February 19, 2025 • 33 mins
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
It's that time. Time time, time, Luck and load. The
Michael Varry Show is on the air.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
The last week. There was a story. I'm telling him
a stack here. I used to love when Rush would
go through his stack. I always wanted to have a stack,
or to go through. Boy, there's a stack of stuff
I could There's so many, so many stories we could
go through today. But in my stack, if I can
(00:54):
find it, I have an embarrassment of riches. Here. Here
it is. It's clip number six one five, and it's
Jonathan Turley talking about President Trump doing what he promised
he would do.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
Well.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
He's carrying out those campaign pledges. He wants to shrink government,
he wants to find fraud and to do that he
needs to look at the books. And I just find
any real effort to prevent that likely to be reversed
on appeal.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
You know, you'd think, why would taxpayers be opposed to that?
But you would expect Jonathan Turley to be interviewed on
Fox News and say that what about when Dana Bash,
who is an unabashed liberal and a terrible journalist, what
(01:47):
about when she has to listen to the fact that
voters who voted for Biden in twenty twenty and switched
to Trump in twenty twenty four. What about when they
tell CNN and she has to sit there like she's
constipated to look on her face as they tell CNN
they like what Trump's doing.
Speaker 5 (02:09):
Talked to some Arizona voters who have switched from voting
for Joe Biden in twenty twenty to Trump in twenty
twenty four, and so far they mostly like what they see.
Speaker 6 (02:19):
I just think he's trying to get America back on
track as quickly as possible given the seat.
Speaker 7 (02:25):
That was left in from the previous administration.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
It feels more married and transparency that I'm getting from
the administration so far.
Speaker 7 (02:33):
I approve of a lot of.
Speaker 8 (02:34):
The stuff that he's doing with the border and.
Speaker 9 (02:36):
Everything other countries I noticed that were to give you
taken seriously, But.
Speaker 10 (02:42):
In most part, I feel like he's on the right
track by keeping transgenders out of women's sports as number.
Speaker 5 (02:49):
One, all eleven Biden Trump voters say they approve of
Donald Trump's first weeks in office.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
When you have CNN running a story about how high
Donald Trump's approval rating is and compare that to Mitch McConnell,
who is determined to thwart him at every turn, poor
old man. But the people love what Trump is doing,
(03:21):
and that's what's important.
Speaker 11 (03:23):
Talk a little bit about Mitch McConnell and the chance
he's going to become a folk hero.
Speaker 8 (03:27):
It ain't going to likely happen. Ain't gonna likely.
Speaker 11 (03:29):
Happen, because I want you to look at his net
approval rays he is underwater with everybody. He has got
the ultimate or might say, some might say sad trifecta
of being underwater overall minus thirty nine points, thirty nine
percentage points more of the electric disapprovas for the jobs
that he has done. How about Democrats, he's fifty eight
points underwater.
Speaker 8 (03:50):
My goodness, gracious.
Speaker 11 (03:51):
The chance that all of a sudden, just because he
casts three votes against Trump, that he's somehow become a
folk here with them is absolutely frankly insane. And then
with the Republicans, of course, he's gone up against Trump before,
and that's why he's seventeen points underwater Republicans. When you're
underwater with Democrats, Republicans and overall, the chance that you're
going to become a folk hero, it seems rather low to.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
Me, Paula indeed.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
All right.
Speaker 5 (04:14):
Of course, the next question is how does his popularity
compare with that of President Trump?
Speaker 11 (04:20):
Yeah, so you know, I think Donald Trump will like
these numbers. All right, So let's take a look. This
is the net approval rating I got overall and I
got with Republicans. Look how much higher Donald Trump is
overall versus Mitch mcconnall. Look at that Trump is on
the positive side of the ledger at plus three. Mitch McConnell,
of course underwater overall at minus thirty nine. So Trump
is forty two points higher the Mitch McConnell is overall
(04:44):
among Republicans. Of course, Donald Trump very popular there with
a plus eighty two point net approval rating. Of course,
Mitch mcconnll again underwater at minus seventeen. So you do
the math quickly here eighty two seventeen. That is nearly
one hundred points higher that Donald Trump is grover rating
wise with Republicans that Mitch McConnell is. The bottom line
is that when it comes to the popularity battle, Donald
(05:06):
Trump comes out way, way, way ahead of Mitch McConnell.
Speaker 5 (05:12):
Okay, okay, but is this just a problem with majority leaders.
Is this like a heavy is the head situation? I mean,
put this into historical conduct text. Where does he stack
up against other majority leaders?
Speaker 12 (05:24):
Yeah?
Speaker 11 (05:24):
I always like going through the history books, right, I'll
love spreadsheets. I love history books. So let's go take
a look through the history books. We'll take a look
at the net popularity ratings of GOP center leaders their
final ratings as majority leaders.
Speaker 8 (05:36):
Take a look here.
Speaker 11 (05:37):
Mitch McConnell again underwater at minus thirty nine points.
Speaker 8 (05:40):
How about his predecessor, doctor.
Speaker 11 (05:41):
Bill Frist from the Great State of Tennessee. He was
underwater two, but he was only at minus eight points.
Trent Lott was at plus five points from the Great
State of Mississippian. Of course, Bob Dole from the Great
State of Kansas, he was above water as well at
plus six points. So the bottom line is Mitch McConnell
a historical anomaly when it comes to Republican leaders, is far, far,
(06:01):
far more underwater than any of the past GOP leaders
over the last forty years.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Paula and let's take it to break on this one.
Also appearing on CNN, Frank Lutz talking about voters who
voted for Biden and Clinton, but then voted for Trump
in twenty twenty four. So they didn't vote for him
the first time in sixteen, didn't vote for him in
(06:28):
twenty they did vote for him this time, and guess what,
they love what he's doing.
Speaker 13 (06:35):
We want to have you on because you do a
lot of focus groups. You really get behind the numbers,
the poll numbers, to the sentiments of voters.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
And it's so interesting.
Speaker 13 (06:43):
You've been speaking with a number of voters who were
Hillary Clinton twenty sixteen, Joe Biden twenty twenty, and then
went for Trump in twenty twenty four. How are these
folks seeing the early days of Trump's second term pretty well?
Speaker 8 (06:58):
Really?
Speaker 14 (06:59):
And they react to it because they love the pace
of change. They were very fed up over the last
four years. They wanted action, they wanted results. They looked
at prices, they looked at affordability, looked at immigration, and
they didn't see anything happening. They still don't like what
he says, but they like what he does. And these
are Democrats now who felt that they were not securing
(07:23):
the border, they were doing nothing to prevent illegal immigration,
that nothing was actually happening. They wanted to see a
reduction and waite for Washington spending, and they're seeing that.
So what they tell me is, I wish you'd be
a little bit less rude. But at the same time,
they like what he's doing. They believe he's serious about it,
and for the first time they have confidence in the future,
(07:44):
which is why you now see some significant shifts in
the polling about the expectations for the direction in the
coming years.
Speaker 13 (07:52):
It's a big wake up call for Democrats.
Speaker 14 (07:54):
I'm waiting for them to get a message. I'm waiting
for them to unify and to understand that to and
to be the resistance, which is what.
Speaker 8 (08:04):
Some of them used that phrase.
Speaker 14 (08:05):
That's not what democrats in grassroots areas want from them.
They may not want the approach that Trump is doing
President Trump, by the way, I now know to say
President Trump, but they do want action and they don't
see action from the Democrats.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
If you can't say something nice, you can always say it.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
On the Michael Berry Show, let's talk about rfk Junior Flamma.
He told the story a few days ago about his
uncle John F. Kennedy in nineteen sixty three awarding the
highest civilian honor to Francis Kelsey but something happened, and
he's going to tell it. And if you remember the
(08:46):
drug deltimone, it's one of the worst debacles in American history.
It's not as bad as the COVID SHOT's going to
turn out to be. But babies were born with horrible,
horrible deformities. Horrible, But listen to the story.
Speaker 15 (09:01):
My uncle awarded John F. Kennedy the highest civilian honor.
The Francis Kelsey. Francis Kelsey was a young scientist at
an i age who came in and objected to the
panel having approved solidamide for American children. All the sciences
that day, they were doing it in Europe, all the
sciencests of that day, and the scientific panels that worked
(09:24):
for the agency approved green lighted solidamide.
Speaker 8 (09:27):
She stood up and screamed and thought and.
Speaker 15 (09:31):
Risked her job and risked her reputation, and she blocked
it in our country. Three years later, everybody knew that
recognized that she was a hero and a savior of
our children because we were not getting the kind of terrible,
diabolical deformities as they were experiencing in Europe. My uncle
gave it the highest civilian honor because she questioned science
(09:53):
and was courageous enough to stand up and say, I
don't care what happens to me.
Speaker 8 (09:59):
This cannot happened.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Francis Kelsey. That's important because so many people, so many
people won't speak out because it might cost me my job.
One might get criticized. When my wife said, I can't
speak out about what the school's doing to my kid
because they'll be hard on my kid, you've just given up.
You've just said that they're in charge, not you. When
you do that. Here is RFK Junior with John Stossel,
(10:23):
and he's asked the question if he would give his
children vaccines today, let's listen and discuss.
Speaker 8 (10:30):
And you still say that autism is caused by vaccines.
Speaker 15 (10:34):
Yeah, autism is caused by vaccines. And by the way,
CDC's own data, you know. And with that, they if
they did a study called the very straight in the
study in nineteen eighty nine, and they looked at the
Hepatitis BE vaccine. They looked at children and from the
(10:56):
biggest database in the world. The vaccine is hefty data length.
The children who got the happetititized B vaccine during their
first thirty days, and they compare those to kids who
got it later or didn't get it at all, and
there was a thirteen one hundred and fifty percent elevated
risk for autism among the people who got There.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
May will be, but there are studies with millions of
people you wouldnore.
Speaker 15 (11:25):
There is this look, but you have this wrong. There's
a series of about thirteen studies that were done by
people we called biostitutes there. One of them was the
leading one, who are people who do these studies for
money for CDC were paid for by CDC in order
to create the illusion that vaccines don't cause autism. The
(11:46):
chief scientists was a guy called Paul Thornson, who CDC
late and his study is the most cited study for
this proposition. And Paul Thornson is now a fugitive. He's
wanted by Inner poll. He stole millions of dollars from
CDC that he had claimed to use on this study.
But he was building houses, buying motorcycles, and living a
(12:06):
life of luxury. And his study is absolute fraud. And
yet it is they have not retracted it because CDC
is a dishonest organization. It continues to be cited in
the literature, and there by the way, John, there are
hundreds and hundreds of sizes. I've written a book if
you're interested, called I'm arisol Let The Science Speak that
(12:27):
has I think fourteen hundred references and at over four
hundred studies cited that link on autism and other related
neurological injuries to vaccines. There is no question about it
if you actually read the literature, if you listen to
what the propaganda that CDC tells you, Yeah, vaccines don't
(12:48):
cause autism because it's propaganda. This is a captive agency,
that is that is intertwined and owned by the pharmaceutical industry.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
So why is it then that well, some of you
remember who listened to our show in Houston. Over the years,
I fought against the HPV human papalonavirus in Texas. My
friend was the governor and he was pushing for it
and I was pushing back. Well, there's a story. Economic
Times wrote a piece about it entitled controversial vaccine Studies.
(13:19):
Why are Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation under fire from
critics in India? What they did to those girls in
India in two thousand and nine is legendary in India
in a very very bad way. Listen to this.
Speaker 12 (13:33):
Welcome back what several Indian tribal girls used as guinea pigs.
The report allegends that two American farmer giants untested vaccine
was administered through thousands of tribal girls without proper study
and paperwork.
Speaker 16 (13:47):
India was among the hardest hit after Bollywood celebrities were
incentivized by the Gates Foundation to urge the public to
cement to mass vaccinations. In two thousand and nine, tribal
children were administered at the hp TV vaccine well for
twenty four thousand. Girls were told they were being given
wellness shots, in many cases without the informed consent of
a parent or a guardian.
Speaker 10 (14:09):
The people that were administering these vaccines lied to the
guardians of these girls and told the girls, Oh, this
is going to cure cancer.
Speaker 8 (14:18):
You're never going to have cancer.
Speaker 10 (14:19):
And these girls became severely injured, some of them developed caesars,
some of them developed cancer, and seven girls died and
there was no insurance, There was no assistance for them,
and the Gates Foundation denied that it had been clinical trials.
And it was so bad that the Parliament in India
created a task force. They studied it and they ticked
(14:41):
out the Gates Foundation.
Speaker 7 (14:43):
What India is about Eric country?
Speaker 17 (14:45):
Things happened you in the very barbaric me but I
was surprised to find an American organization operating in broad
day night doing things in a.
Speaker 7 (14:55):
Very very let's say, Indian fashion.
Speaker 17 (14:59):
And I took was that I want the whole procedio
to be investigated. The Indian Parliament formed a committee and
it was to be a rather surprising move because you
generally don't often have such a high level inquiry into
matters off theecting poor people. And that was such an
(15:21):
extraordinary report. I don't think Indian Parliament has ever come
up with such a scaling le. And the government's officials
came up and said, vision have authorized us, We're sorry,
we're not going to allow them again.
Speaker 7 (15:37):
And now they're back doing the same.
Speaker 15 (15:40):
Old Rest me or take me to Texas because I
haven't any to get out of this day.
Speaker 18 (15:47):
I think Michael Barry Robe show, I don't.
Speaker 17 (15:50):
Like to.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
JD Vance delivered a wing danger in Europe. I mean
it was glorious, just glorious, and Americans were rightfully, incredibly proud.
One of my favorite people to comment on news of
the day is Victor David Hanson, and here he is
(16:14):
explaining exactly what JD. Vance's speech meant in the bigger picture.
Speaker 19 (16:19):
Victor, why should Americans be concerned about what's going on
with free speech in Europe?
Speaker 9 (16:25):
Well though they are a partner in Western civilization and
there are ally we have seventy thousand troops there, but
more importantly, we're losing Europe.
Speaker 7 (16:34):
And JD.
Speaker 9 (16:35):
Vance's speech wasn't just directed at the ministers, nor even
the magat crowd at home. It was really to the
silent majority in Europe. And what he was saying was
this elite has failed, and anytime you fail, that's when
you start to censor. They failed on the border, on
the economy, on energy, on immigration, on defense, and so
(16:58):
in their failure they tried to stifle all forms of
dissent and free expression. And he was trying to give
encouragement to all the people of Europe who know that
and want to rise up. And that's why they hate
him so much. You know, Miss Brennan didn't understand that.
When the Nazis came to power and they started to
outlaw free speech, one of the mechanisms they used was
(17:21):
to say it was the German equivalent of disinformation or
hate speech or misinformation. That's how it always happens. Usually,
censorship is a twin of failure. When you're failing, you
cannot stand the light of criticism.
Speaker 19 (17:36):
And it's so remarkable to me that so many members
of the media don't understand the basics of what you
just said. Right there, listen to Brian Steltzer from CNN
talking about this.
Speaker 20 (17:49):
It's not really about free speech. It's about speech that
is favored versus disfavored. In the case of the president, now,
it's kind of like old speak versus news speak. To
borrow Freeze from Georgia Walls nineteen eighty four, he wants
to do away with old speaking. He's trying to erase
certain language. He's trying to promote and favor other language.
Speaker 19 (18:07):
Do you think he actually read nineteen eighty four?
Speaker 17 (18:10):
No.
Speaker 9 (18:10):
You know, the problem with all that rhetoric is they
never give a single example. Why don't they just tell
us this is exactly what Donald Trump did. He used
the government to do what case, point, time, location.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
They never do.
Speaker 9 (18:25):
It's just all blowhard megaphone and they can't and they
don't realize again that Joe Biden did more to harm
free speech than almost anybody, and he did it because
he had a failed agenda and people were speaking out
against it. And that's why the FBI began to partner
with Facebook. That's why fifty one intelligence authorities started to
(18:47):
lie on national TV to suppress dissent about the authenticity
of the laptop. That was the whole point about the
Russian collusion hoax. They wanted to suppress free speech because
their agenda was failing. And that's what's happening in Europe,
and they know that there's a populist nationalists blowback coming
and JD. Vance wants to assure people that we are
(19:09):
the friend of the real Europe, not the pseudo Europe,
not the pseudo elite that's hijacked the.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Continent the last twenty years. Ronald Reagan's media strategy was
to drop into what was known in the media as
flyover country. He would come to Houston, New Orleans, Montgomery, Alabama, Birmingham, Nashville.
He would go to places other than New York and
LA and DC and Chicago. And he said, I can't
(19:38):
trust the media to tell the story, so he went
directly two places to tell where the people are. That's
kind of what the JD Vance message was. And in
the meantime, listen to this. This is Polish Foreign Minister
Radislaw Sikorski telling Trump, you know, we control the Nobel
Peace Prize. If you want to get the Nobel Peace
(20:00):
then you need to do you know, you need to
be fair with Ukraine and Russia. I don't think Trump's
waiting on the prize. Thank you, though.
Speaker 20 (20:07):
What would you say to Donald Trump and Minister Kursk.
Speaker 21 (20:10):
I would tell him three things. Number One, Joe Biden
was your successor and predecessor, but he planted the flag
of the United States in downtown Kiev and declared on
behalf of the United States that the US will be
with Ukraine for as long as it takes until Ukraine
(20:34):
secures its independence. Therefore, the credibility of the United States
depends on how this war ends, not just the Trump
administration the United States itself. I would secondly tell him
that if you allow Putin to vassalize Ukraine, that'll send
a message to China that you can recover what you
(20:58):
regard as a renegade pros and that would have direct
consequences for US. Grant strategy for the US system of
alliances and possibly for the future of Taiwan.
Speaker 8 (21:12):
And I would thirdly tell him.
Speaker 21 (21:15):
That we Europeans control the Nobel Peace Prize. If you
want to earn it, the piece has to be fair.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
You silly oath Do you even realize that's the kind
of thing that Barack Obama cares about? Silly awards. I
can't tell you how many people I have known in
my life who've racked up every award. That's their big
thing is their resume building award winners. But don't ask
(21:55):
them to do anything because they don't do anything. They
just they build a resume, they win awards. That's the
reason associations have awards is to give them away. Meanwhile,
Donald Trump's first press secretary in his first administration, Sean Spicer,
talking about the fact that the reason Trump's doing what
he's doing is Europe has been taking advantage of you
(22:18):
and me in America and that's going to stop.
Speaker 22 (22:22):
Yeah, there's two separate issues that are happening, but on
parallel tracks. So when it comes to Ukraine, this is
where I think people are missing the where the ball
should be. Ultimately, we all want the war in Ukraine
to end. We want people to stop dying, property stop
being destroyed, money's being spent on needless killing. So everyone
gets their panties in a wad about the process. Oh,
(22:45):
who's involved at the end of the day, Zelenski said.
The other day he told Trump, guten fears you. He's
the only one they can kind of deal. You're the
only one of deal with them, And then everyone gets
offended that they go off to start to cut the deal.
Should Ukraine be involved at the end of the day,
of course they have to be. They can't not be
part of an ultimate solution. But for the US to
take the lead on this, considering the money that we're
(23:06):
spending in these stature that we have, who cares that
shouldn't be what the focus is. So I think you're
seeing this progress being made initially with Rubio and others
over there in Saudi. President will then eventually meet with
Putin at some point Zelenski's going to be involved in
the ultimate solution.
Speaker 8 (23:21):
And then the.
Speaker 22 (23:21):
Second piece is these you know that was led by
the JD Van speech in Munich on Friday, where everyone
got all offended by the language that JD used and
the assertiveness.
Speaker 8 (23:31):
Look, the way I look at this is two friends.
Speaker 22 (23:34):
At some point, if your friend keeps taking advantage of you,
you should.
Speaker 8 (23:39):
Call it out because they're not much of a friend.
Speaker 22 (23:41):
In Europe for a long time has taken advantage of
us financially, militarily, economically, and for us to finally call
them on the carpet and say, you, guys, we've been
your friend, we've had your back, and we've asked you
to make some commitments to your own neighborhood that you
failed to do is not rude.
Speaker 8 (24:01):
That's how you actually act among friends.
Speaker 22 (24:03):
So I actually think it's well timed that we call
them out for how they've treated the United States and
the support.
Speaker 8 (24:10):
That we've given them. So I'm happy with where we're going.
Speaker 22 (24:13):
I think that we could see some great things, and
people need to stay focused on what the ultimate prize is.
Speaker 8 (24:17):
Number one, ending the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 22 (24:19):
Number two is making sure that we have a stronger
and better relationship with Europe. Them being stronger, them contributing
to their national defense makes us better, it makes them better,
and it makes them feel safe.
Speaker 10 (24:30):
Listening to the Michael Berry Show podcast, is Sexy Be Sexy?
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Any advance have a moment during this presidential election where
he was asked about school shootings and he said that
we have a mental health crisis in this country. We've
got real problems in this country. People do not naturally
pick up a gun, go to the school where they attend,
and start shooting people until eventually they take their own life.
(24:59):
Is it's so unnatural? Is it's such an aberration. It's
not been done throughout history? So what changed? What you're
going to hear here is a flashback to nineteen ninety
one and an FDA hearing, and the hearing is about
SSRIs as they're called. You may know what an SSRII
is if you have a teenager and doctors tried to
(25:21):
prescribe this. It's called a serotonin selective re uptake inhibitor.
And what they do is they increase the levels of
serotonin in the brain, which is a neurotransmitter that plays
a role in mood regulation. Now, I'm going to make
(25:44):
the crudest and perhaps least useful analogy, but I'm going
to make it anyway. Let's say you've got a friend
and y'all ended up out one night watching a football game,
and he got so drunk that he said some InCred
I believe, inappropriate things to a woman, maybe touched her inappropriately,
(26:04):
or maybe he wanted to fight a guy twice his size,
or maybe he wrapped his truck around a tree. He
wasn't himself at that moment. Now there's liability, because there
has to be don't let yourself get put into that situation.
Prepair ahead. But can we agree that at that moment
he was impaired and not his usual self. And many
(26:26):
times he'll wake up the next morning, you tell him
what he did, and you go he'll say, no, way,
yeah way, yeah, you did it, you did it well.
I think a lot of people struggle to understand how
mood altering drugs like this can make someone an entirely
different person to take their own life, to see only
(26:46):
desperation and no way out, and leave some people with
the opinion that if I'm going to take my own life,
I'm going to take the life of people that I
don't like. Also, there can be no doubt that we
have seen school shootings on a level that is unimaginable,
and you can't just say, well, it's the music. We've
always had music. Well, young people today, it's always been
(27:09):
young people today. That's always been the case. What if
what if we're prescribing drugs for kids that a rare
few of them react in such a manner that is
beyond the pale of what we can understand. So we
go back to nineteen ninety one, an FDA hearing, hearing
it the Food and Drug Administration, and these drugs had
(27:30):
just come out the SSRIs. They were being prescribed and
still are in epic levels to treat depression, anxiety, all
sorts of mental health conditions, and the FDA was deluged
with reports suicide, homicide, mass shootings caused by these quote antidepressants.
(27:53):
I'm not trying to absolve anybody from liability. I'm saying,
just like you were lied to during COVID, just like
the health experts didn't serve you or Grandma during COVID.
This needs to be studied, and I feel confident that RFK,
who's talking about this, is determined to do so, and
(28:14):
big Pharma stands to lose a lot of money and
we stand to gain back our children, our school safety,
and our country. Now let me say before we play this,
I can't say this clearly enough. I'm not making excuses
for school shooters. I'm not and I'm not saying every
school shooter was under this influence or that was the reason.
(28:35):
And I'm not saying Big Pharma wants this to happen.
They wish it wouldn't because it's bad for business. I
am saying that the reports have come in for thirty
four years now, and it's time we take back the
health care of our children. It's time we stop putting
poison into our children's bodies and minds. And this hearing
(28:58):
in nineteen ninety one should wake you up at least
enough to ask questions, what drugs are you giving your kids? Well,
doctor said he had to take it. Do you hunt
You know how many people were under a doctor's orders
and care when they shot up a school under the
influence of that drug.
Speaker 23 (29:18):
The topic for today's Advisory Committee meeting is the possibility
of a causal linkage between the emergence and or intensification
of suicidal thoughts and acts, suicidality, that is, and or
other violent behaviors, and the use of antidepressant drugs.
Speaker 24 (29:36):
I know with absolute certainty that if Charles had any
idea of the side effects of prozac, he would never
have taken it. This drug is most assuredly responsible for
any torment or suffering and the eventual suicide of my husband.
I want people to be aware of what can happen
when you take the drug Prozac.
Speaker 6 (29:58):
I took the nine millimeters out of sat down on
the bed and put the gun to my head. I
wasn't clear on how to shoot the gun, so I
lowered it and pulled the trigger. It fired into the
bed as I went to hold it back up to
my head. The feather touch trigger had tripped after that
first shot, and I blew a four inch hole out
the back of my arm instead of my head. Prozac
(30:21):
did this to me. Had someone looked further into prozac,
believed me, even mentioned early on in the so called
remote possibility that prozac could cause any of these adverse effects,
especially the act of putting a loaded gun to my
head to want to die so violently, steps could have
been taken to avoid it.
Speaker 8 (30:38):
Thank god I was a lousy shot. Oh this is
a real night.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
May something I have to live with every day.
Speaker 18 (30:45):
I had two sons, David Lee, age eight, Billy sixteen.
My wife twenty year is all gone. I'll tell you
why after being on a prozact for twenty one days,
my wife shot and killed both of these two boys
right here. She turned to go on to herself and
shot herself twice.
Speaker 8 (31:04):
Now she's in.
Speaker 18 (31:04):
Jail for myrtle.
Speaker 25 (31:05):
One woman earlier spoke of nearly committing suicide in front
of her children.
Speaker 10 (31:10):
My sister did commit suicide in front of Lindsay.
Speaker 25 (31:12):
Another woman spoke of hollow point bullets.
Speaker 8 (31:14):
That's what my sister used to do it.
Speaker 13 (31:16):
My sister would have never never killed herself in front
of this little girl.
Speaker 8 (31:21):
She would have never done that.
Speaker 7 (31:22):
Prozac induced her to do that.
Speaker 25 (31:26):
I'm against prozac because it killed my father. Unfortunately, with
my dad, we didn't have time to notice too many changes,
except that he became withdrawn and agitated, but by that
time it.
Speaker 8 (31:39):
Was too late.
Speaker 25 (31:41):
Got up at nine o'clock in the morning, took a
twelve inch butcher knife out of the kitchen drawer and
stabbed himself violently in the abdomen once, and then proceeded
to do it twice.
Speaker 3 (31:55):
My father died when I was sixteen. I was date
raped when I was fourteen. I was date raped again
when I was eighteen. I obviously had a lot on
my mind, so they told me prozac was the quick fix.
I tried to kill myself twice. I was unsuccessful both times,
and I thank god I am alive today. I stand
before you because I want you to be aware of
(32:16):
what is going on in real live people. If one
of you will simply listen to what I have to
say and bring life or at least give somebody the
chance a future, unsuspecting victim the chance to have a life,
and I thank you, and I hope that you heard
what I said.
Speaker 7 (32:35):
I was totally out of control.
Speaker 26 (32:37):
My friends were gassed at my deteria writing mental stake,
but we're afraid to speak to me about it because
of my agitated state of mind during this time. It
is a miracle I did not harm myself. For others,
I had become a menace to society, and that FDA
is allowing this to happen. I want to know why
how many more people are going to be killed in
(32:58):
Maine Before you do something. You have the power to
change things. You have the power to listen to what
we say and investigate what we say.
Speaker 23 (33:06):
I do not find from the evidence today that there
is credible evidence to support a conclusion that antidepressant drugs
cause the emergence and or the intensification of suicidality and
or other violent behaviors.
It's that time. Time time, time, Luck and load. The
Michael Varry Show is on the air.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
The last week. There was a story. I'm telling him
a stack here. I used to love when Rush would
go through his stack. I always wanted to have a stack,
or to go through. Boy, there's a stack of stuff
I could There's so many, so many stories we could
go through today. But in my stack, if I can
(00:54):
find it, I have an embarrassment of riches. Here. Here
it is. It's clip number six one five, and it's
Jonathan Turley talking about President Trump doing what he promised
he would do.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
Well.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
He's carrying out those campaign pledges. He wants to shrink government,
he wants to find fraud and to do that he
needs to look at the books. And I just find
any real effort to prevent that likely to be reversed
on appeal.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
You know, you'd think, why would taxpayers be opposed to that?
But you would expect Jonathan Turley to be interviewed on
Fox News and say that what about when Dana Bash,
who is an unabashed liberal and a terrible journalist, what
(01:47):
about when she has to listen to the fact that
voters who voted for Biden in twenty twenty and switched
to Trump in twenty twenty four. What about when they
tell CNN and she has to sit there like she's
constipated to look on her face as they tell CNN
they like what Trump's doing.
Speaker 5 (02:09):
Talked to some Arizona voters who have switched from voting
for Joe Biden in twenty twenty to Trump in twenty
twenty four, and so far they mostly like what they see.
Speaker 6 (02:19):
I just think he's trying to get America back on
track as quickly as possible given the seat.
Speaker 7 (02:25):
That was left in from the previous administration.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
It feels more married and transparency that I'm getting from
the administration so far.
Speaker 7 (02:33):
I approve of a lot of.
Speaker 8 (02:34):
The stuff that he's doing with the border and.
Speaker 9 (02:36):
Everything other countries I noticed that were to give you
taken seriously, But.
Speaker 10 (02:42):
In most part, I feel like he's on the right
track by keeping transgenders out of women's sports as number.
Speaker 5 (02:49):
One, all eleven Biden Trump voters say they approve of
Donald Trump's first weeks in office.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
When you have CNN running a story about how high
Donald Trump's approval rating is and compare that to Mitch McConnell,
who is determined to thwart him at every turn, poor
old man. But the people love what Trump is doing,
(03:21):
and that's what's important.
Speaker 11 (03:23):
Talk a little bit about Mitch McConnell and the chance
he's going to become a folk hero.
Speaker 8 (03:27):
It ain't going to likely happen. Ain't gonna likely.
Speaker 11 (03:29):
Happen, because I want you to look at his net
approval rays he is underwater with everybody. He has got
the ultimate or might say, some might say sad trifecta
of being underwater overall minus thirty nine points, thirty nine
percentage points more of the electric disapprovas for the jobs
that he has done. How about Democrats, he's fifty eight
points underwater.
Speaker 8 (03:50):
My goodness, gracious.
Speaker 11 (03:51):
The chance that all of a sudden, just because he
casts three votes against Trump, that he's somehow become a
folk here with them is absolutely frankly insane. And then
with the Republicans, of course, he's gone up against Trump before,
and that's why he's seventeen points underwater Republicans. When you're
underwater with Democrats, Republicans and overall, the chance that you're
going to become a folk hero, it seems rather low to.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
Me, Paula indeed.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
All right.
Speaker 5 (04:14):
Of course, the next question is how does his popularity
compare with that of President Trump?
Speaker 11 (04:20):
Yeah, so you know, I think Donald Trump will like
these numbers. All right, So let's take a look. This
is the net approval rating I got overall and I
got with Republicans. Look how much higher Donald Trump is
overall versus Mitch mcconnall. Look at that Trump is on
the positive side of the ledger at plus three. Mitch McConnell,
of course underwater overall at minus thirty nine. So Trump
is forty two points higher the Mitch McConnell is overall
(04:44):
among Republicans. Of course, Donald Trump very popular there with
a plus eighty two point net approval rating. Of course,
Mitch mcconnll again underwater at minus seventeen. So you do
the math quickly here eighty two seventeen. That is nearly
one hundred points higher that Donald Trump is grover rating
wise with Republicans that Mitch McConnell is. The bottom line
is that when it comes to the popularity battle, Donald
(05:06):
Trump comes out way, way, way ahead of Mitch McConnell.
Speaker 5 (05:12):
Okay, okay, but is this just a problem with majority leaders.
Is this like a heavy is the head situation? I mean,
put this into historical conduct text. Where does he stack
up against other majority leaders?
Speaker 12 (05:24):
Yeah?
Speaker 11 (05:24):
I always like going through the history books, right, I'll
love spreadsheets. I love history books. So let's go take
a look through the history books. We'll take a look
at the net popularity ratings of GOP center leaders their
final ratings as majority leaders.
Speaker 8 (05:36):
Take a look here.
Speaker 11 (05:37):
Mitch McConnell again underwater at minus thirty nine points.
Speaker 8 (05:40):
How about his predecessor, doctor.
Speaker 11 (05:41):
Bill Frist from the Great State of Tennessee. He was
underwater two, but he was only at minus eight points.
Trent Lott was at plus five points from the Great
State of Mississippian. Of course, Bob Dole from the Great
State of Kansas, he was above water as well at
plus six points. So the bottom line is Mitch McConnell
a historical anomaly when it comes to Republican leaders, is far, far,
(06:01):
far more underwater than any of the past GOP leaders
over the last forty years.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Paula and let's take it to break on this one.
Also appearing on CNN, Frank Lutz talking about voters who
voted for Biden and Clinton, but then voted for Trump
in twenty twenty four. So they didn't vote for him
the first time in sixteen, didn't vote for him in
(06:28):
twenty they did vote for him this time, and guess what,
they love what he's doing.
Speaker 13 (06:35):
We want to have you on because you do a
lot of focus groups. You really get behind the numbers,
the poll numbers, to the sentiments of voters.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
And it's so interesting.
Speaker 13 (06:43):
You've been speaking with a number of voters who were
Hillary Clinton twenty sixteen, Joe Biden twenty twenty, and then
went for Trump in twenty twenty four. How are these
folks seeing the early days of Trump's second term pretty well?
Speaker 8 (06:58):
Really?
Speaker 14 (06:59):
And they react to it because they love the pace
of change. They were very fed up over the last
four years. They wanted action, they wanted results. They looked
at prices, they looked at affordability, looked at immigration, and
they didn't see anything happening. They still don't like what
he says, but they like what he does. And these
are Democrats now who felt that they were not securing
(07:23):
the border, they were doing nothing to prevent illegal immigration,
that nothing was actually happening. They wanted to see a
reduction and waite for Washington spending, and they're seeing that.
So what they tell me is, I wish you'd be
a little bit less rude. But at the same time,
they like what he's doing. They believe he's serious about it,
and for the first time they have confidence in the future,
(07:44):
which is why you now see some significant shifts in
the polling about the expectations for the direction in the
coming years.
Speaker 13 (07:52):
It's a big wake up call for Democrats.
Speaker 14 (07:54):
I'm waiting for them to get a message. I'm waiting
for them to unify and to understand that to and
to be the resistance, which is what.
Speaker 8 (08:04):
Some of them used that phrase.
Speaker 14 (08:05):
That's not what democrats in grassroots areas want from them.
They may not want the approach that Trump is doing
President Trump, by the way, I now know to say
President Trump, but they do want action and they don't
see action from the Democrats.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
If you can't say something nice, you can always say it.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
On the Michael Berry Show, let's talk about rfk Junior Flamma.
He told the story a few days ago about his
uncle John F. Kennedy in nineteen sixty three awarding the
highest civilian honor to Francis Kelsey but something happened, and
he's going to tell it. And if you remember the
(08:46):
drug deltimone, it's one of the worst debacles in American history.
It's not as bad as the COVID SHOT's going to
turn out to be. But babies were born with horrible,
horrible deformities. Horrible, But listen to the story.
Speaker 15 (09:01):
My uncle awarded John F. Kennedy the highest civilian honor.
The Francis Kelsey. Francis Kelsey was a young scientist at
an i age who came in and objected to the
panel having approved solidamide for American children. All the sciences
that day, they were doing it in Europe, all the
sciencests of that day, and the scientific panels that worked
(09:24):
for the agency approved green lighted solidamide.
Speaker 8 (09:27):
She stood up and screamed and thought and.
Speaker 15 (09:31):
Risked her job and risked her reputation, and she blocked
it in our country. Three years later, everybody knew that
recognized that she was a hero and a savior of
our children because we were not getting the kind of terrible,
diabolical deformities as they were experiencing in Europe. My uncle
gave it the highest civilian honor because she questioned science
(09:53):
and was courageous enough to stand up and say, I
don't care what happens to me.
Speaker 8 (09:59):
This cannot happened.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Francis Kelsey. That's important because so many people, so many
people won't speak out because it might cost me my job.
One might get criticized. When my wife said, I can't
speak out about what the school's doing to my kid
because they'll be hard on my kid, you've just given up.
You've just said that they're in charge, not you. When
you do that. Here is RFK Junior with John Stossel,
(10:23):
and he's asked the question if he would give his
children vaccines today, let's listen and discuss.
Speaker 8 (10:30):
And you still say that autism is caused by vaccines.
Speaker 15 (10:34):
Yeah, autism is caused by vaccines. And by the way,
CDC's own data, you know. And with that, they if
they did a study called the very straight in the
study in nineteen eighty nine, and they looked at the
Hepatitis BE vaccine. They looked at children and from the
(10:56):
biggest database in the world. The vaccine is hefty data length.
The children who got the happetititized B vaccine during their
first thirty days, and they compare those to kids who
got it later or didn't get it at all, and
there was a thirteen one hundred and fifty percent elevated
risk for autism among the people who got There.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
May will be, but there are studies with millions of
people you wouldnore.
Speaker 15 (11:25):
There is this look, but you have this wrong. There's
a series of about thirteen studies that were done by
people we called biostitutes there. One of them was the
leading one, who are people who do these studies for
money for CDC were paid for by CDC in order
to create the illusion that vaccines don't cause autism. The
(11:46):
chief scientists was a guy called Paul Thornson, who CDC
late and his study is the most cited study for
this proposition. And Paul Thornson is now a fugitive. He's
wanted by Inner poll. He stole millions of dollars from
CDC that he had claimed to use on this study.
But he was building houses, buying motorcycles, and living a
(12:06):
life of luxury. And his study is absolute fraud. And
yet it is they have not retracted it because CDC
is a dishonest organization. It continues to be cited in
the literature, and there by the way, John, there are
hundreds and hundreds of sizes. I've written a book if
you're interested, called I'm arisol Let The Science Speak that
(12:27):
has I think fourteen hundred references and at over four
hundred studies cited that link on autism and other related
neurological injuries to vaccines. There is no question about it
if you actually read the literature, if you listen to
what the propaganda that CDC tells you, Yeah, vaccines don't
(12:48):
cause autism because it's propaganda. This is a captive agency,
that is that is intertwined and owned by the pharmaceutical industry.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
So why is it then that well, some of you
remember who listened to our show in Houston. Over the years,
I fought against the HPV human papalonavirus in Texas. My
friend was the governor and he was pushing for it
and I was pushing back. Well, there's a story. Economic
Times wrote a piece about it entitled controversial vaccine Studies.
(13:19):
Why are Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation under fire from
critics in India? What they did to those girls in
India in two thousand and nine is legendary in India
in a very very bad way. Listen to this.
Speaker 12 (13:33):
Welcome back what several Indian tribal girls used as guinea pigs.
The report allegends that two American farmer giants untested vaccine
was administered through thousands of tribal girls without proper study
and paperwork.
Speaker 16 (13:47):
India was among the hardest hit after Bollywood celebrities were
incentivized by the Gates Foundation to urge the public to
cement to mass vaccinations. In two thousand and nine, tribal
children were administered at the hp TV vaccine well for
twenty four thousand. Girls were told they were being given
wellness shots, in many cases without the informed consent of
a parent or a guardian.
Speaker 10 (14:09):
The people that were administering these vaccines lied to the
guardians of these girls and told the girls, Oh, this
is going to cure cancer.
Speaker 8 (14:18):
You're never going to have cancer.
Speaker 10 (14:19):
And these girls became severely injured, some of them developed caesars,
some of them developed cancer, and seven girls died and
there was no insurance, There was no assistance for them,
and the Gates Foundation denied that it had been clinical trials.
And it was so bad that the Parliament in India
created a task force. They studied it and they ticked
(14:41):
out the Gates Foundation.
Speaker 7 (14:43):
What India is about Eric country?
Speaker 17 (14:45):
Things happened you in the very barbaric me but I
was surprised to find an American organization operating in broad
day night doing things in a.
Speaker 7 (14:55):
Very very let's say, Indian fashion.
Speaker 17 (14:59):
And I took was that I want the whole procedio
to be investigated. The Indian Parliament formed a committee and
it was to be a rather surprising move because you
generally don't often have such a high level inquiry into
matters off theecting poor people. And that was such an
(15:21):
extraordinary report. I don't think Indian Parliament has ever come
up with such a scaling le. And the government's officials
came up and said, vision have authorized us, We're sorry,
we're not going to allow them again.
Speaker 7 (15:37):
And now they're back doing the same.
Speaker 15 (15:40):
Old Rest me or take me to Texas because I
haven't any to get out of this day.
Speaker 18 (15:47):
I think Michael Barry Robe show, I don't.
Speaker 17 (15:50):
Like to.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
JD Vance delivered a wing danger in Europe. I mean
it was glorious, just glorious, and Americans were rightfully, incredibly proud.
One of my favorite people to comment on news of
the day is Victor David Hanson, and here he is
(16:14):
explaining exactly what JD. Vance's speech meant in the bigger picture.
Speaker 19 (16:19):
Victor, why should Americans be concerned about what's going on
with free speech in Europe?
Speaker 9 (16:25):
Well though they are a partner in Western civilization and
there are ally we have seventy thousand troops there, but
more importantly, we're losing Europe.
Speaker 7 (16:34):
And JD.
Speaker 9 (16:35):
Vance's speech wasn't just directed at the ministers, nor even
the magat crowd at home. It was really to the
silent majority in Europe. And what he was saying was
this elite has failed, and anytime you fail, that's when
you start to censor. They failed on the border, on
the economy, on energy, on immigration, on defense, and so
(16:58):
in their failure they tried to stifle all forms of
dissent and free expression. And he was trying to give
encouragement to all the people of Europe who know that
and want to rise up. And that's why they hate
him so much. You know, Miss Brennan didn't understand that.
When the Nazis came to power and they started to
outlaw free speech, one of the mechanisms they used was
(17:21):
to say it was the German equivalent of disinformation or
hate speech or misinformation. That's how it always happens. Usually,
censorship is a twin of failure. When you're failing, you
cannot stand the light of criticism.
Speaker 19 (17:36):
And it's so remarkable to me that so many members
of the media don't understand the basics of what you
just said. Right there, listen to Brian Steltzer from CNN
talking about this.
Speaker 20 (17:49):
It's not really about free speech. It's about speech that
is favored versus disfavored. In the case of the president, now,
it's kind of like old speak versus news speak. To
borrow Freeze from Georgia Walls nineteen eighty four, he wants
to do away with old speaking. He's trying to erase
certain language. He's trying to promote and favor other language.
Speaker 19 (18:07):
Do you think he actually read nineteen eighty four?
Speaker 17 (18:10):
No.
Speaker 9 (18:10):
You know, the problem with all that rhetoric is they
never give a single example. Why don't they just tell
us this is exactly what Donald Trump did. He used
the government to do what case, point, time, location.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
They never do.
Speaker 9 (18:25):
It's just all blowhard megaphone and they can't and they
don't realize again that Joe Biden did more to harm
free speech than almost anybody, and he did it because
he had a failed agenda and people were speaking out
against it. And that's why the FBI began to partner
with Facebook. That's why fifty one intelligence authorities started to
(18:47):
lie on national TV to suppress dissent about the authenticity
of the laptop. That was the whole point about the
Russian collusion hoax. They wanted to suppress free speech because
their agenda was failing. And that's what's happening in Europe,
and they know that there's a populist nationalists blowback coming
and JD. Vance wants to assure people that we are
(19:09):
the friend of the real Europe, not the pseudo Europe,
not the pseudo elite that's hijacked the.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Continent the last twenty years. Ronald Reagan's media strategy was
to drop into what was known in the media as
flyover country. He would come to Houston, New Orleans, Montgomery, Alabama, Birmingham, Nashville.
He would go to places other than New York and
LA and DC and Chicago. And he said, I can't
(19:38):
trust the media to tell the story, so he went
directly two places to tell where the people are. That's
kind of what the JD Vance message was. And in
the meantime, listen to this. This is Polish Foreign Minister
Radislaw Sikorski telling Trump, you know, we control the Nobel
Peace Prize. If you want to get the Nobel Peace
(20:00):
then you need to do you know, you need to
be fair with Ukraine and Russia. I don't think Trump's
waiting on the prize. Thank you, though.
Speaker 20 (20:07):
What would you say to Donald Trump and Minister Kursk.
Speaker 21 (20:10):
I would tell him three things. Number One, Joe Biden
was your successor and predecessor, but he planted the flag
of the United States in downtown Kiev and declared on
behalf of the United States that the US will be
with Ukraine for as long as it takes until Ukraine
(20:34):
secures its independence. Therefore, the credibility of the United States
depends on how this war ends, not just the Trump
administration the United States itself. I would secondly tell him
that if you allow Putin to vassalize Ukraine, that'll send
a message to China that you can recover what you
(20:58):
regard as a renegade pros and that would have direct
consequences for US. Grant strategy for the US system of
alliances and possibly for the future of Taiwan.
Speaker 8 (21:12):
And I would thirdly tell him.
Speaker 21 (21:15):
That we Europeans control the Nobel Peace Prize. If you
want to earn it, the piece has to be fair.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
You silly oath Do you even realize that's the kind
of thing that Barack Obama cares about? Silly awards. I
can't tell you how many people I have known in
my life who've racked up every award. That's their big
thing is their resume building award winners. But don't ask
(21:55):
them to do anything because they don't do anything. They
just they build a resume, they win awards. That's the
reason associations have awards is to give them away. Meanwhile,
Donald Trump's first press secretary in his first administration, Sean Spicer,
talking about the fact that the reason Trump's doing what
he's doing is Europe has been taking advantage of you
(22:18):
and me in America and that's going to stop.
Speaker 22 (22:22):
Yeah, there's two separate issues that are happening, but on
parallel tracks. So when it comes to Ukraine, this is
where I think people are missing the where the ball
should be. Ultimately, we all want the war in Ukraine
to end. We want people to stop dying, property stop
being destroyed, money's being spent on needless killing. So everyone
gets their panties in a wad about the process. Oh,
(22:45):
who's involved at the end of the day, Zelenski said.
The other day he told Trump, guten fears you. He's
the only one they can kind of deal. You're the
only one of deal with them, And then everyone gets
offended that they go off to start to cut the deal.
Should Ukraine be involved at the end of the day,
of course they have to be. They can't not be
part of an ultimate solution. But for the US to
take the lead on this, considering the money that we're
(23:06):
spending in these stature that we have, who cares that
shouldn't be what the focus is. So I think you're
seeing this progress being made initially with Rubio and others
over there in Saudi. President will then eventually meet with
Putin at some point Zelenski's going to be involved in
the ultimate solution.
Speaker 8 (23:21):
And then the.
Speaker 22 (23:21):
Second piece is these you know that was led by
the JD Van speech in Munich on Friday, where everyone
got all offended by the language that JD used and
the assertiveness.
Speaker 8 (23:31):
Look, the way I look at this is two friends.
Speaker 22 (23:34):
At some point, if your friend keeps taking advantage of you,
you should.
Speaker 8 (23:39):
Call it out because they're not much of a friend.
Speaker 22 (23:41):
In Europe for a long time has taken advantage of
us financially, militarily, economically, and for us to finally call
them on the carpet and say, you, guys, we've been
your friend, we've had your back, and we've asked you
to make some commitments to your own neighborhood that you
failed to do is not rude.
Speaker 8 (24:01):
That's how you actually act among friends.
Speaker 22 (24:03):
So I actually think it's well timed that we call
them out for how they've treated the United States and
the support.
Speaker 8 (24:10):
That we've given them. So I'm happy with where we're going.
Speaker 22 (24:13):
I think that we could see some great things, and
people need to stay focused on what the ultimate prize is.
Speaker 8 (24:17):
Number one, ending the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 22 (24:19):
Number two is making sure that we have a stronger
and better relationship with Europe. Them being stronger, them contributing
to their national defense makes us better, it makes them better,
and it makes them feel safe.
Speaker 10 (24:30):
Listening to the Michael Berry Show podcast, is Sexy Be Sexy?
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Any advance have a moment during this presidential election where
he was asked about school shootings and he said that
we have a mental health crisis in this country. We've
got real problems in this country. People do not naturally
pick up a gun, go to the school where they attend,
and start shooting people until eventually they take their own life.
(24:59):
Is it's so unnatural? Is it's such an aberration. It's
not been done throughout history? So what changed? What you're
going to hear here is a flashback to nineteen ninety
one and an FDA hearing, and the hearing is about
SSRIs as they're called. You may know what an SSRII
is if you have a teenager and doctors tried to
(25:21):
prescribe this. It's called a serotonin selective re uptake inhibitor.
And what they do is they increase the levels of
serotonin in the brain, which is a neurotransmitter that plays
a role in mood regulation. Now, I'm going to make
(25:44):
the crudest and perhaps least useful analogy, but I'm going
to make it anyway. Let's say you've got a friend
and y'all ended up out one night watching a football game,
and he got so drunk that he said some InCred
I believe, inappropriate things to a woman, maybe touched her inappropriately,
(26:04):
or maybe he wanted to fight a guy twice his size,
or maybe he wrapped his truck around a tree. He
wasn't himself at that moment. Now there's liability, because there
has to be don't let yourself get put into that situation.
Prepair ahead. But can we agree that at that moment
he was impaired and not his usual self. And many
(26:26):
times he'll wake up the next morning, you tell him
what he did, and you go he'll say, no, way,
yeah way, yeah, you did it, you did it well.
I think a lot of people struggle to understand how
mood altering drugs like this can make someone an entirely
different person to take their own life, to see only
(26:46):
desperation and no way out, and leave some people with
the opinion that if I'm going to take my own life,
I'm going to take the life of people that I
don't like. Also, there can be no doubt that we
have seen school shootings on a level that is unimaginable,
and you can't just say, well, it's the music. We've
always had music. Well, young people today, it's always been
(27:09):
young people today. That's always been the case. What if
what if we're prescribing drugs for kids that a rare
few of them react in such a manner that is
beyond the pale of what we can understand. So we
go back to nineteen ninety one, an FDA hearing, hearing
it the Food and Drug Administration, and these drugs had
(27:30):
just come out the SSRIs. They were being prescribed and
still are in epic levels to treat depression, anxiety, all
sorts of mental health conditions, and the FDA was deluged
with reports suicide, homicide, mass shootings caused by these quote antidepressants.
(27:53):
I'm not trying to absolve anybody from liability. I'm saying,
just like you were lied to during COVID, just like
the health experts didn't serve you or Grandma during COVID.
This needs to be studied, and I feel confident that RFK,
who's talking about this, is determined to do so, and
(28:14):
big Pharma stands to lose a lot of money and
we stand to gain back our children, our school safety,
and our country. Now let me say before we play this,
I can't say this clearly enough. I'm not making excuses
for school shooters. I'm not and I'm not saying every
school shooter was under this influence or that was the reason.
(28:35):
And I'm not saying Big Pharma wants this to happen.
They wish it wouldn't because it's bad for business. I
am saying that the reports have come in for thirty
four years now, and it's time we take back the
health care of our children. It's time we stop putting
poison into our children's bodies and minds. And this hearing
(28:58):
in nineteen ninety one should wake you up at least
enough to ask questions, what drugs are you giving your kids? Well,
doctor said he had to take it. Do you hunt
You know how many people were under a doctor's orders
and care when they shot up a school under the
influence of that drug.
Speaker 23 (29:18):
The topic for today's Advisory Committee meeting is the possibility
of a causal linkage between the emergence and or intensification
of suicidal thoughts and acts, suicidality, that is, and or
other violent behaviors, and the use of antidepressant drugs.
Speaker 24 (29:36):
I know with absolute certainty that if Charles had any
idea of the side effects of prozac, he would never
have taken it. This drug is most assuredly responsible for
any torment or suffering and the eventual suicide of my husband.
I want people to be aware of what can happen
when you take the drug Prozac.
Speaker 6 (29:58):
I took the nine millimeters out of sat down on
the bed and put the gun to my head. I
wasn't clear on how to shoot the gun, so I
lowered it and pulled the trigger. It fired into the
bed as I went to hold it back up to
my head. The feather touch trigger had tripped after that
first shot, and I blew a four inch hole out
the back of my arm instead of my head. Prozac
(30:21):
did this to me. Had someone looked further into prozac,
believed me, even mentioned early on in the so called
remote possibility that prozac could cause any of these adverse effects,
especially the act of putting a loaded gun to my
head to want to die so violently, steps could have
been taken to avoid it.
Speaker 8 (30:38):
Thank god I was a lousy shot. Oh this is
a real night.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
May something I have to live with every day.
Speaker 18 (30:45):
I had two sons, David Lee, age eight, Billy sixteen.
My wife twenty year is all gone. I'll tell you
why after being on a prozact for twenty one days,
my wife shot and killed both of these two boys
right here. She turned to go on to herself and
shot herself twice.
Speaker 8 (31:04):
Now she's in.
Speaker 18 (31:04):
Jail for myrtle.
Speaker 25 (31:05):
One woman earlier spoke of nearly committing suicide in front
of her children.
Speaker 10 (31:10):
My sister did commit suicide in front of Lindsay.
Speaker 25 (31:12):
Another woman spoke of hollow point bullets.
Speaker 8 (31:14):
That's what my sister used to do it.
Speaker 13 (31:16):
My sister would have never never killed herself in front
of this little girl.
Speaker 8 (31:21):
She would have never done that.
Speaker 7 (31:22):
Prozac induced her to do that.
Speaker 25 (31:26):
I'm against prozac because it killed my father. Unfortunately, with
my dad, we didn't have time to notice too many changes,
except that he became withdrawn and agitated, but by that
time it.
Speaker 8 (31:39):
Was too late.
Speaker 25 (31:41):
Got up at nine o'clock in the morning, took a
twelve inch butcher knife out of the kitchen drawer and
stabbed himself violently in the abdomen once, and then proceeded
to do it twice.
Speaker 3 (31:55):
My father died when I was sixteen. I was date
raped when I was fourteen. I was date raped again
when I was eighteen. I obviously had a lot on
my mind, so they told me prozac was the quick fix.
I tried to kill myself twice. I was unsuccessful both times,
and I thank god I am alive today. I stand
before you because I want you to be aware of
(32:16):
what is going on in real live people. If one
of you will simply listen to what I have to
say and bring life or at least give somebody the
chance a future, unsuspecting victim the chance to have a life,
and I thank you, and I hope that you heard
what I said.
Speaker 7 (32:35):
I was totally out of control.
Speaker 26 (32:37):
My friends were gassed at my deteria writing mental stake,
but we're afraid to speak to me about it because
of my agitated state of mind during this time. It
is a miracle I did not harm myself. For others,
I had become a menace to society, and that FDA
is allowing this to happen. I want to know why
how many more people are going to be killed in
(32:58):
Maine Before you do something. You have the power to
change things. You have the power to listen to what
we say and investigate what we say.
Speaker 23 (33:06):
I do not find from the evidence today that there
is credible evidence to support a conclusion that antidepressant drugs
cause the emergence and or the intensification of suicidality and
or other violent behaviors.
Popular Podcasts
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!