Roman Bystrianyk on why no vaccine, ever, has worked

Jerm is joined by Roman Bystrianyk to explore why vaccines may not deserve the credit they’ve been given. They look at history, sanitation, polio, and what really drove the decline in disease.

More Jerm Warfare: https://www.ukcolumn.org/series/jerm-warfare

Episode Transcript

(00:36):
You didn't just write a book. You and Susan Humphries Carlson,
one of the pivotal books on the history of vaccines.
I mean she wasn't Rogan recentlychatting about.
It. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I mean, that's not what I intended to do.
I was just doing research and I just, after a while, I had
enough information and data thatI thought I should share it
because no one seemed to know it.
Why? I don't, you know, I was like,

(00:58):
why wouldn't people know this? It's it's in the CDC databases.
It's in National Health Service databases.
It's all through the medical literature.
So why wouldn't anybody know it?But apparently they didn't.
I have I have the 10th anniversary edition because it's
where's where's the camera? There it is Wait, there we go.
No, there we go. There it is.

(01:18):
And I have the one that you never speak about, but the.
Oh yeah, The Companion. Yeah, that's that.
That was fun. That's got a timeline in it and
hundreds of doctors quotes that were against vaccination and
against the medical system in general and all sorts of goodies
in there. But it's not a book to read.
It's just more of a reference. Here's another good book, not by
you, but Turtles All the Way Down.

(01:41):
It's a great accessory to to your book.
I've heard that, but I haven't read it and I generally don't
read other books. I agree.
That sounds. That sounded really stupid,
didn't it? I don't read the current books,
I read old stuff. It's like a musician saying I
don't listen to any other music,I just.
Listen to my no, when I when I started this, I just said I'm

(02:02):
just going to read all the literature and ignore any
current like books that have been written so I wouldn't get
biassed right. So, so I kind of stick with
that. So I don't really read any.
Roman, this is your first appearance on my UK column show.
So for my UK column audience whomight not know who you are, what
is your background? Very quickly, let's get it out

(02:25):
of the way so that it's not boring.
Well, it is boring. So I have an engineering
background. I did computers for a lot of
years and at one point I had young kids.
I'm going to keep it short, right?
So I had young kids and I decided that after listening to
the Gary Knoll programme that, you know, I was a little worried
about neurological damage of from vaccines.

(02:46):
I didn't think it was that big of a deal.
But I did some research and I started reading books and I
found a book by Neil Miller. And then there was a chart
showing the client and mortalityrate of measles by 95% before
there was a vaccine in 1963. And I thought, well, this guy's
a lunatic. This can't be true because I had
a belief system in vaccines. I don't know where it came from,

(03:07):
but I didn't anyway, so I went to a local library and I found
Almanacks and the third one if Igot some data from there every
10 years from measles deaths. And I charted it on my graph
paper. So this was over 25 years ago
and it was basically the same chart.
And I still didn't believe it because I thought, you know,

(03:28):
maybe the Almanacks wrong. I mean, I just, I just couldn't
accept it. So then I ended up going to Yale
Medical where I walked in, had no idea what I was doing, and I
found these big olive green books called US Vital
Statistics. I was like, well, it's probably
in there. So I started getting data from
there. I went in back and put in my
spreadsheet and eventually I charted it and I had this chart

(03:52):
of measles, which we'll see in alittle while that showed a
decline of 98% in mortality for measles before there was a
vaccine, which just blew my mind.
And then I saw that for all sorts of other diseases
something just didn't fit. And I questioned myself a long
time. I thought maybe I did something
wrong. Am I misinterpreting the data?

(04:12):
But eventually I realised the data's correct.
Our perceptions of reality were incorrect, or at least my
perceptions were. And then so I started writing
for a little while. I had some proto chapters and I
knew I had to have a doctor and I heard Suzanne Humphreys on the
air on Gary. No actually I think it was.
I didn't know who it was. I just turned tuned in in the

(04:33):
middle and I heard this lady. I was like she's talking about
smallpox and I was like I listened for a while.
I was like that's my Co author. I knew it was.
I gave her a call. We got together, spent four
years, got the book out. Short story.
So what is the gist of of of your work?

(04:54):
Using data and history to, you know, really kind of just
understand what really happened as far as infectious diseases,
what our real history is, what caused the decline in infectious
diseases? Could it couldn't have been
vaccines or antibiotics because this came in near the tail end,
as we'll see in these charts. So the charts is where I started
and then I dig dug deeper into the the medical literature and

(05:18):
found all sorts of very interesting things going on and
I'm still learning new things. There's always more to learn.
And so that's the gist of the book.
There's a lot of, you know, subtopics like eugenics, that
type of thing that was served inthe 19, early 1900s, late 1800s
and how that was used to justifyeven compulsory vaccinations.

(05:42):
So if we can like sterilise people, then we can, you know,
enforce vaccinations and all sorts of stuff like that that's,
you know, you don't learn about in school generally or in just
regular old books. And I never found out this stuff
in them and the normal literature.
Show me some shots. Sure.
So we'll start, let's see. Hopefully I'm moving here.

(06:03):
So anybody who has wants to get this information or wants to
contact me, here's my contact stuff, right.
So we'll start with the data. So This Is Us Vital statistics
data and it shows disease rates for five infectious diseases.
And it also shows when we had mass production of penicillin,
streptomycin and where the whooping cough vaccine and

(06:24):
measles vaccine came in and there's no scarlet fever
vaccine, right? So these this is what happened
from the early 19 from 1900 on. So all these disease mortality
rates declined. And then later on these
interventions came in and the last one coming in as the
measles vaccine in 1963. And this is where we basically

(06:44):
have a 98% decline in mortality,whooping cough down 90 / 90%
before they came out with a vaccine.
So clearly there's some other factors that were involved in
the decline in mortality. So they, they have statistics
starting in 1900 in England, they began in 1838.
And you can see the mortality rate, especially for a scarlet

(07:05):
fever was huge. Scarlet fever was a big killer
and you see these big spikes up and down.
Then around 1875, these things start to decline until you came
out with ADTP vaccine in 1957 inEngland and we're down over 99%.
Measles vaccine 1968, we're down100% virtually.
So these things were not a big problem by the time that medical

(07:28):
underventions came out. And so you have penicillin again
in 1944 and these types of antibiotics and other medical
interventions. So it wasn't even medical
interventions to 'cause this massive decline in death rate.
And you can see it even in various states.
Here's Massachusetts and here you have tuberculosis.

(07:48):
Tuberculosis was one of the biggest killers in the 1800s,
but you never really hear about tuberculosis much in the United
States is not even part of the vaccine schedule.
So that basically went down to 0.
All these diseases you can see ameasles is at the bottom there,
the green line. And that hit near 0 for quite a

(08:08):
few years before they came out with a vaccine.
And if anybody wants to actuallyverify the data, you can go
here, go to the link. Here's all the data that was
used to create that chart back here.
So this is the very first chart I created, the green one that's
measles deaths. And you can see in 1963 that's

(08:30):
we're down about 98%. The chart on the left is from
the US Vital Statistics report, but in the 60s.
So this is actually in this particular report that the CDC
had, but essentially no one seemed to pay attention to the,
you know, low mortality rate that we're kind of obsessed with
doing vaccines. Some of these charts show up in

(08:53):
other books. This one's from a particular
book and you can see the vaccine, which actually was
introduced in 1957 was already down 98% or so.
And here they say in in there and they in that book, they say
you were down 97% in mortality rate from 19 O 1 to 1945.
So pretty much the problem was solved.

(09:18):
You also have these various quotes from medical journals.
This is from 1959 where they're talking about how measles was
not really a serious disease. And I can spend more time in any
of these quotes, but I don't want to like take too much time,
right? And here's 1 from 1960 where
they're questioning whether because whooping cough was a
mild disease by this point there, he was questioning

(09:40):
whether we really need to have avaccine in the 1st place.
And another article in The Lancet 1977, no evidence of
vaccination played a major role in decline in incidence and
mortality, which is what we see in these charts.
We see the the mortality had already been taken care of,
right? The funny thing, Roman, is that
people don't like history. So they'll they'll immediately

(10:04):
respond by saying something like, yeah, but that was 50
years ago. That was seven years ago.
We have a much better understanding now.
Yeah, I guess. But the data is the data.
The data shows you exactly what happened.
And history is boring. Yeah, I agree.
I hated history when I was in high school.
I was like, history. No thanks.
Boring. No.

(10:24):
I think, I think what I'm what I'm suggesting is that it
actually is important what was happening historically because.
Oh yeah, it's it's it's incredibly important because
without knowing the history, youjust buy into whatever the
current paradigm is. So the paradigm is vaccine saved
us. This is what we need to do.
But when you look at the data, the mortality rate for every
disease I'm talking to, every single so called infectious

(10:47):
disease was down almost 100% or 100%.
So you take tuberculosis, we don't vaccinate for that in the
United States. That's not a real problem.
Scarlet fever went to 0 without a vaccine.
And then you have the ones you know about which are whooping
cough and measles because we have a vaccine.
That's why you know about them. If we never had a vaccine, you
wouldn't even think about measles or whooping cough.

(11:08):
It wouldn't even be on your radar because it would be.
So, you know, it would be considered mild.
So just like it's saying in thisJournal of Epidemiology and
Community Health back in 1981, what are we saying here?
Whooping cough, muses, are no longer important causes of death
or severe illness, and it's onlyoccurring in a small minority of

(11:28):
children who are disadvantaged, malnourished.
Otherwise, most children get over it and without too much
trouble, which is different thanat least my perception was that
these diseases were really deadly.
Whooping cough, which is basically coughed to death.
Measles would somehow just, you know, totally take you over and
kill you. This is my perception.

(11:50):
But it turned out that wasn't even, that wasn't true either.
All these diseases became more and more mild until they were
just not a major part of mortality statistics.
But if you listen to the media and it's like every time there's
a measles case, people think they're all going to die.
So, but it's just simply not true.
And this is a very important study. 500 consecutive cases of

(12:13):
whooping cough back in 95. And the conclusion is most cases
are mild and you don't have to worry about, parents can be
reassured. A serious outcome is unlikely.
Now, most people think whooping cough, like I said, you're
basically coughed to death and that's what's going to happen.
This is not what happens. And you can there's there's

(12:33):
different journal articles and books from the time that talked
about the decline in mortality rate from these diseases were
down 90% before 1940, before there was anything available.
This guy McCormick, this is a really long quote from 1951.
And he was noticing that the thedecline in all these diseases
had nothing to do with basicallyany kind of medical intervention

(12:56):
because the ones they had medical interventions for
declined at the same rate. The ones they didn't have, which
is what you see in the charts. McKinley talked about this.
Medical measures had very littleto do with the mortality
decline. We always are told that it's our
medical system that did it right.
And it's generally that's not true.
It's our, you know, our health improved radically from the

(13:18):
1800s into the mid 1900s. That's what really did things,
you know, and there's a whole bunch of things behind that.
Engineering projects, electricity, replacing horses
with cars, sanitation, hygiene, all these things came in.
That's what really caused the mortality decline.
It wasn't these medical interventions.
And you can see that in the chart.
So they had a chart in their study.

(13:39):
You see the the, the solid line going down, down, down.
And you also see very interesting the GDP, how much we
spend on healthcare from 1930s goes up, up, up starts at 3 1/2%
and by the 1970s, eight and a half percent.
And now we're actually close to 18% of our GDP, or one in $5

(13:59):
spent on healthcare. So and now and now people are
the unhealthiest they've ever been.
Yeah, I think my opinion is thatwe peaked.
We had peak health in the 60s, seventies, 50s, sixties, 70s.
After, you know, around 1980, things started going downhill
and we got hooked on medicationsto fix everything.

(14:20):
We got hooked on junk foods, we got hooked on the Internet and
all these things that made us weaker and weaker and less
healthy obesities, you know, offthe charts.
Vitamin D deficiency is really rampant and people are unfit.
You can go to like a Walmart or in a big box store and you see
people walking around and they're not doing too good and
people are in little carts and you know, people are pale.

(14:43):
They're just unhealthy looking for the most part.
There's, there's exceptions, butthe this is not what it was like
in the 50s and 60s and 70s. People are generally thin and
you know, relatively fit. But now it's just just, you
know, the health of our societies have degraded,
especially in the Western, Western world.

(15:04):
It's a good point that you made now about the Western world,
because I think in many Eastern bloc or just Eastern countries,
I mean you still don't really see I really.
Yeah, I really don't know. I've seen a few videos like from
Moscow or some places in China and people look relatively thin

(15:24):
still and they look relatively healthy.
Is that, you know, I don't have any data on that, but that's
just my perception. Yeah, I mean, I was in Hong Kong
last year and I struggled to find any fat people.
Yeah, a number of years ago. Well, this is now about 20 years
ago or 15 years ago, I was in Stockholm and I was shocked.
People were walking around. Everybody looked pretty, pretty,

(15:45):
pretty good shape. And that wasn't the case.
When I came back to New York City, I was like, wow, what a
difference, you know, quite shocking.
I don't know how Stockholm is now, but that was because that
was a while ago. But yeah, other other places
are, you know, doing fairly wellhealth wise.
United States not so much in other Western countries I
understand too, like Australia. So people go well, you know, at

(16:09):
least we have a vaccine and the vaccine is giving us extra
protection. So here in this chart we have
from England from basically nineteen O 1 to 2008.
And we had the more this is likethe total number of deaths from
whooping cough and the whooping cough vaccine came in way at the
tail end 1957. And in the in the 70s there was

(16:29):
a scare about the DTP vaccine causing neurological damage,
which it did. And we see a drop in vaccination
and the medical system panicked and they got the vaccination
rates back up. That's the dotted blue line.
But you'll see that during that big drop, there's no increase in
deaths. Nothing, nothing happened.
There might have been more casesbecause they were looking for
them, but nothing really happened right.

(16:52):
Then we have an example of Sweden where they were 84% of
the children who had three shotswere still being found to have
whooping cough by, you know, whatever test they were using.
And they determined the DTV vaccine was ineffective and
there was concerns over safety. So they discontinued nationally
the 9/19/79, the whooping cough vaccine.

(17:14):
And so for 17 years they had no national programme for whooping
cough. And you can see in this chart,
by 1953, most of the problem wasalready taken care of anyway.
And for those 17 years, there isreally no difference in
mortality rate from, you know, from whooping cough.
There was it's basically didn't do anything.
So they had they were just as good having no vaccine as having
a vaccine as far as mortality rate from whooping cough.

(17:37):
And so then some people tell me,well, at least we have some
protection and so we should do it anyway.
OK, but you're, you're these guys are they screw around with
your biology without really knowing what they're doing.
So what they replace the DTP vaccine, which they found
eventually, you know, they finally conceded that, yeah, it

(17:58):
caused some neurological damage.So they came out with a so
called safer vaccine, the Dtap. The the small A is attenuated
pertussis. And this is from Doctor James
Cherry. And everybody should go find
this article and read it. And what he's saying here is all
children primed by the DTAP vaccine will be more susceptible
to whooping cough throughout their lifetimes.

(18:19):
And there was no easy way to decrease this increased lifetime
susceptibility. So what he's saying here is we
with this linked epitome suppression, they've messed up
your immune system response permanently.
So now you're more susceptible to whooping cough.
So he also suggested that and this guy is the world expert on

(18:40):
pertussis and pertussis immunisation.
So he, he recommended that everybody should get a vaccine
for the rest of your lives everythree years for the D TAP
because it wears off. And so he, this is his way of
like, oh, well, how are we goingto protect everybody?
Well, we'll just vaccinate everybody every three years.
Back in the, in the 50s, it was supposed to be one shot protects
you for life. But now it's like, oh, well, you

(19:01):
just have to take a shot every three years, no big deal.
So by screwing up your immune system forever, they that's what
they're recommending. So everybody should be really
disturbed by this. I was disturbed by this when I
first read it. And everybody should download
it. And then you can always ask your
doctor and say, Hey, what about this?
Why is my immune system screwed up?

(19:22):
Did you guys know this? No, they didn't know when they
were doing this. They just assumed it was a
better idea. And they just start doing it on
the, on the, on the population. Then we can talk about the flu
vaccine that's a little different.
So flu and pneumonia deaths down90% before there was a vaccine.

(19:42):
So there still was somewhat of aproblem, right?
And then they began vaccinating in the 70s, there was a big
swine flu disaster. So vaccination rates peaked up a
little bit and went back down. And by the, you know, 2000s were
at like 95% or whatever it is, 80 percent, 7580%.
In 65 year olds or or older, butyou'll see here the brown line,

(20:06):
that's the mortality rate and the mortality rate after 40
years is essentially the same. So the flu vaccine hasn't
decreased mortality. It's basically they're, they're
always emphasising get your flu vaccine, get your flu vaccine.
But the death rate hasn't changed in over 40 years.
It's actually longer than that. I've updated the chart since
then But so it's about 50 years of no real no benefit.

(20:31):
And this is a very interesting quote and every should get this
too from cell host and microbe. And this is Fauci is the third
author on this and I'm just going to read the whole thing
cuz it's important. After more than 60 years of
experience with influenza vaccines, very little
improvement in vaccine prevention of infection has been
noted. As pointed out decades ago and
still true today, the rates of effectiveness are best approved

(20:55):
influenza vaccines. I should move this out of the
way would be inadequate for licensure for most other vaccine
preventable diseases. It is not surprising that none
of the mucosal respiratory viruses have ever been
controlled by vaccines. So viruses, mucosal respiratory
virus. High mortality rates have thus
far eluded vaccine development efforts.

(21:18):
So this is an admission that thevaccine for the flu has not
worked, but we're still going todo it.
They still recommended every year.
So they're not looking at their own literature and saying, well,
this has not worked. What they're doing is they're
coming out with new vaccines because they have new ideas
after 60 years of failure. Well, let's try it this way.
Maybe that will work. And then they experiment on the

(21:39):
public because the public doesn't know they're being
experimented on. And This is why it's good to
know history. It's good to know what's going
on in the medical literature. And, you know, it's really
important. And I think if you know this
stuff, you, you go back and go, yeah, you start questioning
everything just like I did. So the final thoughts on all

(22:02):
this, you know, contrary to popular belief, it wasn't
antibiotics and vaccines that saved us from all these various
things, from scarlet fever to tuberculosis and, you know,
whooping cough and measles. It was something else.
It wasn't vaccines because sometimes you didn't even have a
vaccine, as in the case of scarlet fever, or they're not

(22:23):
really used, as in the case of tuberculosis, which by the way,
again, tuberculosis was the giant killer.
That was around 400 to 450 deaths per 100,000.
And then scarlet fever was like 120 deaths per 100,000.
Whooping cough and measles were down in the 40s to 60.
So just they were a lot less bigger of a problem than these

(22:45):
other diseases. But we don't really think about
the other diseases because we don't have a whooping.
You know, we have a whooping cough vaccine, We have a measles
vaccine. And that's why we know about
those. The other ones we forgot about,
even though those were much bigger killers.
So then comes the question whichI had was like, well, if it
wasn't that, what did change? You know, why did we have a

(23:06):
decline in mortality rate? And we have this perception of
the good old days where people had top hats and twirled
parasols and everything was justwonderful.
But that's not how most people lived.
It just hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on.
Yeah, This, this, this thing about everything being terrible
only really occurred after the advent of the Industrial

(23:26):
Revolution, right? Yeah, a lot of that is true,
right. So you have people streaming
into cities, overcrowding, this is later, this is in the 30's,
the Hooverville, this is outsidethis big cities, you know,
economic problems, right, Right.So what you had is, you know,
starting in the late 1700s, early 1800s, you start to have

(23:49):
people crowding into these cities.
So you had to have this horriblehousing where people were just
crammed in there and it was filled with their own waste.
It was filled with vermin. And this is how a lot of people
lived. So if you, if you looked at the,
let's say, 1850s London, you hadthe West End where the rich
people lived. It was, you know, pretty good.
It was OK. They had some paved streets and

(24:12):
generally they were OK. Then you had the West End of
London where there were hundredsof thousands of people living on
the, you know, what they called the ragged edge of the misery.
They were extremely poor. They were malnourished.
They lived in their own faeces and, and people had to, you
know, do whatever they could to make a make a penny.
And you know, over 80,000 women turn to prostitution just to

(24:35):
make some kind of money. So it was really just an amazing
divergent a few miles apart and at the rich over here.
And then you had the miserable pour over here that struggle to
stay alive. There's no sanitation or sewage.
Everything just went into the streets.
So you would just throw all yourwaste into the into those into

(24:57):
the streets, or you have some kind of common Privy and all
that stuff ended up going to your water supply, which was
mixed with industrial waste fromTanners and other factories.
So that was all where your watercame from and you would have to
drink that. So now you're drinking
contaminated water. We also had no real good
transportation except everythingwas done with horses and they

(25:19):
had to go to the bathroom too. So they pooped in the streets
and peed in the streets and thatwent into your water supply or
you walk through it and dragged it into your your house or
apartment or Hubble. So that's another thing that we
had back then. We also had enormous amounts of
air pollution because how did you heat everything coal?
How did you do anything with, with industry's coal?

(25:40):
And you burnt coal and it went up into the atmosphere.
And the London fog was not a foglike I used to think when I was
a kid. Oh, it's just foggy in London.
OK. No, that was just industrial
pollution. So that come down and settle
onto the streets. Sometimes it was so bad you
couldn't even see the sun at at noon.
So you're now you're in a industrial chimney breathing

(26:01):
this stuff in, day in, day out. So that's another impact on your
health. The food supply was abysmal
because we didn't have refrigeration.
So, you know, things would get slaughtered.
A lot of times they slaughtered animals inside the cities.
And this is what you ate. You just ate food that was
decaying. It was, you know, you know, some
of the milk, milk was horribly infected with contamination.

(26:26):
And so people are eating this disease food when they're living
in this horrible environment. At various times, there's people
just basically starving to death.
They're just literally starving to death.
So of course you wouldn't be toohealthy if you're starving to
death. We just mentioned the gross
overcrowding. So you had tonnes and tonnes of
people just jammed in. And this is kind of a

(26:48):
horrifying. So people would die in these
apartments, their family memberswould die and that's where they
stayed. The rotting corpses would stay
with them because they had to somehow get these people buried,
right? So, so you had these people
jammed in together. Working was horrifying.
A lot of people had to work 12/16/18 hours a day just to try

(27:12):
to stay alive. So not only were they
malnourished, living in a industrial toilet, breathing in
smog, but they also had to work and huge amounts of time it, you
know, really just mind numbing, soul crushing labour.
And you know, and this is shocking because no one would
actually do this these, you know, these days is child

(27:34):
labour. So you had children as young as
3-4 or five years old working inmines, working in factories.
And it's not surprising that a lot of these children ended up
just basically destroyed, you know, basically cripples their,
their health would have been just completely destroyed.
And then if you did get sick with something, whatever it may

(27:55):
be, here's a case of a 7 year old girl who was working, who
was probably malnourished, who was, you know, working non stop
and exposed to these elements. And then she got some kind of
case of measles and then died, died in the sun.
And then we had medicine coming in and they had a lot of very

(28:15):
bizarre notions. They were bleeding people for
centuries for almost every condition.
They were giving people toxic medications based on mercury and
arsenic and strychnine. And they had this thing called a
hot regimen for things like likesmallpox where they would put
you in a room, deprive you of fresh air, fresh water, maybe
give you a little mercury and keep you very hot.

(28:37):
And a lot of people just died from that treatment.
So they might be treating smallpox or measles, but then
the treatment itself was deadly.And then there are, there's
hundreds of doctors that realisevaccination and the only vaccine
then was against smallpox. And we like to think, you know,
we have a vaccine. You take a nice clean hypodermic

(28:58):
needle put in your arm. But that's not what the original
vaccine was. What they would do is they would
take a sharp instrument called The Lancet and they would cut
your arm repeatedly. And then we take this pus from
some unknown source and smear itinto your arm.
And that's what a vaccine was. And so you can imagine you might
get sepsis, you might get all these different diseases because

(29:19):
you're putting some unknown material filled with microbes
and putting it into your blood supply.
So there are a lot of doctors like this, Henry G Hanchett,
who, you know, determined that vaccination is worthless and
it's harmful and creates all these other diseases.
This is a sketch from the Poor man's Guardian in the 1847.

(29:42):
And this is a representation of how people lived.
So you have that middle layer. It's just they're just jammed in
there. Upstairs, there's a bunch of
beds that people are jammed into.
And people even lived in the in the basement.
They have basement apartments where people lived in the sewer
with a vermin. This is where they lived.
It's just pretty unimaginable because that would have been
filled with faeces and rats and cockroaches.

(30:05):
But that's where you would stay.And this is how millions of
people live their lives. And this is I was talking about
in London in the 1860s, you havehundreds of thousands in the
East End of London that were themiserable poor and, you know,
80,000 women turning to prostitution people.
You know, just, it was just horrifying.

(30:28):
And so you have all these things, hazardous housing,
sewage, the horses dropping dungeverywhere, the coal in the
atmosphere. And by the way, you're also
blocking out sunlight so you're not in the way people dressed.
You got almost no sunlight on your skin.
So vitamin D levels would have been near 0.
Vitamin C was already probably near 0. vitamin A was probably
near 0. So you're massively

(30:50):
malnourished. So you have also starvation,
overcrowding, the brutal punishing work, child labour,
neglected care, deadly medicine and vaccination.
How could anybody be healthy? And so, you know, despite the
way I used to think about thingsthat there was, it was really
nice. They had carriages and they went

(31:10):
to the balls and it was really nice.
That's not the way it was for a lot of people.
There's a poor girl who was a one of these people working in
the cotton factories early 1900s.
So what changed? There was a massive health
revolution. That's what I call, they used to
call the sanitation revolution. And what's what started shifting

(31:35):
is what I already mentioned. So we started having different
things change throughout the many decades starting around
1870 and going all the way to, you know, 1940s, fifties and
60s. And so we have public water
coming in, pipes and sewers, hand washing, getting rid of all
these slum apartments, moving inthe industries outside from the

(31:56):
outside, the cities, tanneries and slaughterhouses, improving
the milk supply, union and labour laws, child labour laws,
public schools, people. Instead of going to factories,
you went to school and learn howto read and write.
So that was great. Proper handling of of food,
vastly better nutrition, fruits and vegetables, exercise,

(32:17):
sunshine, great engineering projects.
Electricity has transformed the world.
Now you have a refrigeration, you have cars instead of horses
carrying Everything Everywhere, the flush toilet tackling the
water and air pollution. No more bleeding, no more
medications based on mercury andarsenic, less smallpox
vaccination. So what they did for 100 years,

(32:39):
they would put that puss in yourarm and go from arm to arm to
arm. So they had arm to arm
vaccination for 100 years and basically just the overall
general improvement in society and standard of living.
This is what changed everything.Yes, but it doesn't make money.
It doesn't make money for the Pharmaceutical industry.
It makes money for farmers and engineers, but that's not a lot

(33:01):
of money. So what you're telling me,
ultimately, Roman, is that vaccines didn't eradicate these
diseases, plumbers did? Yeah, plumbers, engineers, there
was hundreds of thousands of people, activists that said

(33:23):
we're going to clean up the streets, we're going to get rid
of these slums. You know, all these things came.
We're not going to let children four or five or six work in in
factories anymore. We'll only allow 12 year olds
and then 16 year olds and 18 year olds.
And then we said, well, we're not going to let people work 70
hours a week, 80 hours a week inhorrible conditions.
We're going to clean up the factories.

(33:44):
We're going to limit it to 60 hours, 50 hours, 40 hours.
So then eventually we had life in the, you know, forties, 50s
and 60s was so much different than it was in the 1800s.
So anybody alive in the 1800s would have been just blown away
at the transformation. So essentially it went from life
like this to life like this. And these are pictures from the

(34:08):
50s, sixties and 70s. That's how I grew up on them
bottom right hand corner with the little bikes and everything.
It's great and horrible clothes that my mom made me wear, but
you know, so we went the. Year growing up, I had a BMX and
I was. I remember it was one of those
banana bikes. I don't know what kind of brand
it was. Yeah, I know.

(34:29):
It's like, OK, that's not a thing anymore.
Anyway. So you had life on the left
where child labour and pollutionand horrible conditions to the
Fifties, 60s and 70s when we hadoptimal health and we had a
society transformed, but then weforgot that that happened.
So I call it the world's greatest health revolution.

(34:50):
We forgot about it. If we knew about it, and this
goes back to your point, if we knew about this history, we
wouldn't be susceptible to everything has to be medical,
medical, this, medical that we talked about that we have
healthcare, but we have medical care.
We don't have healthcare. So it's a we've tied those two
words together very, you know, Idon't know if it was done on

(35:12):
purpose, probably was, but you know, we don't have healthcare
which promotes the things that actually made the difference,
not just some kind of drug for everything or shots for
everything. And so by there, you can find
these things in the Thirties, 40s and 50s in the literature
saying, hey, yeah, we don't really have to worry about
measles, scarlet fever, whoopingcough, because we have advances

(35:34):
in sanitary science. We have refrigeration.
We have better water supplies. So everything's more or less
taken care of. It keeps on dropping.
And we can expect complete eradication of these diseases,
which we did because scarlet fever went away and tuberculosis
went away, more or less. But then people, you know,
continue to focus on vaccinationas some kind of solution to

(35:57):
something we didn't really need to solve other diseases that we
probably don't think about anymore.
Pelegra Berry Berry scurvy, These are big, big problems too.
Scurvy in particular was a deadly problem.
And people would think and logically so that somebody came
out of the ship and then people started getting sick and losing

(36:18):
their teeth, that there was somekind of infection going around.
So there was always this idea, these things that were
infective. So scarlet fever, pellagra Berry
Berry, once thought to be, you know, infectious diseases, but
they just turned out to be vitamin C deficiency and vitamin
B3 and B1 deficiencies. And if we map out the deaths
from measles and scurvy, scurvy was a less less of a killer by

(36:43):
this point. But you can see they map almost
directly. So as measles deaths went down,
scurvy deaths went down because they're tied together.
Same thing with whooping cough. You can see the death rate
declining for scurvy and whooping cough, which is not
surprising. The overall health of the people
improved. Then you didn't have a problem.

(37:05):
And then there's studies that showed just vitamin A could
reduce the overall mortality rate for let's say measles,
right? So Doctor Klenner, who everybody
should know who that is, but we forgot about him too use vitamin
C, just vitamin C for measles. And he had no problem with
measles by just giving them vitamin C.

(37:26):
He also used it in all sorts of different conditions and always
has spectacular results. But vitamin C is not a big money
maker. So it was basically ignored.
So basically we had a massive health transformation from the
again around 18601870. So by the time we hit the 1950s,

(37:47):
sixties and 70s, we were done. We were happy.
We should have just kept on going in that direction.
But we shifted further and further away from health and
towards less health and more pharmaceutical solutions for
every problem and every a shot for every problem.
And so today we're all obese, we're vitamin D fit.
Well, not everybody, but a lot of people are.

(38:09):
And then people get hooked on these medications, which also
cause increased nutritional problems like depleting your
magnesium. And we're also magnesium
deficient because of our industrial aquaculture, by the
way. So instead of correcting those
fundamental problems and gettingpeople to exercise, eat
properly, we say, well, eat whatever you want, get fatter
and fatter and then we'll give you Ozempic or we'll do a

(38:30):
Bastric bypass. And and you know, they're
starting to test for vitamin D and they're finding like pretty
much everybody's, you know, deficient in vitamin D.
And what's the solution there? Sunshine, sunshine, fresh air.
Just like it was determined in the early 1900s, people finally
figured out the solution to health was pretty easy.

(38:51):
But we've over complicated it with the, you know, giant
Pharmaceutical industry or, you know, healthcare.
So we can go back to the original idea behind
vaccination, which was smallpox.OK.
And it's very interesting. I found this quote from 1688.
And Thomas Sydenham, which is considered the father, father of

(39:14):
English medicine, he noted that when he did his particular
treatment, not doing that hot regimen, that he found that
smallpox was a slight and safe disease.
He found that the people who aredoing this hot regimen because
he promoted this cool regimen, that's where the people were
dying from a smallpox. And he actually communicate with

(39:35):
this doctor Cole, and he tried it as well.
And he found that. Well, OK, yeah, you're right.
You found the cure for smallpox.Don't do the hot regimen.
Just do the cool regimen. This is our hero that people
worship in the medical system isEdward Jenner.
He came up with this idea of taking pus from a cow.
Actually, he thought it was froma horse and scratching it onto

(39:56):
somebody's arm, which was already a procedure called
inoculation. They would take pus from
somebody who had smallpox and scratching it into their arm.
And he decided that, you know, cow pox is so well, that's a lot
better. So it's, it's perfectly easy to
do. It's perfectly safe and will
keep you sip here from smallpox for life, which wasn't true.
Doctors from 18-O518101817 all found that that wasn't true.

(40:21):
They wrote about in the medical journals, but they were.
Again, ignored. And here's one guy who also John
Birch in 1814, who noted that about 2/3 of the most smallpox
deaths for centuries was becauseof this hot regimen and using
these heating cordials and I'm sure other medications as well.

(40:43):
So it wasn't the disease that was killing them.
It was these poor medical interventions and you never knew
where your vaccine came from. So it could have came from a
variety of different animals. The main factions end up being
from a cow, which they had really hard time finding this
supposed cow virus, but Jenner actually think thought it came

(41:07):
from horses. So a lot of the vaccine material
actually came from this disease called the grease.
They also another big faction that those are the ones in the
yellow circles was taking pus from somebody who died from a
smallpox or had smallpox or was had a blanket on them from
smallpox, which they would then hang on a cow's head or transfer

(41:28):
to a cow. And then the cow was somehow
magically transform it. So you had these three different
factions mixing into all this different vaccine material that
you would scratch onto your arm.And then for 100 years they'd go
from arm to arm to arm to arm, you know, scratching the stuff
from people's arms. And that's what a vaccine was.
They also had something called retro vaccination.
So they would take this pus fromanimals, put it back on humans

(41:51):
and back to animals again to supposedly make it more virulent
so it would actually do what it was supposed to do.
And they found out by the late 1800s that when they started
using the microscope, they will look at this vaccine material
under the microscope and they would find all sorts of fungus
and bacteria and, and traces of blood.
And this is what the vaccine wasbeing used and promoted and

(42:14):
scratched onto people's arms forover 100 years.
And this is a a correspondence with a vaccine manufacturer and
then early 1900s from Doctor Hodge, who wanted to know where
this stuff came from. And they had to admit eventually
it was basically from a tramp that had smallpox who slept in
the stables and somehow the cowsgot sick.

(42:36):
So that's where their vaccine material came from.
And I mentioned this before, they used a sharp knife called
The Lancet. And this is where they would,
you know, scratch, scratch your arm and then put the material
into your arm. And this article from 1882
showed the how they actually putlots and lots of people into
room and just mass vaccinated them.

(42:56):
Just scratch, put some stuff in,scratch, vaccinate, you know,
over and over again without any kind of concept of hygiene.
There was no alcohol to clean the wound or anything.
And they just went from person to person to person.
Nobody would do that today. So the picture on the left is
what was called a good arm. This is what was supposed to

(43:18):
happen. So you got 5 scratches there.
You put the, you know, the supposed vaccination, cowpox,
horsebox, whatever, whatever wasin that vial or from the last
person who got it. And they would smear that into
your arm and you would get this massive inflammation as you
might expect. And sometimes if it was good, it

(43:38):
would just die down. And supposedly we're protected.
Of course, you weren't really protected, as they found out
really early on. That's where we get the concept
of revaccination because despitewhat Jenner said, it wasn't
protecting you for life. They decided, well, we'll just
vaccinate you every 10 years. Some people said every five
years. Some people said every three
years, some people said every year.
So they kept on like changing the goal, you know, changing

(44:00):
what what they were doing because it was just a giant
experiment. Nobody really knew.
And the picture on the right, somebody had a, you know,
horrible reaction. You can see a massive wound and
that was considered, you know, not such a great, you know,
vaccine that was called a bad arm.
And according to this guy, ScottTebb, one in 10 people had bad
arms and high fevers. So vaccination wasn't that

(44:22):
simple magical procedure. And we often see pictures on the
Internet. It's like, oh, that that boy
didn't have a vaccine. So he's all broken out and
pustules. But they didn't don't often show
you the results of, you know, sometimes a vaccine basically
causing you to deteriorate and die.
And this is 11 picture of a MissFanny Lent who apparently died a

(44:44):
horrible death after her vaccinein.
So in 18711873, after about 70 years of vaccines, there was a
massive outbreak of smallpox. And this is in London.
This is from The Lancet. And so they're here, they're
saying the 122,000 vaccinated persons still got smallpox, so
the vaccine wasn't working. They hemmed and hawed and tried

(45:06):
to figure out why it didn't workand said well, maybe we just
need to change things up a little bit.
Not that the whole idea failed. Doctor Millard, who was in
Leicester, England, who initially was a pro vaccine guy,
saw that the Leicester method ofisolation and and cleaning up

(45:28):
the city streets was what was really actually working.
And he wrote a book in 1914 and he noticed that enteric fever
and scarlet fever were decliningat the same time smallpox was
declining. He also noted that people were
less and less people were getting vaccines.
So the number of people were vaccinating was going down,

(45:49):
which we can see in this chart from Lester.
So the blue line is how many people were vaccinated and the
grey ones are smallpox deaths. And by the late 1800s,
vaccination rates plummeted because the people of Leicester
said we had enough of this. They knew people that were
injured by vaccines, they saw that it didn't work during the

(46:11):
big 1871 to 73 disaster. So they, they protested and they
won and they're vaccinated rates, which were already
declining, plummeted down to like 10%.
And Despite that, and despite medical men saying, well, you're
all going to die, you're going to all suffer, that never
happened. So smallpox deaths remain low

(46:33):
despite virtually no vaccinationrates.
I mean, it spiked up a little bit, but very little vaccination
was being done in Leicester thateventually spread to all of
England. So you can see vaccination rates
are declining. And then so by 1921, we're down
to 40% of the people are being vaccinated.
But there's never been a resurgence of smallpox deaths.

(46:56):
And here we see during the heyday of vaccination, that's
the first long red arrow, the deaths for children basically
stayed the same. It wasn't until the health
revolution of 1875, while vaccination rates were
decreasing, you can see the mortality rate for all children
was going down after around 1875, despite falling

(47:18):
vaccination rates. So what did It wasn't the
vaccine. It was basically the health
revolution that changed everything.
And like every other disease, bythe end of the 1800s, early
1900s, smallpox became just as mild as chickenpox.
As a matter of fact, here's an article of 1913 where he said

(47:39):
smallpox and chick pox are very difficult to distinguish.
And so here's a an example of somebody with smallpox that you
would never see on the Internet because it doesn't show massive
pustules. This is was a case of smallpox
wasn't a big deal because it by that time it was pretty mild.
So when you where you had one infive deaths in the 1800s, that

(48:03):
plummeted to very low levels andin this particular case 98% down
in mortality rate by 1913. And if you look at the
statistics, and this is from public health reports, so you
have the early 1900s and 19-O2, you had X number of deaths from
smallpox, then it plummeted downto almost nothing.

(48:24):
So you had a 98% decrease in mortality rate over those 40
years. So smallpox wasn't a big deal by
that point, which is kind of hard to believe because we've
been all programmed to think smallpox deadly, right?
And at the same time, we had vaccination rates plummeting by
1948 when they got rid of compulsory vaccination.
In England, only 18% of the people are vaccinated, so it

(48:47):
wasn't widespread. And Doctor Millard in 1948 wrote
about this in the British Medical Journal.
He said because of the conscientious clause that was
introduced, most people were notvaccinated, 2/3 were not
vaccinated. Smallpox never made a comeback
and never was, you know, high mortality rate.

(49:10):
So that kind of, he kind of, youknow, basically said, well, we
didn't really need vaccines in the 1st place, which again, he
was originally a pro vaccine, but over his years, he
determined that that was not really true.
And then a doctor, Thomas Mack talked about this in 2002 and
you can find his articles on theInternet too.

(49:32):
He, he, he, he realised it was economic development, or as I
call it, the health revolution that made the difference.
It wasn't from universal vaccination.
And he also noted that long before the, The Who, the World
Health Organisation started the eradication programme, smallpox
disappeared from many countries as they developed economically.

(49:53):
So it wasn't from this, you know, big grand vaccine across
the world thing that's often, you know, talked about.
Doctor Crichton was tasked with writing an article for the
Encyclopaedia Britannica in 1888.
There he decided not to just go with talking points.
He actually did a research because he was a big researcher.

(50:15):
So he was in the library all thetime.
And he concluded that that vaccines weren't the magical
thing that, you know, he had been taught.
And he wrote a very scathing article in the Encyclopaedia of
Britannica that went in and remained there until the 1920s.
And he wrote two books on vaccination and Jenner, and
everybody should go find those or read those are quite

(50:36):
powerful. But the medical profession as a
whole ignored him. And his career was more or less
destroyed. And he ended up a poor, poor,
poor person, despite, you know, being a very smart guy and
writing a couple books on the topic.
He wrote a, he wrote books on the history of Britain.
He was a really deep researcher and really smart guy.

(50:57):
Of course, he didn't go along with the programme.
So that was the end of him. So, you know, everything changed
as the sanitation revolution took hold and we got rid of
toxic medications and these toxic treatments, just like all
the other diseases that we talked about before smallpox

(51:18):
became mild and eventually just faded away, just like scarlet
fever and all these other diseases, despite, you know,
falling vaccination rates. So it's not the story we were
told. It's a lot more, you know, a lot
more different, right? So, so far, what what we can

(51:39):
conclude is that vaccines have had little to no impact at all.
That's that's my conclusion. I think people sometimes say,
well, the incident rate of measles went down, but it wasn't
that big of a deal. You know, we forgot to look at
what are people's vitamin C levels and vitamin A levels.

(51:59):
If we had done focused on real health, then a lot of other
diseases wouldn't have manifested either.
But we're not focused on the health, we're focused on medical
interventions. If we had.
Learned I was actually wrong. I said little to no impact.
They actually had either no impact or they harmed people.

(52:19):
I mean they cut to incident. Right.
And, well, yeah, Qatar. But if you look at the smallpox
vaccine, which was, you know, highly problematic if you're
scratching pus into somebody's arm, they had all sorts of
diseases, including many doctorsconcluded tuberculosis was tied
to that and cancers and all sorts of other things.
As you might imagine, if you putfungus and bacteria and whatever

(52:42):
else into your arm, into your blood supply, it probably not a
good idea. So yeah, that would have been a
big negative. It's actually very destructive.
And yeah, you have Qatar and youhave other incidents too.
So yeah, so there's been a big giant negative, but there's a
there's a positive spin all the time.
Oh, Jenner created the cowpox vaccine.

(53:03):
Therefore, it's killed smallpox,even though it wasn't really
just from a Kyle, it was from a horse and corpses and everything
else. This is like a big mishmash
going from arm to arm to arm. Do we have time for a little
polio? Well, not not really having
polio, but talk about polio. So, so this is the classic

(53:27):
picture that people think of polio and that's why we have a
vaccine so we don't end up like this poor little guy.
And Doctor Kleiner noticed in orcommented in 1952 that there
were a lot more people with rheumatic fever that were
crippled for then there were from polio.
But because you don't see the the problems, it's not the same
thing. If you see people crippled and

(53:48):
it's like, OK, that's a problem.But if you don't see, it's like,
who knows? Who cares?
So there was there was a sphere of infantile paralysis that was
promulgated in the media. So here's an article from, what,
1916? So there's an outbreak of some
kind of polio inside the city there.

(54:11):
But I want to make sure that people understand that polio was
a very low incidence disease. So if you look at this
particular chart, it's the line at the very, very bottom.
It's, you know, we had more cases like say syphilis or
malaria in the United States. Then we have had a polio.
Polio is very, very low. And then here's from particular

(54:36):
Vermont State Department of Public Health 1924 article, and
this is a picture of Vermont. And the little red dots are the
cases of polio or paralysis, andyou can see they're just all
over the place. There's a few dots here and
there. There's no outbreak in a city
centre that you might imagine ifit was some kind of infectious
agent. So it just scattered about.

(54:59):
And again, here is 1 from 1912. This is just a few dots here and
there. Again, it's not.
It's just these isolated cases across the state.
And what's very interesting is this is a couple charts or one
chart with two time periods on it, 19161931 and you can see

(55:19):
polio spikes up during the summer, peaking in August and
then goes back down towards 0. So the cases of these this what
they called polio was very seasonal.
It didn't happen in the winter. It was basically a summer
disease. Wasn't it also related to
pesticides? Yeah, we'll get there.

(55:43):
So, So what maps to that? Well, first, what's interesting,
there was many people observing that it's not highly infectious
that people were in hospitals and there's nobody ever like
infected somebody else. And people, children would sleep
with their, you know, their, their brother or their family

(56:04):
member that was had some kind ofparalysis, but they never caught
it. So it wasn't like contagious in
any, you know, sense of the wordhere.
There's somebody's talking abouta doctor enter a nurse.
And nobody ever caught polio for35 years at this particular
hospital. So it wasn't like this massively
contagious thing that we might imagine.

(56:26):
And here's the pesticide. So they're using lead arsenate.
This is what they would be spreading, spraying onto crops
at the time. And they, you basically spray it
on and then you wouldn't like wash off the, the apples or
whatever. And in case of apples, it was
the coddling moth that they're worried about because it was
decimating crops. So anyway, so during the hot

(56:47):
weather months, they would be spraying the stuff onto the
crops. You would go home and you'd have
an apple or some kind of food and you're getting a dose of
lead arsenate, which is known tocause paralysis.
And eventually they got rid of that, but then they replaced it
with DDT. But so they were spraying this
stuff on this more correlates with the the diagrams.

(57:11):
We just saw it. It was a summer disease tied
with the same time these lead arsenate pesticides that are
well known to cause paralysis. And actually here's you know,
some of the lead arsenate, the third phase of chronic arsenical
intoxication is marked by peripheral neuritis and off
which is often mild at first, but which may progress to motor

(57:33):
and more severe cases paralysis.So so this is known about lead
arsenate which is was being usedall over the place.
You know, supposedly polio virusis only in men, you know, in
humans. But during these times people
noticed that horses, sheepdogs, cats, hogs and birds were being

(57:54):
paralysed at the same time, which makes sense if they were
exposed to lead arsenate, right?So this particular doctor said
just based on the epidemiology, appears that it's not really a
living microorganism or a virus,but a toxin.

(58:15):
And during the mid 1900s, there was a lady called Doctor Kenny,
sister Kenny, sorry, not doctor,she wasn't a doctor.
So here is a picture of her in ausing her particular therapies,
which she rallied against what the current the the medical
treatments of the time were. If you had some kind of

(58:35):
condition, they would force yourarms, your legs to be
straightened out. They were put them in cast and
they would do these surgeries. And she said that's the reason
people are having paralysis for the most part, right?
So she said, no, no, we're goingto do like massage and hot, hot
packs, which we do today. And, you know, basically that's

(58:59):
the modern way of having therapyand rehabilitation.
Here's another picture of her with a successful patient.
So she had a very high cure rateof polio by using these
techniques and not using the medical treatment techniques.
And here's Doctor Kleiner again.He had 60 out of 60 successful
cases by using by using polio, by using vitamin C.

(59:23):
He didn't use polio. So he used that which is a
strong detoxification agent. So he had success with that and
he was disturbed that his information was never used.
It was just, you know, just kindof sidelined.
So these are all the different like pieces of history about
polio that you might not know, that you can decide for yourself

(59:45):
whether you know the vaccine didtoo much.
But there's also another part tothat story is the original
diagnosis for polio would be done.
So if you had paralysis and you had paralysis within 24 hours,
still, that was considered a case of polio.
There was no need for any kind of laboratory confirmation.

(01:00:06):
You were paralysed. 24 hours later, you're still paralysed.
You have polio. That's what it was.
So they disabled, they disabled it, right?
So that that's, you know, this is 1950s, right, or before the
1950s. But when they, when they
eventually had the vaccine in 1954, they changed the
definition. The definition became you had to

(01:00:27):
be paralysed 60 days later. So you basically created a whole
new condition. So the first one was you're
paralysed within 24 hours, OK, you have that.
But then they just changed the definition.
So you have to be paralysed 60 days later, which according to
Doctor Kleiman, it's like almostnobody had that.
So you automatically got rid of polio just by the definition

(01:00:47):
change. A similar thing happened in in
India. So here's the original polio.
You see that there's a, there's a, the, the green lines, the
polio cases. And we can see that when they
started vaccinating for polio very heavily in 1996, they also

(01:01:12):
changed the definition. They created a new thing called
ACE, a acute flaccid paralysis. And part of that is you have to
have original residual paralysisafter 60 days.
That's when it changed in 1997. So now we have a new disease
called acute flaccid paralysis and that's the big green line

(01:01:34):
going up at the the little blue line on the bottom is the new
polio definitions. But if we stayed with the old
polio definition and didn't haveAFP, then the levels of
paralysis have increased since they vaccinated.
But by a definition change, suddenly polio is going away.
And so according to this article, there was an extra

(01:01:56):
640,000 children developed with paralysis during the years 2000
to 2017 because but those cases never really counted because it
wasn't considered polio. So again, a definition change
really made a, you know, big difference in what you perceive.
That's the best vaccine ever. A changing definition.

(01:02:19):
Yeah, certainly. They really did that with polio
quite often after 2012, the number of oral polo vaccines,
because sometimes they were giving kids four or five or more
of these vaccines. That kind of this idea is like
just keep on hammering them, which I, you know, it looks
pretty clear that the increase in paralysis, but after 2012

(01:02:39):
they start, they started to reduce those and you see the,
the number of paralysis cases started to drop off because they
said, well, we've tackled polio so we can start decreasing the
number of vaccines, which they didn't really do.
They just changed the definition.
So that's my little spiel on polio, which again was a pretty

(01:03:01):
low incidence disease. It was spread apart.
Yeah, I mean, you, you say no incidents, but it's one of the
most spoken about in the last 100 years.
Yeah, so we had a big media blitz and we saw people in iron
lungs, we saw people in braces, and that tugs at your
heartstrings, right? So if you had, if you're

(01:03:21):
debilitated by some other disease that causes damage to
your heart, well, you don't see that.
So that doesn't get any media attention, right?
So, you know, you know, this idea of being paralysed kind of
freak people out. And there was a lot of media
attention to it. And then there was a big push
for the the vaccine and eventually they came out one and
came out with one in 1954. And then after that they change

(01:03:44):
the definition. So of course polio would just
vanish. And there's still people,
apparently they still get these paralysis problems and they get
put on not those big metal lung machines because we don't have
that technology anymore. We they get put on ventilators.
I actually bought that book, TheMoth in the Iron Lung.

(01:04:09):
Yeah, there was a particular study, I think it was in
Michigan in 1958, where they, you know, they tried to isolate,
you know what caused the paralysis.
And only a small fraction of thepeople were found to have like,
polio virus. There was a bunch of other
different viruses. In many cases, there was no
detectable pathogen that they could find at all.
It was just like, Oh yeah, none.I don't have that.

(01:04:32):
I don't have that chart in here,but which is kind of
interesting. So, you know, they've made it
sound like there's just this onelittle virus and that causes
paralysis and nothing else does.And never, nothing ever else
did. But I think the the history
shows that, you know, we had things like the LED arsenate was
causing problems because before really the late 1800s, there

(01:04:54):
wasn't really much paralysis ever detected.
It only happened when they started using these kind of
industrial pesticides. The trend is the same no matter
which disease you look at. Yeah, that's what I found out.
So you had typhoid fever, typhus.
You had scarlet fever, you had cholera.
All these things declined to near 0 by the 1940s, fifties and

(01:05:18):
60s. Some had a vaccine, some didn't.
It all had to do with cleaning up the environment.
And again, if we learn that lesson, we wouldn't be doing the
things we're doing today. We would be getting exercise.
We'd be getting fresh air, plenty of sunshine, good quality
Whole Foods, not junk foods. We wouldn't be people.

(01:05:38):
Struggle with this so much though.
I mean you you in the most. For the most part, when you say
stuff like this, people will call you a quack.
Yeah, well, I've been called worse, but I think the data
shows that. And I think that, you know, I, I
actually live that lifestyle andI feel great and I feel better
now than I did in my 30s. And then, you know, we're, we're

(01:06:02):
being stupid with plastic pollution.
We got microprostix everywhere, nanoplastics getting into our
system. So we're destroying our own
environment just for conveniences.
And and then we use the medical system to try to fix everything,
which I think is just not the right thing to do.
So I think we need a second health revolution where people
actually try to get healthy through exercise, sunshine,

(01:06:25):
clean water or good food, you know, don't eat garbage.
And it's not that hard. Well, it is psychologically
hard, but the concept isn't hard.
It's like, well, I can have an apple or I can have this junky
breakfast cereal. You know, there's you can make
better choices all the time. And yet that's the thing with
health is you make these choiceslike every day.

(01:06:47):
It's like this morning, I this morning I went for 1/2 hour walk
yesterday, went to the gym for two hours.
So that's my workout. I eat all Whole Foods.
I get plenty of sunshine. I de stress, try to have a good
day, laugh, have do meaningful work, have good social
connections. These are all how you build
health. The other way to do is, you

(01:07:08):
know, eat junk and drink Coca Cola and dunk a Donuts and don't
exercise and don't get any sunshine and then start
deteriorating. Then run to a doctor and hope
they can fix it. Yeah.
Then you take a pill. I need to Ozempic now, you know,
because if you ignore your health, you're going to get
sick. And then you run to somebody
that's going to try to fix it for you with a magic pill.
And those never really work. Have you seen this, a huge

(01:07:30):
lawsuit now against Ozempic, I think something to the tune of
$2 billion. Yeah, yeah.
But that's part of the business model, right?
So they'll make X number of billion dollars, they'll settle
out of court, but they still made still made a huge profit.
That's how the business model works.
They already know that they're going to get sued at some point.

(01:07:51):
That's a real kind of illness inour society.
It's like as long as you're making a dollar, that's OK.
It doesn't matter what we make. Who cares if it, you know, has,
you know, so called side effects?
It doesn't matter because as long as we make money.
And same thing with the food industry.
You know, people know they're making garbage food.
They figure, well, that's up to them not to eat our garbage
product because they're making lots of money from it.

(01:08:12):
And it's, you know, extends to the agricultural system.
It's like, oh, we know we're making substandard food.
A lot of them people know that it's like, and we know it's
magnesium deficient, but we're going to do it that way anyway.
We could be doing regenerative farming and organic farming, but
we don't make as much money of that.
We can't sell pesticides to those people.
So that's no good. And the advertisers along for

(01:08:33):
the ride too. We're going to advertise
whatever you want, you know, so you can have a Coke and a smile
and diabetes too. You can have, you know, you can
have Doritos and obesity, you can have all these wonderful
things that we're going to promote and show young people
having a great time with it, youknow, and then, you know,
financial industries all invested in all this stuff.
So it's a big what I call the sickness industrial complex.

(01:08:55):
And I think we need to change direction and go back towards,
you know, natural living. But the again, you, as you point
out, nobody makes money off of that sunshine's free clean
water. Well, that could cost you some
because our piping system in United States awful in a lot of
places. And so a lot of things are free.

(01:09:15):
Exercise is free. You don't have to go to a gym.
You can just go out and exercise.
So and you could choose to have Whole Foods or you can choose to
eat garbage and garbage food is very alluring.
It gets people addicted. There's a reason there's food
scientists. It's to get you hooked on these
things. But if we all shifted towards
the other end, the amount of money we'd spend on healthcare

(01:09:38):
would plummet from 18% back downto maybe 3% where it belongs for
accidents. Where medicine's great, you get
into a car accident? Super.
But these chronic conditions arebecause of our lifestyle, not
because anybody can really fix them except for yourself.
OK, we are over time Roman, let's come in for the final lap.

(01:09:59):
How can I follow your work and get your Well, I've got your
books, but I can somebody else get your books?
Sure. Let's just put this up here.
We'll skip all this stuff. Here's my contact.
I'm on XI. Like Twitter better.
That's a better name, but OK, it's X.
You can go on my sub stack. I have articles on all this
stuff, the charts, they're all free.

(01:10:21):
Or you can go to desalinus.com. You can find the books there
from all over the planets. It's translated into seven other
languages. We just released Chinese, so if
anybody reads Chinese, it's on there and there's the contact
and you can follow me on Telegram too.
So whichever way you want. If anybody has questions, you

(01:10:42):
want the charts, they're on dissolvinglucius.com.
They're on my sub stack so you can always find them.
Robin Best Janik, thank you for joining me in the trenches.
Thanks much for having me.