June 21, 2025 • 28 mins
The healthcare establishment was rocked to its foundation when Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in one decisive move. Dr. Robert Jackson and his daughter Hannah Miller explore this watershed moment and its profound implications for vaccine safety oversight in America.
Kennedy's bold action directly confronts decades of pharmaceutical industry influence over vaccine approvals. The ACIP panel members—described as having "never met a vaccine they didn't love"—maintained deep financial ties to the very companies whose products they evaluated. This arrangement created an environment where rubber-stamp approvals became standard practice, culminating in the hasty endorsement of mRNA COVID vaccines for children without adequate safety data.
Mainstream media immediately framed Kennedy's decision as "anti-science," coordinating messaging across platforms with doctors in white coats condemning the move. Yet this reaction ignores Kennedy's substantive criticisms: conflicts of interest that permeate vaccine oversight, persecution of medical professionals who question consensus, a striking lack of curiosity about vaccine injuries, and fundamentally skewed research methodologies that prioritize fast approval over thorough safety evaluation.
The conversation highlights doctors like Peter McCullough and Robert Malone who faced severe professional consequences for challenging COVID policies, while examining how RFK Jr's new appointees—including Martin Kulldorff, co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration—bring credibility and needed perspective to vaccine safety evaluation.
Why do so many medical professionals remain unable to acknowledge mounting evidence of vaccine harms? Dr. Jackson suggests this represents a form of spiritual blindness that transcends mere information deficits. The path forward requires not just better data, but a fundamental reorientation toward truth-seeking regardless of financial incentives.
Are you concerned about conflicts of interest in medical research? Have you noticed how questioning vaccine safety immediately brands someone as "anti-science"? Listen to this essential conversation that peels back the layers of institutional corruption threatening public health.
https://www.jacksonfamilyministry.com
https://bobslone.com/home/podcast-production/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Welcome to More Than Medicine, where Jesus is more
than enough for the ills thatplague our culture and our
country.
Hosted by author and physician,dr Robert Jackson, and his wife
Carlotta and daughter HannahMiller.
So listen up, because thedoctor is in.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Welcome to More Than Medicine.
I'm your host, Dr RobertJackson, bringing to you
biblical insights and storiesfrom the country doctor's rusty,
dusty scrapbook.
Well, I'm delighted today tohave my daughter, Hannah Miller,
on with me and she's going tobe asking questions and I'm
going to be answering thequestions about what Robert F
(00:44):
Kennedy did this last week withthe ACIP panel.
And Hannah, welcome to MoreThan Medicine.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
So, dad, let me just jump right in and ask you what
did RFK Jr do this week?
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Well, it's an amazing thing, and I'm going to start
by reading a quote from thehealth ranger, mike Adams, who
said this if I were HHSsecretary, I would solve the
entire vaccine problem in oneday, which is what Robert F
(01:19):
Kennedy just did.
You're all fired.
I would auction off thefurniture, sell the buildings,
pink slip everybody on day oneand return health decisions to
the American people and thestates, instead of a bunch of
corrupt pharma whores who profitfrom maiming and killing
(01:46):
children.
Problem solved that was MikeAdams, the health ranger.
Now, if y'all don't know whoMike Adams is, he's a health
advocate who for years has beenantagonistic to the CDC and the
FDA and Big Pharma, and he'sbeen an advocate for alternative
(02:11):
health care, and that's astrong statement.
But that's exactly what RobertF Kennedy has done the last week
.
And what he did was he firedthe ACIP panel.
Now that's the CDC's VaccineAdvisory Committee, and I'm
(02:33):
going to tell you a secret theyhave never met a vaccine that
they did not love.
If Big Pharma produced avaccine and submitted it to the
advisory committee, theyapproved it no questions asked,
including the mRNA template shot.
(02:55):
I'm not calling it a vaccine,it was a shot.
It was a killer shot.
And when it was submitted tothem to give that mRNA template
to our pediatric populationwithout any question, they
approved it for our children, noquestions asked.
(03:17):
They never met a proposedvaccine they didn't like and
that they did not approve.
And Robert F Kennedy looked atthe whole 17-member panel and he
said you're fired.
And he gave them all a pinkslip just last week and it
(03:38):
turned the whole medicalestablishment and big pharma on
their heads.
Bam, and it's been a long timecoming.
Speaker 3 (03:47):
Has been a long time coming.
And here's the thing how havewe seen the media respond and
how can we expect them torespond as they're looking at?
I mean, we already know they'repearl clutching and if you're
reading the news, you've alreadyseen that.
You know they're all besidethemselves about this.
So what are we seeing fromfolks?
You know they're all besidethemselves about this.
So what are we seeing fromfolks?
You know the mainstream mediaand you know and I ask you that
(04:09):
because I want people to be onguard Like this is how they're
going to respond.
This is how they are responding.
Think critically about this.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Well, actually, what Robert F Kennedy did was he
gutted the CDC's vaccine panel.
And the NBC spun it this waythey call it a manufactured
chaos and they said that Kennedygutted the CDC's vaccine panel
(04:38):
of independent experts.
Well, you and I know there'snot a lick of independence in
that panel, and let's just stopa minute and think about it.
That's a ludicrous statement,because they're not independent
experts, If you defineindependent as financially
(05:00):
entangled with big pharma butstill somehow magically unbiased
.
You know, and there's nothingmanufactured about the chaos.
The only thing that was beinggutted was pharma's ability to
treat the CDC like their ownprivate focus group.
(05:21):
So you know, NBC's statement wasitself a bit ludicrous, and so
you know, I find their statementin the media to be laughable
all by itself.
Now here's as soon as they madethe statement, there were these
(05:41):
guys in white coats withstethoscopes around their neck
who showed up in the media andthey were making statements like
this is dangerous, this is RFK,is anti-science and he's
gutting public health.
And simultaneously, thosestatements came out in multiple
(06:02):
media outlets.
And that's how you know, it wasall coordinated handsome and
attractive young doctors inwhite coats showing up on MSNBC,
NBC, ABC All of those outlets.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
And not just those.
You're seeing them on socialmedia too.
I know you're not really onsocial media, but you know I get
on Instagram and Facebook andother places like that, and you
know there's all these doctorsnow that people follow for their
expertise in whatever fieldthat they're in, and they get on
and they start saying thesesame exact kind of things and
they're all in lockstep on thisand, of course, a lot of it's
(06:44):
because one they're all paid tobe, uh and then that's exactly
right.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
It's popular.
The money, that's right.
Follow the money and it's also.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
it also is what's popular.
You know they want to be, theywant to be saying what everybody
else is saying, because it'swhat makes them look good.
You know, and and the and themedia has put up this framework
of RFK versus the science.
Like you know, anything andeverything that he does is
anti-science, and so all ofthese quote unquote experts that
are out there on social mediaand in the MSM, they all want to
(07:16):
be looking like well, we're notanti-science, we're certainly
not anti-science.
So anything that he does isautomatically we're opposed
because of the framework thatit's been put in and everything
that he does.
You know it's always going tobe RFK versus the science, and
so we can't question any of that.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
But what they forget to say is that the guys that
were fired on the ASAP panelwere all neck deep in Merck and
Pfizer and Moderna profits andthey were all on the payroll for
the big pharma companies andthey never said that in any of
these news outlet reports.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
That kind of brings me to RFK's statement about all
this, and I don't know, did youwant me to go to this?
Speaker 2 (08:00):
next yeah, go for it Okay.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
So he, you know, responded to all of this and
this is what he had to say aboutit, and I'll read the whole
quote, and then we're going todive into four aspects of things
that he says, because what youwere just saying kind of leads
into the first point that hemakes.
Here's what he said Vaccineshave become a divisive issue in
American politics, but there'sone thing all parties can agree
(08:23):
on the US faces a crisis ofpublic trust, whether toward
health agencies, pharmaceuticalcompanies or vaccines themselves
.
Public confidence is waning.
Some would try to explain thisaway by blaming misinformation
or anti-science attitudes.
To do so, however, ignores ahistory of conflicts of interest
, persecution of dissidents, alack of curiosity and skewed
(08:43):
science that has plagued thevaccine regulatory apparatus for
decades.
End quote.
And so I want to look intothose four categories that he
just kind of put out here,categories that he just kind of
put out here when he says theyignore a history of conflicts of
interest.
well, you just highlighted oneof those things right there, so
restate that for us.
(09:04):
When he says ignoring a historyof conflicts of interest in
regards to vaccines, ACIP, allof this, what is he talking
about?
Speaker 2 (09:13):
What he's talking about is, all these members on
the ACIP panel are bought andpaid for by Big Pharma, and not
only these members of thesepanels.
The researchers are at themajor medical universities.
All of them are knee-deep andwaist-deep in money paid to them
by the pharmaceutical companies, in money paid to them by the
(09:34):
pharmaceutical companies.
The medical universities, theresearch institutes all of them
are bought and paid for by BigPharma.
The lobbyists are paid for byBig Pharma.
The medical journals are paidfor by Big Pharma.
I quit reading medical journalsyears ago because every other
page has a Big Pharmaadvertisement.
(09:57):
It's sickening, and even theeditors of these medical
journals have come out afterthey're no longer on the payroll
of the medical journals andadmitted that all the medical
journals are nothing more thanadvertisements for big pharma.
And it really is.
It's sickening.
But these guys on the ACIPpanel all of them some of them
(10:22):
even own patents for thesevaccines and how can they be
objective?
They can't be unbiased.
That's right, they're notunbiased.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
How can they be an independent expert?
Speaker 2 (10:34):
They cannot be an independent expert.
They're not unbiased.
They're terrible conflicts ofinterest and people that are in
the know have known this foryears.
But parents don't know that,the media doesn't know that and
the average medical doctordoesn't know that.
Unless people do their research, they don't know this.
Speaker 3 (10:58):
And Robert F.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Kennedy has known it for years, mike Adams, the
health ranger, has known thisfor years, and they have been
trying to trumpet this through amegaphone, but nobody's been
listening.
People don't want to hear this,and that's why that entire
panel needed to be fired in oneday and replaced with people who
(11:22):
are not bought and paid for bythe pharmaceutical companies,
because how can peopleobjectively approve vaccines and
do research on vaccines who arebeing paid for, bought and paid
for by the pharmaceuticalcompanies?
Speaker 3 (11:39):
I want to talk about some of the names, but we're not
there yet.
I want to finish this withthese four points in his
statement.
And then I do want to talkabout some of the names that we
know that have been appointedand flesh those out and remind
folks of who those people are.
But the next part of hisstatement that he made here in
you know, refuting this panicover all this and defending his
(12:02):
statement and his decision to dothis the second part of that
was the persecution ofdissidents.
When he says that is that justhim, you know, talking out of
nowhere, or is actuallylegitimately have is there.
Is that legitimate?
Speaker 2 (12:15):
It's all very real.
Parents who ask questions aresquelched and made to feel like
they're ignorant and unlearned.
But but I have lots of parentswho come to see me in my medical
office who are very welleducated, about vaccines in
particular.
They ask lots of good andhonest questions.
They're not ignorant, they'reconcerned about their children
(13:02):
and they want to know and theyhave done their research.
And for medical doctors to actall high and pompous and like
they know way more than parents,that's unfair.
And for the medicalestablishment to treat doctors
who ask questions specialtybecause they asked questions and
(13:22):
challenged the consensus inCOVID, and that was just
uncalled for and unfair.
And they were not the only ones.
There were dozens of well-known, nationally known physicians,
like Peter McCullough.
He lost his position at BaylorUniversity as head of the
(13:44):
cardiology department.
He lost his cardiologyspecialty certification because
he challenged the consensus onCOVID consensus on COVID.
And that's what he's talkingabout when he makes that
statement there about, say theexact word the persecution of
(14:06):
dissidents.
Persecution of dissidents.
These doctors were askinghonest questions and big pharma
challenges and persecutes peoplewho just merely ask questions.
Speaker 3 (14:15):
Because he's saying look, we're in a crisis of
public trust regarding ourmedical organizations here in
the United States and this isone of the reasons why we just
said conflicts of interest,persecution of distance.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
I no longer trust the CDC, I don't trust the FDA, I
don't trust pharmaceuticalcompanies, and it's all because
they treat me as a medicaldoctor who asks honest questions
and they treat me as if I'mignorant and unlearned, and
that's not fair.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
That's right, and so when he's talking, when he's
laying these out, he's sayingyou know, look, whether you
believe in it or not, or youbelieve.
The reality is that people dodistrust, there is lack of
public trust in us, in the FDA,CDC and all of these things,
because of these reasons thathe's laying out and you're
(15:07):
providing examples of thathappening in real time.
And if you were a parent andyou've ever walked into a
doctor's office and had any kindof questions about any of the
childhood vaccines, you knowexactly what my dad is talking
about.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Pediatric offices will actually dismiss you if
you're not willing to receivethe CDC recommended vaccines.
Because, number one they loseincome because they're paid a
bonus if they get a certainpercentage of patients to obtain
all the pediatric vaccines.
So if you're unwilling to giveyour children the vaccines, they
(15:44):
will dismiss you because ithurts their percentage and
therefore they don't receive thebonus.
So there's one issue right thereon the table.
But number two they treat youwith disrespect because you ask
questions about the pediatricvaccine schedule, right?
So you know, there's all.
That's that dissident.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
Right, and parents have experienced that in real
life.
The third aspect of this is, hesaid there's a lack of
curiosity that's led to a crisisof public trust.
What does he mean by that?
Speaker 2 (16:19):
What he means by that is that pharmaceutical
companies and FDA and NIH areunwilling to do the trials
necessary to lay to rest theconcerns that parents have about
the safety and the efficacy ofthe vaccines, and they have all
manner of reasons why they saythey cannot do the randomized,
(16:42):
controlled, double-blind goldstandard trials that are
necessary to lay to rest theconcerns that parents have about
the safety of the vaccines.
And those concerns that thevaccine manufacturers have are
spurious.
They're false.
There's absolutely no reasonthey cannot do a
(17:05):
placebo-controlled trials forthese vaccines.
But they can't do it and theywill never do it.
And I'm going to tell you why.
It's because the vaccines arenot safe.
They are absolutely not safeand that's why they simply
cannot do the randomized control, placebo control trials that
(17:25):
the parents are demanding toprove that these vaccines are
safe so that they can actuallygive them to their children with
a good and clear conscience.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
And they're never going to do them and they're
never going to do them Right,and that's all it would take is
if they did them and they werelike, hey, we did them and this
is the evidence for it.
Everything is safe Prove to us.
Prove to us and the parentswould say, okay, that's what we
wanted, and why are youresisting so hard?
This is all it would take, andthey resisted.
And they resisted it for nowyears and years and years and
(18:01):
years and decades, and refusingto give parents the assurance
that they need to feel like theycan trust these organizations
and trust these medications.
And so it's just bizarre thatwe would look at these parents
and refuse to give them thataffirmation that they need, when
we know that the money to do itis there.
You know they're going to.
They make arguments that theydon't you know funding and all
of these.
That's all bogus.
The last one he said the lastaspect of this quote.
(18:26):
He said why people and folksthat, why there's such a crisis
of public trust, is skewedscience.
Now, when he says skewedscience, what does he mean by
that?
Speaker 2 (18:31):
He means that the trials that have been done are
are skewed and rigged.
And they've been rigged to makeyou trust the vaccines to be
safe when they're not safe.
And they're rigged because thevaccines are tested not against
a true placebo but they'retested against another vaccine.
(18:51):
And when people actually lookinto the trials and realize that
the vaccines that they'regiving their children have never
really been tested against atrue placebo, parents are
offended by that, they'reshocked by that.
When they realize that thevaccines are tested against
(19:12):
another vaccine and not againsta true placebo, they begin to
realize that it's been skewedand it's not a true
placebo-controlled trial.
And the parents, when theybegin to realize that, they
start backing up and they say Idon't want this and in fact the
COVID vaccines.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
I was about to bring up the COVID vaccines.
They were never tested.
Speaker 2 (19:34):
They never even got to the third level, the level
three, phase three trials.
They were given to people.
We were actually the guineapigs, right, and the people that
took those mRNA template shots?
They were the guinea pigs andwe found out very quickly they
(19:55):
were not safe, right, they werenot effective and there was all
manner of issues with thosevaccines.
And it's because they nevercompleted the trials and, in
fact, the trials were rigged tomake them look better than they
really were.
They were skewed.
In other words, just like thatwhat Robert F Kennedy said.
(20:15):
Robert F Kennedy spoke thetruth.
And who approved those vaccines?
Well, it was the ACIP committeethat he just fired, and they
not only needed to be fired,they probably need to be
prosecuted.
Speaker 3 (20:29):
Yeah, I agree with that.
I think there's a lot of peoplethat need to be prosecuted
regarding vaccines, and not justCOVID, but others, and there's
a long history and I thinkthere's a lot of folks out there
and a lot of mamas and daddieswho would agree with that and
not just with the COVID vaccines.
Last thing I want to do is Iwant to talk about who has been
appointed, because we know we'vegot a couple of names already
(20:49):
of folks who have been appointedto replace those, and you've
got and I want to talk aboutthem just briefly.
Just you know one or twosentences about them, what we
know about them, just briefly,just you know one or two
sentences about them, what weknow about them, and so who are
those folks that we know?
Speaker 2 (21:03):
Well, I'm sure he's going to appoint more, but I
know three that he appointed.
One was Vicki Pebsworth.
She was with the NationalVaccine Information Center.
A lot of folks don't know whothat is and what that is, but it
was a reporting center that wascreated as a substitute for
VAERS.
Everybody knew that VAERS wasfaulty and it was complicated.
(21:26):
It was cumbersome, doctorsdidn't use it, so a substitute
to that was created that waseasy to use and she was
responsible in large part forthat.
So she was a very worthysubstitute to be placed on the
ACIP committee.
And then there was MartinKulldorff.
(21:47):
He was a medical doctor and hewas an epidemiologist and he
co-authored the great BarringtonDeclaration that garnered
literally thousands andthousands of medical doctors all
around the world.
And I signed it.
I was delighted to be a part ofthat.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
That was during COVID .
And it was a refutation of alot of what was going on with
COVID and it was a call tointegrity within the medical
field, and it was a bunch ofdoctors who signed on to it and,
yeah, it was actually.
It was excellent and he did aphenomenal job being a part of
that, so, anyway, and then,lastly, dr Robert Malone MD.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
He rose to prominence during COVID-19 pandemic and he
was an outspoken MD against thetoxic mRNA jabs and he's been
quoted at length in lots ofdifferent places and lots of
people know his name and youknow he was one of the doctors
who lost some of hiscertification because of the
(22:50):
kickbacks against doctors whospoke out against it.
Yeah, he was one of the quotedissidents, but he was one of my
heroes.
Speaker 3 (22:58):
Right, oh yeah, I remember I started following him
voraciously during COVID.
I wanted to know everything hehad to say.
Speaker 2 (23:04):
But he's actually going to be on this panel and
that just makes me realize thatRobert F Kennedy is so wise and
judicious in the people thathe's putting on the panel and
see, that's going to restore theconfidence of the parents.
Now the medical establishmentyou know they're going to have
(23:26):
their little whitey tighties allin a knot because of who Robert
Malone is, because the parentswill trust Robert Malone, and
Kuhldorf and Pebsworth, becauseit's going to restore confidence
in the ACIP panel.
Now, the medical establishmentyou know I don't know about them
(23:48):
.
They're going to be all in aknot.
Speaker 3 (23:50):
Yeah, something's going to have to.
They're going to have to havethe veil pulled away from their
eyes somehow.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
And.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
I don't know how that's going to happen and I
don't know if RFK can do ithimself, because they have so
much distrust he's been sobesmirched by the media and
others.
You know, it really does takesomething spiritual happening, I
think, for folks with the Lordjust pulling a veil away from
their eyes so that they can seethe truth.
Speaker 2 (24:13):
Well and it goes back to what I've told my listeners
many times A lot of what we'redealing with here has to do with
spiritual blindness.
Yes, you know, there's a lot offolks, not just in the medical
community but in the world atlarge, that are just unable to
see the truth.
And I'm not talking aboutspiritual truth alone, I'm just
talking about truth in general.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
Yeah, it seems like a lot of the COVID stuff is
pretty black and white.
Truth in general?
Yeah, it's.
It seems like a lot of theCOVID stuff is pretty black and
white.
It should be.
You know, we're seeing youngpeople at astronomical rates.
You know, falling dead on thefootball field after getting
COVID shots.
So you know years ago.
So it feels like that should bepretty black and white that
these things are dangerous, butyet people are unable to see
that truth.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
They're still.
They're still giving the shots.
People are still searching andwanting the shots and you would
think that, like you said,that's a black and white issue
and those shots are dangerous.
And you think people would seethat now and be distrusting the
shots and avoiding the shots.
But oh no, our government isstill pushing it.
(25:15):
State governments are stillpushing it and there are people
out there warning the shots anddoctors out there still pushing
it.
There are doctors out therepushing it for little babies and
I see advertisements on TVstill and on the radio still for
the COVID shots and I'm likeyou've got to be kidding me.
(25:35):
But it's not.
And how can people be so blindto that?
It's a function of spiritualblindness.
It's not a matter ofinformation or rationale or
logic.
It's a function of spiritualblindness and I tell this to my
listeners and my friends all thetime.
The root of the problem is alack of knowing biblical truth.
(26:01):
If people do not know the LordJesus Christ, they simply cannot
see the truth.
There's a verse in scripturethat says the natural man the
natural man is a biblical wordfor the lost man, spiritually
lost and spiritually blind.
The natural man does notreceive the things of the spirit
of God, because they'refoolishness to him.
(26:23):
Neither can he understand them,because they're spiritually
discerned.
Now, how do we solve that?
Evangelism Evangelism.
That's why you and I must sharethe gospel with our lost friends
, because you just giving theminformation about covid and the
(26:46):
shots and the dangers thereof isnot going to help them, because
they're blind.
They're spiritually blind andunless they are born again into
the kingdom of god andtransferred from the domain of
darkness into the kingdom ofGod's beloved Son, they're still
going to be blind.
And no amount of information orlogic or rationale is going to
(27:09):
help them see the truth.
Unless the Spirit of God openstheir eyes to see spiritual
truth, they're still going to beblind.
To see spiritual truth, they'restill going to be blind.
And that's why, dear listener,unless you and I are willing to
humble ourselves and give tothem the gospel you see, I'm not
(27:29):
ashamed of the gospel, for itis the power of God unto
salvation to everyone whobelieves.
We must give them the gospel,give them Jesus, and when folks
are born again into the kingdomof God, then their eyes will be
opened and then they will seethe truth.
(27:50):
But until then they walk indarkness, All right?
Well, listen, Hannah, our timeis up.
I think we're going to have tolet our folks go.
Thank you, Ms Hannah.
I appreciate you being herewith me.
You're listening to More ThanMedicine.
I'm your host, Dr RobertJackson.
My guest today is my lovelydaughter, Ms Hannah Miller.
I'll be back again next week.
(28:12):
Until then, may the Lord blessyou real good.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
Thank you for listening to this edition of
More Than Medicine For Real good.
Thank you for listening to thisedition of More Than Medicine.
For more information about theJackson Family Ministry, dr
Jackson's books, or to schedulea speaking engagement, go to
their Facebook page, instagramor their webpage at
jacksonfamilyministrycom.
This podcast is produced by BobSloan Audio Production at
bobsloancom.
Welcome to More Than Medicine, where Jesus is more
than enough for the ills thatplague our culture and our
country.
Hosted by author and physician,dr Robert Jackson, and his wife
Carlotta and daughter HannahMiller.
So listen up, because thedoctor is in.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Welcome to More Than Medicine.
I'm your host, Dr RobertJackson, bringing to you
biblical insights and storiesfrom the country doctor's rusty,
dusty scrapbook.
Well, I'm delighted today tohave my daughter, Hannah Miller,
on with me and she's going tobe asking questions and I'm
going to be answering thequestions about what Robert F
(00:44):
Kennedy did this last week withthe ACIP panel.
And Hannah, welcome to MoreThan Medicine.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
So, dad, let me just jump right in and ask you what
did RFK Jr do this week?
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Well, it's an amazing thing, and I'm going to start
by reading a quote from thehealth ranger, mike Adams, who
said this if I were HHSsecretary, I would solve the
entire vaccine problem in oneday, which is what Robert F
(01:19):
Kennedy just did.
You're all fired.
I would auction off thefurniture, sell the buildings,
pink slip everybody on day oneand return health decisions to
the American people and thestates, instead of a bunch of
corrupt pharma whores who profitfrom maiming and killing
(01:46):
children.
Problem solved that was MikeAdams, the health ranger.
Now, if y'all don't know whoMike Adams is, he's a health
advocate who for years has beenantagonistic to the CDC and the
FDA and Big Pharma, and he'sbeen an advocate for alternative
(02:11):
health care, and that's astrong statement.
But that's exactly what RobertF Kennedy has done the last week
.
And what he did was he firedthe ACIP panel.
Now that's the CDC's VaccineAdvisory Committee, and I'm
(02:33):
going to tell you a secret theyhave never met a vaccine that
they did not love.
If Big Pharma produced avaccine and submitted it to the
advisory committee, theyapproved it no questions asked,
including the mRNA template shot.
(02:55):
I'm not calling it a vaccine,it was a shot.
It was a killer shot.
And when it was submitted tothem to give that mRNA template
to our pediatric populationwithout any question, they
approved it for our children, noquestions asked.
(03:17):
They never met a proposedvaccine they didn't like and
that they did not approve.
And Robert F Kennedy looked atthe whole 17-member panel and he
said you're fired.
And he gave them all a pinkslip just last week and it
(03:38):
turned the whole medicalestablishment and big pharma on
their heads.
Bam, and it's been a long timecoming.
Speaker 3 (03:47):
Has been a long time coming.
And here's the thing how havewe seen the media respond and
how can we expect them torespond as they're looking at?
I mean, we already know they'repearl clutching and if you're
reading the news, you've alreadyseen that.
You know they're all besidethemselves about this.
So what are we seeing fromfolks?
You know they're all besidethemselves about this.
So what are we seeing fromfolks?
You know the mainstream mediaand you know and I ask you that
(04:09):
because I want people to be onguard Like this is how they're
going to respond.
This is how they are responding.
Think critically about this.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Well, actually, what Robert F Kennedy did was he
gutted the CDC's vaccine panel.
And the NBC spun it this waythey call it a manufactured
chaos and they said that Kennedygutted the CDC's vaccine panel
(04:38):
of independent experts.
Well, you and I know there'snot a lick of independence in
that panel, and let's just stopa minute and think about it.
That's a ludicrous statement,because they're not independent
experts, If you defineindependent as financially
(05:00):
entangled with big pharma butstill somehow magically unbiased
.
You know, and there's nothingmanufactured about the chaos.
The only thing that was beinggutted was pharma's ability to
treat the CDC like their ownprivate focus group.
(05:21):
So you know, NBC's statement wasitself a bit ludicrous, and so
you know, I find their statementin the media to be laughable
all by itself.
Now here's as soon as they madethe statement, there were these
(05:41):
guys in white coats withstethoscopes around their neck
who showed up in the media andthey were making statements like
this is dangerous, this is RFK,is anti-science and he's
gutting public health.
And simultaneously, thosestatements came out in multiple
(06:02):
media outlets.
And that's how you know, it wasall coordinated handsome and
attractive young doctors inwhite coats showing up on MSNBC,
NBC, ABC All of those outlets.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
And not just those.
You're seeing them on socialmedia too.
I know you're not really onsocial media, but you know I get
on Instagram and Facebook andother places like that, and you
know there's all these doctorsnow that people follow for their
expertise in whatever fieldthat they're in, and they get on
and they start saying thesesame exact kind of things and
they're all in lockstep on thisand, of course, a lot of it's
(06:44):
because one they're all paid tobe, uh and then that's exactly
right.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
It's popular.
The money, that's right.
Follow the money and it's also.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
it also is what's popular.
You know they want to be, theywant to be saying what everybody
else is saying, because it'swhat makes them look good.
You know, and and the and themedia has put up this framework
of RFK versus the science.
Like you know, anything andeverything that he does is
anti-science, and so all ofthese quote unquote experts that
are out there on social mediaand in the MSM, they all want to
(07:16):
be looking like well, we're notanti-science, we're certainly
not anti-science.
So anything that he does isautomatically we're opposed
because of the framework thatit's been put in and everything
that he does.
You know it's always going tobe RFK versus the science, and
so we can't question any of that.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
But what they forget to say is that the guys that
were fired on the ASAP panelwere all neck deep in Merck and
Pfizer and Moderna profits andthey were all on the payroll for
the big pharma companies andthey never said that in any of
these news outlet reports.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
That kind of brings me to RFK's statement about all
this, and I don't know, did youwant me to go to this?
Speaker 2 (08:00):
next yeah, go for it Okay.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
So he, you know, responded to all of this and
this is what he had to say aboutit, and I'll read the whole
quote, and then we're going todive into four aspects of things
that he says, because what youwere just saying kind of leads
into the first point that hemakes.
Here's what he said Vaccineshave become a divisive issue in
American politics, but there'sone thing all parties can agree
(08:23):
on the US faces a crisis ofpublic trust, whether toward
health agencies, pharmaceuticalcompanies or vaccines themselves
.
Public confidence is waning.
Some would try to explain thisaway by blaming misinformation
or anti-science attitudes.
To do so, however, ignores ahistory of conflicts of interest
, persecution of dissidents, alack of curiosity and skewed
(08:43):
science that has plagued thevaccine regulatory apparatus for
decades.
End quote.
And so I want to look intothose four categories that he
just kind of put out here,categories that he just kind of
put out here when he says theyignore a history of conflicts of
interest.
well, you just highlighted oneof those things right there, so
restate that for us.
(09:04):
When he says ignoring a historyof conflicts of interest in
regards to vaccines, ACIP, allof this, what is he talking
about?
Speaker 2 (09:13):
What he's talking about is, all these members on
the ACIP panel are bought andpaid for by Big Pharma, and not
only these members of thesepanels.
The researchers are at themajor medical universities.
All of them are knee-deep andwaist-deep in money paid to them
by the pharmaceutical companies, in money paid to them by the
(09:34):
pharmaceutical companies.
The medical universities, theresearch institutes all of them
are bought and paid for by BigPharma.
The lobbyists are paid for byBig Pharma.
The medical journals are paidfor by Big Pharma.
I quit reading medical journalsyears ago because every other
page has a Big Pharmaadvertisement.
(09:57):
It's sickening, and even theeditors of these medical
journals have come out afterthey're no longer on the payroll
of the medical journals andadmitted that all the medical
journals are nothing more thanadvertisements for big pharma.
And it really is.
It's sickening.
But these guys on the ACIPpanel all of them some of them
(10:22):
even own patents for thesevaccines and how can they be
objective?
They can't be unbiased.
That's right, they're notunbiased.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
How can they be an independent expert?
Speaker 2 (10:34):
They cannot be an independent expert.
They're not unbiased.
They're terrible conflicts ofinterest and people that are in
the know have known this foryears.
But parents don't know that,the media doesn't know that and
the average medical doctordoesn't know that.
Unless people do their research, they don't know this.
Speaker 3 (10:58):
And Robert F.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Kennedy has known it for years, mike Adams, the
health ranger, has known thisfor years, and they have been
trying to trumpet this through amegaphone, but nobody's been
listening.
People don't want to hear this,and that's why that entire
panel needed to be fired in oneday and replaced with people who
(11:22):
are not bought and paid for bythe pharmaceutical companies,
because how can peopleobjectively approve vaccines and
do research on vaccines who arebeing paid for, bought and paid
for by the pharmaceuticalcompanies?
Speaker 3 (11:39):
I want to talk about some of the names, but we're not
there yet.
I want to finish this withthese four points in his
statement.
And then I do want to talkabout some of the names that we
know that have been appointedand flesh those out and remind
folks of who those people are.
But the next part of hisstatement that he made here in
you know, refuting this panicover all this and defending his
(12:02):
statement and his decision to dothis the second part of that
was the persecution ofdissidents.
When he says that is that justhim, you know, talking out of
nowhere, or is actuallylegitimately have is there.
Is that legitimate?
Speaker 2 (12:15):
It's all very real.
Parents who ask questions aresquelched and made to feel like
they're ignorant and unlearned.
But but I have lots of parentswho come to see me in my medical
office who are very welleducated, about vaccines in
particular.
They ask lots of good andhonest questions.
They're not ignorant, they'reconcerned about their children
(13:02):
and they want to know and theyhave done their research.
And for medical doctors to actall high and pompous and like
they know way more than parents,that's unfair.
And for the medicalestablishment to treat doctors
who ask questions specialtybecause they asked questions and
(13:22):
challenged the consensus inCOVID, and that was just
uncalled for and unfair.
And they were not the only ones.
There were dozens of well-known, nationally known physicians,
like Peter McCullough.
He lost his position at BaylorUniversity as head of the
(13:44):
cardiology department.
He lost his cardiologyspecialty certification because
he challenged the consensus onCOVID consensus on COVID.
And that's what he's talkingabout when he makes that
statement there about, say theexact word the persecution of
(14:06):
dissidents.
Persecution of dissidents.
These doctors were askinghonest questions and big pharma
challenges and persecutes peoplewho just merely ask questions.
Speaker 3 (14:15):
Because he's saying look, we're in a crisis of
public trust regarding ourmedical organizations here in
the United States and this isone of the reasons why we just
said conflicts of interest,persecution of distance.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
I no longer trust the CDC, I don't trust the FDA, I
don't trust pharmaceuticalcompanies, and it's all because
they treat me as a medicaldoctor who asks honest questions
and they treat me as if I'mignorant and unlearned, and
that's not fair.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
That's right, and so when he's talking, when he's
laying these out, he's sayingyou know, look, whether you
believe in it or not, or youbelieve.
The reality is that people dodistrust, there is lack of
public trust in us, in the FDA,CDC and all of these things,
because of these reasons thathe's laying out and you're
(15:07):
providing examples of thathappening in real time.
And if you were a parent andyou've ever walked into a
doctor's office and had any kindof questions about any of the
childhood vaccines, you knowexactly what my dad is talking
about.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Pediatric offices will actually dismiss you if
you're not willing to receivethe CDC recommended vaccines.
Because, number one they loseincome because they're paid a
bonus if they get a certainpercentage of patients to obtain
all the pediatric vaccines.
So if you're unwilling to giveyour children the vaccines, they
(15:44):
will dismiss you because ithurts their percentage and
therefore they don't receive thebonus.
So there's one issue right thereon the table.
But number two they treat youwith disrespect because you ask
questions about the pediatricvaccine schedule, right?
So you know, there's all.
That's that dissident.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
Right, and parents have experienced that in real
life.
The third aspect of this is, hesaid there's a lack of
curiosity that's led to a crisisof public trust.
What does he mean by that?
Speaker 2 (16:19):
What he means by that is that pharmaceutical
companies and FDA and NIH areunwilling to do the trials
necessary to lay to rest theconcerns that parents have about
the safety and the efficacy ofthe vaccines, and they have all
manner of reasons why they saythey cannot do the randomized,
(16:42):
controlled, double-blind goldstandard trials that are
necessary to lay to rest theconcerns that parents have about
the safety of the vaccines.
And those concerns that thevaccine manufacturers have are
spurious.
They're false.
There's absolutely no reasonthey cannot do a
(17:05):
placebo-controlled trials forthese vaccines.
But they can't do it and theywill never do it.
And I'm going to tell you why.
It's because the vaccines arenot safe.
They are absolutely not safeand that's why they simply
cannot do the randomized control, placebo control trials that
(17:25):
the parents are demanding toprove that these vaccines are
safe so that they can actuallygive them to their children with
a good and clear conscience.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
And they're never going to do them and they're
never going to do them Right,and that's all it would take is
if they did them and they werelike, hey, we did them and this
is the evidence for it.
Everything is safe Prove to us.
Prove to us and the parentswould say, okay, that's what we
wanted, and why are youresisting so hard?
This is all it would take, andthey resisted.
And they resisted it for nowyears and years and years and
(18:01):
years and decades, and refusingto give parents the assurance
that they need to feel like theycan trust these organizations
and trust these medications.
And so it's just bizarre thatwe would look at these parents
and refuse to give them thataffirmation that they need, when
we know that the money to do itis there.
You know they're going to.
They make arguments that theydon't you know funding and all
of these.
That's all bogus.
The last one he said the lastaspect of this quote.
(18:26):
He said why people and folksthat, why there's such a crisis
of public trust, is skewedscience.
Now, when he says skewedscience, what does he mean by
that?
Speaker 2 (18:31):
He means that the trials that have been done are
are skewed and rigged.
And they've been rigged to makeyou trust the vaccines to be
safe when they're not safe.
And they're rigged because thevaccines are tested not against
a true placebo but they'retested against another vaccine.
(18:51):
And when people actually lookinto the trials and realize that
the vaccines that they'regiving their children have never
really been tested against atrue placebo, parents are
offended by that, they'reshocked by that.
When they realize that thevaccines are tested against
(19:12):
another vaccine and not againsta true placebo, they begin to
realize that it's been skewedand it's not a true
placebo-controlled trial.
And the parents, when theybegin to realize that, they
start backing up and they say Idon't want this and in fact the
COVID vaccines.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
I was about to bring up the COVID vaccines.
They were never tested.
Speaker 2 (19:34):
They never even got to the third level, the level
three, phase three trials.
They were given to people.
We were actually the guineapigs, right, and the people that
took those mRNA template shots?
They were the guinea pigs andwe found out very quickly they
(19:55):
were not safe, right, they werenot effective and there was all
manner of issues with thosevaccines.
And it's because they nevercompleted the trials and, in
fact, the trials were rigged tomake them look better than they
really were.
They were skewed.
In other words, just like thatwhat Robert F Kennedy said.
(20:15):
Robert F Kennedy spoke thetruth.
And who approved those vaccines?
Well, it was the ACIP committeethat he just fired, and they
not only needed to be fired,they probably need to be
prosecuted.
Speaker 3 (20:29):
Yeah, I agree with that.
I think there's a lot of peoplethat need to be prosecuted
regarding vaccines, and not justCOVID, but others, and there's
a long history and I thinkthere's a lot of folks out there
and a lot of mamas and daddieswho would agree with that and
not just with the COVID vaccines.
Last thing I want to do is Iwant to talk about who has been
appointed, because we know we'vegot a couple of names already
(20:49):
of folks who have been appointedto replace those, and you've
got and I want to talk aboutthem just briefly.
Just you know one or twosentences about them, what we
know about them, just briefly,just you know one or two
sentences about them, what weknow about them, and so who are
those folks that we know?
Speaker 2 (21:03):
Well, I'm sure he's going to appoint more, but I
know three that he appointed.
One was Vicki Pebsworth.
She was with the NationalVaccine Information Center.
A lot of folks don't know whothat is and what that is, but it
was a reporting center that wascreated as a substitute for
VAERS.
Everybody knew that VAERS wasfaulty and it was complicated.
(21:26):
It was cumbersome, doctorsdidn't use it, so a substitute
to that was created that waseasy to use and she was
responsible in large part forthat.
So she was a very worthysubstitute to be placed on the
ACIP committee.
And then there was MartinKulldorff.
(21:47):
He was a medical doctor and hewas an epidemiologist and he
co-authored the great BarringtonDeclaration that garnered
literally thousands andthousands of medical doctors all
around the world.
And I signed it.
I was delighted to be a part ofthat.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
That was during COVID .
And it was a refutation of alot of what was going on with
COVID and it was a call tointegrity within the medical
field, and it was a bunch ofdoctors who signed on to it and,
yeah, it was actually.
It was excellent and he did aphenomenal job being a part of
that, so, anyway, and then,lastly, dr Robert Malone MD.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
He rose to prominence during COVID-19 pandemic and he
was an outspoken MD against thetoxic mRNA jabs and he's been
quoted at length in lots ofdifferent places and lots of
people know his name and youknow he was one of the doctors
who lost some of hiscertification because of the
(22:50):
kickbacks against doctors whospoke out against it.
Yeah, he was one of the quotedissidents, but he was one of my
heroes.
Speaker 3 (22:58):
Right, oh yeah, I remember I started following him
voraciously during COVID.
I wanted to know everything hehad to say.
Speaker 2 (23:04):
But he's actually going to be on this panel and
that just makes me realize thatRobert F Kennedy is so wise and
judicious in the people thathe's putting on the panel and
see, that's going to restore theconfidence of the parents.
Now the medical establishmentyou know they're going to have
(23:26):
their little whitey tighties allin a knot because of who Robert
Malone is, because the parentswill trust Robert Malone, and
Kuhldorf and Pebsworth, becauseit's going to restore confidence
in the ACIP panel.
Now, the medical establishmentyou know I don't know about them
(23:48):
.
They're going to be all in aknot.
Speaker 3 (23:50):
Yeah, something's going to have to.
They're going to have to havethe veil pulled away from their
eyes somehow.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
And.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
I don't know how that's going to happen and I
don't know if RFK can do ithimself, because they have so
much distrust he's been sobesmirched by the media and
others.
You know, it really does takesomething spiritual happening, I
think, for folks with the Lordjust pulling a veil away from
their eyes so that they can seethe truth.
Speaker 2 (24:13):
Well and it goes back to what I've told my listeners
many times A lot of what we'redealing with here has to do with
spiritual blindness.
Yes, you know, there's a lot offolks, not just in the medical
community but in the world atlarge, that are just unable to
see the truth.
And I'm not talking aboutspiritual truth alone, I'm just
talking about truth in general.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
Yeah, it seems like a lot of the COVID stuff is
pretty black and white.
Truth in general?
Yeah, it's.
It seems like a lot of theCOVID stuff is pretty black and
white.
It should be.
You know, we're seeing youngpeople at astronomical rates.
You know, falling dead on thefootball field after getting
COVID shots.
So you know years ago.
So it feels like that should bepretty black and white that
these things are dangerous, butyet people are unable to see
that truth.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
They're still.
They're still giving the shots.
People are still searching andwanting the shots and you would
think that, like you said,that's a black and white issue
and those shots are dangerous.
And you think people would seethat now and be distrusting the
shots and avoiding the shots.
But oh no, our government isstill pushing it.
(25:15):
State governments are stillpushing it and there are people
out there warning the shots anddoctors out there still pushing
it.
There are doctors out therepushing it for little babies and
I see advertisements on TVstill and on the radio still for
the COVID shots and I'm likeyou've got to be kidding me.
(25:35):
But it's not.
And how can people be so blindto that?
It's a function of spiritualblindness.
It's not a matter ofinformation or rationale or
logic.
It's a function of spiritualblindness and I tell this to my
listeners and my friends all thetime.
The root of the problem is alack of knowing biblical truth.
(26:01):
If people do not know the LordJesus Christ, they simply cannot
see the truth.
There's a verse in scripturethat says the natural man the
natural man is a biblical wordfor the lost man, spiritually
lost and spiritually blind.
The natural man does notreceive the things of the spirit
of God, because they'refoolishness to him.
(26:23):
Neither can he understand them,because they're spiritually
discerned.
Now, how do we solve that?
Evangelism Evangelism.
That's why you and I must sharethe gospel with our lost friends
, because you just giving theminformation about covid and the
(26:46):
shots and the dangers thereof isnot going to help them, because
they're blind.
They're spiritually blind andunless they are born again into
the kingdom of god andtransferred from the domain of
darkness into the kingdom ofGod's beloved Son, they're still
going to be blind.
And no amount of information orlogic or rationale is going to
(27:09):
help them see the truth.
Unless the Spirit of God openstheir eyes to see spiritual
truth, they're still going to beblind.
To see spiritual truth, they'restill going to be blind.
And that's why, dear listener,unless you and I are willing to
humble ourselves and give tothem the gospel you see, I'm not
(27:29):
ashamed of the gospel, for itis the power of God unto
salvation to everyone whobelieves.
We must give them the gospel,give them Jesus, and when folks
are born again into the kingdomof God, then their eyes will be
opened and then they will seethe truth.
(27:50):
But until then they walk indarkness, All right?
Well, listen, Hannah, our timeis up.
I think we're going to have tolet our folks go.
Thank you, Ms Hannah.
I appreciate you being herewith me.
You're listening to More ThanMedicine.
I'm your host, Dr RobertJackson.
My guest today is my lovelydaughter, Ms Hannah Miller.
I'll be back again next week.
(28:12):
Until then, may the Lord blessyou real good.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
Thank you for listening to this edition of
More Than Medicine For Real good.
Thank you for listening to thisedition of More Than Medicine.
For more information about theJackson Family Ministry, dr
Jackson's books, or to schedulea speaking engagement, go to
their Facebook page, instagramor their webpage at
jacksonfamilyministrycom.
This podcast is produced by BobSloan Audio Production at
bobsloancom.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.