then it's really going to
blow up.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
Really, we can send one hundred and eighty missiles into
Israel and you don't retaliate. Well, we just don't know
which way it's going to be. Israel is calm about it.
Israel doesn't come back, It doesn't react instantly. It plans
it although plans are already in place, and we don't
(07:44):
know what's going to happen. I have, if I had
to guess it's not going to be any kind of
financial sanctions. It's going to be an outright attack on facilities.
The most vulnerable are those oil facilities where Iran, like
ninety percent of Iran is making its money selling oil.
(08:04):
And the economy of Iran is already in the toilet.
And then Lebanon, where a war has started, already the
economy of Lebanon has disappeared. The currency of Lebanon is
now worth one percent of what it was a few
(08:26):
years ago.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
One percent. Can you imagine? So you used to.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
Buy a sandwich for four bucks, Now that same sandwich
is going to cost you in your own currency, what
four hundred dollars?
Speaker 2 (08:42):
That's about right. It's devastating.
Speaker 1 (08:46):
And so the world is watching, but the Western powers
are and Israel is saying nope, this is We're not
going to let you get away with it. I don't
know why Iran did this for quote solidarity with with Hamas.
I don't know why has Blah did this with quote
for solidarity. You got to tell you they're going to
(09:09):
pay a huge price for solidarity.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
And everybody scared to death. Okay. Last night was vice
presidential debate.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Which normally no one pays attention to this one. I
can't wait for the ratings to come out. I'm sure
it did better than vice presidential debates in the recent past.
I'm convinced of that, and I watched every every minute
of it. And so what happened, Well, first of all,
(09:40):
if you want to talk about win and lose, Walls
did not lose Vance, I think one because Vance was
able to do something that I didn't think it was possible,
and to show his prowess as a debater, although that
was not debate.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
And I'll explain why none of this is a debate.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
He was able to humanize Donald Trump, and I didn't
know how that was possible. Now, a couple of things
he said were just blatant, outright lies that Walls should
have nailed him on and did not. One of them
is that in the end it was a peaceful transfer
(10:26):
of power. Did not mention as Walls did. Is that
Trump fought every bit of that to this day, it
is it was a rigged election. Over sixty lawsuits were
filed in various states to undo the election.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
He asked.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
Mike pens to not certify because it was a rigged election,
and he just said no, oh, and then the peaceful
transfer of power. And another thing Advance said is that
January sixth was a peaceful demonstration. As we watched police
(11:08):
officers that were beaten to a pope, as we saw
the overrunning of the capitol, that is a peaceful demonstration.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
And Walls did not really call him on it.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
And the other thing that Walls did not do when
Vance refused to say that the election was legitimate and
Joe Biden won, Wow, how could Walls have left that
on the table. And so let me tell you how
Vance spun that he was the election won by Joe Biden.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
That's not the issue.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
The issue is Kamala Harris and the First Amendment has
been violated because she is asking or promoting the fact
that the big tech companies should not publish, should not
be able to should not be able to post misinformation.
And that's the problem with the country. Not an election
that's either fair or not. That's not a problem whether
(12:05):
an election was rigged, and it was rigged. The problem
is Kamala Harris and the Democratic administration who is responsible
for everything. If you listen to the Bay, the Bay
last night, Kamala Harris, the Harris administration, not the Biden administration.
The Harris administration created the crime, created the illegal aliens
(12:29):
crossing the border, which they did do to a great extent,
created inflation, created all the problems in this in this country.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
The only thing and I'm.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Surprised that Vance did not mention that Harris was also
responsible for kidnapping the Limberg baby.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
That's the only thing that was left out.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Walls really didn't answer a lot of questions. They both spun,
just spun, and every time there was a tough question,
Walls went, well, in Minnesota, here's what we do, here's
it's it was just spinning and just pivoting.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And it was And here I gotta tell you, if
I had.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
To do these debates i I were moderators, I would say
at the beginning, here are the rules.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
No microphones or microphones turn on.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
Or off, or no studio audience. A question will be asked.
If it is not answered, it will be followed up
with you did not answer the question. If it is
not answered, again the response from the moderators for the record,
you refuse to answer the question. And at the end
(13:43):
of this broadcast we will note how many questions were
refused to be answered by each candidate, also fact checking.
Now it was done in real time last time, not
this time, and that is the shame of it.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
JD.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
Vance was polished. He was able to spin very professionally.
He was humanizing Donald Trump. Everything good about America was
during the Trump administration, everything good.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
As far as Trump was concerned.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
They saved the Lindbergh baby, which, of course the Lindberg
baby was found dead. It's just, well, you want to
go back in history, and I don't know why I'm
going there, mainly because of claims that were made.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
So Walls, I think, started haltingly. He was nervous.
Speaker 1 (14:40):
The first few questions, he didn't do well, and then
he sped it up.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
The reproductive.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
Position that Walls has and Kamala Harris has. Vance was
able to spin that and talk about how life is
sacrisanct and he just he he sounded like he cared
and at the same time women should not have a choice,
and somehow that's a good thing. Now, I don't know
(15:11):
what side of the coin you're on, because that is
a legit By the way, that is a legitimate.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
Argument among conservative Republicans.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
That one I'll buy truly because it is a moral issue.
But the bottom line was anything decided last night.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I don't think so. Was Trump humanized? That was JD.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
Vance's position. Yeah, it was, and he did. He absolutely
did Obamacare right. The Trump type tried to kill over
and over again. It was saved by Donald Trump. See
it's what's here, is really there? What up is down Obamacare?
And they still want to undo Obamacare and they will
(15:57):
come up with a different way of doing Obamacare. Well
what is the different way. Well, we're going to come
up with a different way. We're going to come up
with making sure that people are covered.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
But you tried to kill it. No, we didn't. We
saved it again.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
Well, well he did somewhat of a job, but should
have just kept on pushing and pushing and pushing. And
I wish the moderators fact checked and said Vance, actually, Senator,
the president did try to kill Obamacare and he did
nothing to save it. But of course moderators don't do this.
(16:36):
So in the end, who do I blame the whole system?
That's not a debate, by the way, a debate is
you take a position, here is the question, you argue
both sides, and in a real debate, if someone spins,
the moderator said, you are not answering the question.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Go to the point, what is the question? And they stopped.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
In a real debate, I mean, the moderator of a
real debate will stop it and say you're not answering
the question. I wish they would do that more forcefully.
If you're talking about the job that Vance did, I
think Vance had a harder job to do, and I
think he pulled it off, did it very very well.
(17:23):
And Tim Walls was not as bad as was anticipated.
Knowing that he is not a debater the way that
Vance did. So I'm going to go back to the
original position, Tim Walls did not lose jd Vance won.
I know that seems a contradiction in terms, but I
think that describes what.
Speaker 2 (17:44):
Happened last night. All right now, Jim Keeney is with us.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
Jim is chief medical officer for Dignity Saint Mary Medical
Center in Long Beach.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
Jim, good morning, morning Bill.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
All right, a story we're going to do that we
have done is the governor banned some of those kids'
favorite foods.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
No more fruit.
Speaker 1 (18:06):
Loops at school. School menus, they're done with various dies.
How big a deal is that. I mean, what kind
of damage do those dies do to a kid?
Speaker 3 (18:20):
Well, I mean, unfortunately, the research is kind of mixed
on this thing. You know, FDA considers all these dies
to be safe, but there is some research that shows
when you remove these things from kids with ADHD, their
ADHD improves. So, I mean that's that definitely impacts learning.
I think if they're going to do it in schools,
(18:41):
the bigger issue is that you know, school programs, school
lunch programs and all that is big money, huge money,
and then the schools turn around with that money.
Speaker 4 (18:50):
And buy foods that are affordable and.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
Cheap, and a lot of that is crappy, ultra processed foods.
So by the government stepping in and saying, look, we're
not going to allow this crappy food in our food
chain for children that the government's paying for, I think
that's a huge step in the right direction.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
Yeah, there are some companies that have contracts with thousands
of school districts and it's you know, you're right, it's
big money school lunches. When I went to school, the
only way you could describe them you had to start
with inedible, and no one ate goes school lunches, and
then I.
Speaker 4 (19:30):
Mean all they go ahead, go ahead.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
Well, I mean now at least they're you know, they're edible,
but they're super edible. Right before they were just there,
even though they were inedible, they were just like milk
and spaghetti. You know, there's only so much you can
do as far as damage to your body with that.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
Yeah, none of it was very good. And so you
bring a sack lunch because I remember, and the other thing.
And I don't know if they do this anymore. When
I was in junior high, I happen to like the
grilled cheese sandwiches they did just for some crazy reason,
and they were either a quarter or ten cents depending
on when the government would give a surplus cheese, which
we used to call government cheese.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
They cheat g OV the NT government.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
And I don't know if that program is still going on.
I just thought i'd throw that out, but there.
Speaker 3 (20:20):
Is no I mean, they're they're buying stuff like lunchables
with you know the fude, and you know, lunchables are
famous for really not being lunchable. You know, they're kids
love the parents love them because you just throw it
at the kid. It's like a little TD dinner with
crackers and cheese and everything. But even though the manufacturers
(20:40):
that there was some internal emails with them joking, you know,
the most the healthiest thing in that lunchable container has
the napkin.
Speaker 4 (20:47):
So you know, it's just it's.
Speaker 2 (20:51):
I understand how bad it look.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Put it this way, they're not pushing, they're pushing for
nutrition and now they're getting rid of certain dies. But
the base it's a premise that the food has way
too much sodium, sugar breaded. Even though they're arguing one
way or the other or arguing to try to stop that,
you don't see laws being passed to you or maybe
I have it wrong.
Speaker 3 (21:13):
No, no, I kind of I mean that's what I'm saying.
Is it kind of misses the mark, but maybe right
direction that the government is willing to intervene and say, look,
if we're paying for this food, it should have some
nutritional value to the children that are getting it. We
shouldn't be giving this crappy food to children. Now, the
die issue is probably not the biggest issue, but there's
(21:36):
that's some of it. But if they are willing to
head in the direction of look, it can't have you know,
because that's the deal. And I don't know if you
want to start down this road, but that whole the
story about how tobacco companies in the eighties bought all
these food companies and then used their ability to flavor
and their ability to make things addictive through textures, a
(21:58):
combination of textures and ultra processed chemicals that create cravings.
You know, there's there's articles in Addiction magazine. Why is
Addiction magazine writing articles about food?
Speaker 4 (22:11):
It's because they it was.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Very intentionally, according to these researchers, made to be addictive.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
Yeah, I remember when they took cigarettes out of the
school lunches in high school. Doctor Jim Keeney, chief medical
officer for Dignity Saint Mary Medical Center in Long Beach
and a board certified er doc, has been our go
to for how long now, Jim, you've been We've been.
Speaker 4 (22:37):
Doing long time? Yeah, a long time years, almost thirty years.
Speaker 2 (22:43):
Yeah, God, you've gotten old.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
I really have. From Julio the pool Boy too.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Oh yeah, exactly. Now, let's talk about something that is
pretty scary. In this age of huge advances in medicine
in the world of cancer, breast cancer continues to go
up among younger women.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
What is going on.
Speaker 3 (23:09):
Jen, right is that we see breast cancer is definitely
as you age, the risk increases. We know that, and
that's still true. Breast cancer has gone up slightly in
certain subgroups, even in the older age groups like Pacific Islanders,
and it's probably because as they integrate into a normal,
you know, a more typical US diet and everything else,
(23:31):
that they're being exposed to the exact same chemicals and
everything else that we're being exposed to. But the story
here is that while breast cancer is increasing at about
one percent or less with every other age group, it's
it's increasing by two percent or more per year and
people under fifty significant because you know, for a while
there they had backed off the recommendations for mimography to
(23:53):
be after age fifty, and just this year they changed
it again the US to the US Preventative Service Task Force,
they change the recommendation and said that we should start
between age forty and forty four. Is kind of optional,
and especially if you have risk factors or family history,
but forty five and older should start getting screened.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
That's a big deal.
Speaker 1 (24:16):
And the reasons for it is it lifestyle for the
most part when we talk about, you know, a bad
eating good way. If it is inaccurate or horrible eating,
then you and I've gone to lunch. I died a
long time ago of cancer. So is it lifestyle? Is
(24:38):
it what we eat? Is it the environment just breathing
the crap and the plastics that we're now ingesting, any
rhyme or reason or any connection.
Speaker 3 (24:48):
Yeah, I think it's likely all of the above, right,
because we have so many environmental factors now that influence estrogen.
A lot of these cancers are estroge insensitive. So what
happens is as we alter estrogen metabolism than we you know,
we affect how these cancers may grow. There's a difference
now in the population where women are getting pregnant later
(25:11):
in life, and so that's exposing them to more estrogen
as they go through more menstrual cycles and are spending
less time pregnant.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
So you know, that's that could be an issue. But
I mean linking it to the last segment we talked about, there's.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
The changes in food and what we call food and
what we eat since the eighties is so dramatic that
it really is wouldn't be shocking that a lot of
the chemicals now that end up in our food have
some level of connection to this cancer.
Speaker 4 (25:41):
And then you mentioned.
Speaker 3 (25:41):
Plastics and the things that now food is everything's wrapped
in plastic. You can't even get stuff from Trader Jove's
that oftentimes that fresh vegetables that are wrapped in plastics. So,
you know, there's so many environmental factors that have just
exploded that it's hard to really pin it down.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
So let me ask you about the silver lining here.
If there is one where the increase in breast cancer
is apparent, how about the cure or the prognosis of
breast cancer.
Speaker 2 (26:14):
What has happened to that in the last twenty years.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
Right, So survival rates have improved and that's probably due
to improve detection, improve screening, and improve treatments. So you know,
survival rates have significantly improved over the last twenty years.
Speaker 4 (26:29):
That's the good side of this, and it's.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
Also the reason why you know, being very attuned to
changes in breast tissue and then seeking out medical attention
to look for screening or other testing to evaluate that
is super.
Speaker 1 (26:43):
Important any big breakthroughs in cancer treatment.
Speaker 3 (26:48):
Lately, it seems like every day they're coming out with
something new, but I don't know off the top of
my head.
Speaker 4 (26:56):
I'm not thinking of anything specific.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
Yeah, I mean, there's no huge and I'm assuming that
you know, certain for example, radiation techniques, those are big
breakthroughs there's been. Is it all incremental now that we've
reached a point where it's there before doing the gene stuff?
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Well, I mean yeah, I think that it's the gene
stuff or the targeted you know, therapies that really are
able to target tumor cells. And we're talking about all
those those like we talked about it on a prior
segment where you can now harness viruses that will target
specific cancer cells and wipe out only those cancer cells,
(27:38):
and we talked about.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
You know, treatments like that.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
So I think that that we're on the It seems
like we're on the verge, but it does. It's seem
like we've been on the verge for like twenty years now,
so hopefully we'll get some good breakthroughs.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
Yeah, all right, guessing now, of course you don't know
the answer to this, but you've been around medicine for
as long as you have and have studied this. When
does the magic bullet occur? Because we do have magic
bullets and other diseases.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Yeah, it might have already occurred. You know, those car
T cell therapies which we've talked about before, they produce
proteins that specifically use the patient's cancer cells to just
I mean the patients T cells to destroy cancer cells.
It is kind of a laser guided bullet. There's immunotherapy
(28:28):
drugs that are also somewhat laser guided. So there's all
kinds of things that are happening.
Speaker 4 (28:34):
And then for.
Speaker 3 (28:36):
The estrogen specific breast cancers, we've got all kinds of
new technologies there. So I think there's a lot out there,
and that's why cancer centers now are really popping up everywhere,
because there is specific cancer treatment that holds out hope
for a lot of these people.
Speaker 1 (28:54):
All right, Jim, thank you. We'll catch you again next week.
As oh, I won't be here next week. Yeah, you
get to talk to Neil. No, you get to talk
to Neil in two weeks. And next week it is uh,
I'm going to be who the hell is Cicillion?
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Wayne? That's right?
Speaker 1 (29:10):
Yeah? Wayne?
Speaker 2 (29:11):
Yeah, all right, week me the following week.
Speaker 4 (29:14):
I just Jim the whole time.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
That's what I said.
Speaker 4 (29:18):
I'm looking forward to it, all right, Jim, thank you.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
Take care, take care. Yeah didn't I say that. By
the way, Neil, you're correcting me.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
So next week it's Wayne. The following week it's Neil.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
Not correcting you. Just a tiny bit of a rudder.
Speaker 1 (29:34):
This is kf I am six forty Live everywhere on
the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
You've been listening to the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Catch my Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
The Bill Handel Show News
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.