June 23, 2025 • 64 mins
In this thought-provoking episode of Ageless and Timeless, host Michele Hughes welcomes Rob Verkerk, PhD—ecologist, researcher, and founder of the Alliance for Natural Health International. With a career spanning decades across continents, Rob dives deep into the evolution of health, science, and the systemic influences shaping modern wellness.The conversation is a powerful call to action to take back control of your health in a world increasingly governed by corporate interests and regulatory overreach. Rob shares eye-opening truths about the flaws in modern medicine, the censorship of nutritional science, and the widespread damage caused by ultra-processed foods and sedentary lifestyles. From his work uniting regenerative agriculture and integrative medicine to his commitment to redefining public policy through science and law, Rob empowers listeners to think critically and live intentionally.Rob also offers Ageless and Timeless viewers a chance to win a signed copy of his bestselling book Reset Eating—a practical guide to reviving health through food. This episode is a must-watch for anyone interested in reclaiming their health and staying informed about the future of wellness, freedom, and sovereignty.Special Offer:
Rob is giving away a signed copy of his book Reset Eating to the first person who emails Michele at: themichelehughescompany@gmail.com
Medical Disclaimer – Ageless and Timeless PodcastAgeless and Timeless (the “Show”), along with its host and guests, shares insights and discussions on health, wellness, and longevity for informational and educational purposes only. The Show does not provide medical advice, diagnoses, treatments, cures, or preventative recommendations for any disease or health condition. The content shared should not be used as a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.While we strive to feature reputable sources and knowledgeable guests, neither Ageless and Timeless nor its host or affiliates assume responsibility for errors, omissions, or misinterpretations in the information provided. Listeners are encouraged to use their own discretion and consult with a licensed medical professional before making any health-related decisions. By listening to this podcast, you acknowledge that any actions you take based on the information presented are at your own risk, and Ageless and Timeless, its host, guests, and affiliates are not liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages resulting from the use of this content.
Rob is giving away a signed copy of his book Reset Eating to the first person who emails Michele at: themichelehughescompany@gmail.com
- Alliance for Natural Health USA: www.anh-usa.org
- ANH International: www.anhinternational.org
Medical Disclaimer – Ageless and Timeless PodcastAgeless and Timeless (the “Show”), along with its host and guests, shares insights and discussions on health, wellness, and longevity for informational and educational purposes only. The Show does not provide medical advice, diagnoses, treatments, cures, or preventative recommendations for any disease or health condition. The content shared should not be used as a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.While we strive to feature reputable sources and knowledgeable guests, neither Ageless and Timeless nor its host or affiliates assume responsibility for errors, omissions, or misinterpretations in the information provided. Listeners are encouraged to use their own discretion and consult with a licensed medical professional before making any health-related decisions. By listening to this podcast, you acknowledge that any actions you take based on the information presented are at your own risk, and Ageless and Timeless, its host, guests, and affiliates are not liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages resulting from the use of this content.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Good morning everyone. This is Michelle Hughes from Ageless and Timeless.
My guest today is actually a brit He's from England
and his name is Rob Burkirk and he has been
in the health and wellness space for it well since
at least two thousand and two, in an active role
as the executive director.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I guess is that your title, Rob.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
That is right, Michelle?
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Yeah, of the Alliance for Natural Health International, correct.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
Yeah, and the USA as well, and that's as well.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Yeah, that's why I said international because you added the USA.
You have someone here for about fifteen years and then
and you took over the responsibility for so you have
a really busy.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Life and we have we have another office in Amsterdam
as well. So yeah, so where are you?
Speaker 2 (01:06):
Where are you today? Doing this podcast?
Speaker 3 (01:08):
Today? I'm doing the podcast from the UK. I'm actually
a Dutch national, so I'm not a Dutch national and
next week I'll be back in the States, so literally
I moved backwards. It will Yeah, you know.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
I do remember you telling me that, and you'd have
a Dutch last name anyway, so you have a British accent.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
That's strange, I do.
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Yeah, I was I was a victim of the British
boarding school system when my parents were living the other
side of the world.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Right, and you went to uh, you went to school
at Imperial College.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Right.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I did my my university. Yeah. I did my my
master's and PhD in post doc all at Imperial College.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
How would you compare Imperial College to what what university
in the US would be comparable.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
To Imperial, Oxford and Cambridge of the really the three
top universities in the UK. So the equivalent to Yale, Harvard,
you know.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Yeah, Okay, I went to Oxford. I'm proud to say
I had my little stint on the Thames and I
learned how to punt. Yeah. It was a graduate program
from where I went to undergraduate in the University of
Massachusetts in Amherst, Massachusetts.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
I don't know if you know that, but it's a very.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Absolutely, very progressive school, and they had a program for
graduate students to go over to England and to Oxford.
I mean, so I was at Saint Hilda's College and
so we spend like a summer. It was about three
and a half months. It was really funny because when
I went over there, I was as skinny as a
(02:49):
reel and I mean, you know, like like people when
I came back to pick me up at the end,
they couldn't recognize me because we had been eating all.
You know, the food was so bad at those days
in Saint Hilda's.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
So we went on the high you know, on the
main street, and we.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Would go to all the pastry shops and eat all
the cars. So we were certainly not your poster children
for healthy eating that at that time. But it was
because England didn't have or Oxford didn't have really good
quality food.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
I know that's changed now and certainly.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
Lunch and it's changed a lot. And of course the
other thing is your microbiome wouldn't have been adjusted to
you know, moving from a US dot to a European
or a UK diet. It wouldn't be adjusted, so that,
you know, that.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Is so true. And not only that, but I was
there in the summer, but I got the.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
Worst nasal or you know, sinus and fetched and cold
that I'd ever had in my entire life. I've never
been so sick where I actually had to take antibiotics,
which I refused. You know, in my adult life, refuge
is to do unless it's a real crisis. Well, that
(04:03):
was a real crisis. So I think the weather, even
though it was warmer, it was still damp, and you know,
coming out of New England, even with the.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Humidity, it just I just wasn't used to it.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
So that was an adjustment to the health and wellness.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
You were not epigenetically adapted to the United Kingdom. There
you go as a result, Michelle. Yeah, and it's the
same people going the other way. You know, we're as
we become more and more global citizens. You could argue
that we've seen over the last fifty years or so,
food's becoming more and more similar. But still there are
(04:45):
pretty big adjustments.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
So Rob start us off by telling us more about you.
Everybody always wants to know who is your guest, Michelle,
and why did you choose him or her to come
on your show? So give us some thumbnails of your background.
What influenced you to become who you are today.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Well, I've had a lifelong interest in really getting under
the covers of understanding what nature is and why it is,
even to the point of really trying to understand what
life is. You know, we I was giving a talk,
it was a couple of years ago in a huge
(05:29):
mansion in the UK. There were two of us who
were key speakers, and I had a load of top
doctors and scientists in the audience, and I was sitting
between two oak trees. I'd taken everyone out of the
lecture theater. It was a beautiful summer's afternoon, unlike the
weather that you had when you're an auto. And I said, look,
(05:49):
let's start by talking about life. What is life? And
I was a standard that amongst these doctors and scientists,
you know, people were very unsure or what life is?
You know that when when someone dies in chemistry, exactly
the same chemistry you know is still there. What happens
(06:12):
is an electrical and bioelectrical and electromagnetic impulses, including from
the heart and the brain stopped. But you know, bottom
line is we haven't got a clear view of it.
So I was a kind of kid growing up in
Africa that was fascinated by the jungle and by the bugs.
And I, you know, was being pushed during my schooling
(06:35):
years towards economics. And I thank god my grandmother in
Holland said why are you doing economics? She swayed me
back and I became an ecologist, so I carried on
studying nature. I then became very concerned about the way
corporations were interfering with our environment and with our choices.
(07:00):
I then spent ten years or so campaigning in Australia
on getting chemicals out of foods and agriculture and you know,
for termite control, you name it. That that was my
goal for ten years. I then went back into academia,
went back to Imperial College, did a master's and a PhD,
(07:23):
and then seven years of postdoc in the field of
sustainable agriculture, but looking particularly at you know, food quality
and how to produce the healthiest foods with the highest
nutrient values that didn't become inundated with disease and insects
and all the rest of it. The more I did
(07:43):
that work, the more I realized that the chemistries that
were required in a plant to avoid being ravaged by
pestant disease were the same chemistries that were beneficial to humans.
We eat small quantities of them. And at Imperial College
(08:03):
we had a big, you know, biology and ecology department,
but also a big medicine department. Whenever I would talk
to the medics, I was always amazed that they had
no interest or no understanding when I'd say, hey, look,
we're studying these really interesting glucascinholates, for example, in cruciferous vegetables,
and you know, we find in the cruciferus vegetables that
(08:27):
have high levels there's no need to use pesticides. These
things act as natural pesticides. But look, I've been reading
papers that say that when you consume small amounts of
these compounds, they're really protective against cancer. And I remember
specifically asking one of the top on cologists that Imperial
this question is about glucasinolates, and he looked at me
(08:50):
as if I had two heads and said, I don't
know what you're talking about. We do chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery.
And round about two thousand and two I was offered
a permanent I was offered permanent tenure at Imperial College,
and so I had to make a decision as to
whether to become an academic for the rest of my life,
(09:14):
build my research group, or go back to my campaigning roots.
And by this stage I was really concerned about how
nature was being completely stripped apart, and you know, I
wanted to create a linkage between those of us who
(09:35):
produce the healthiest foods on the planet and those who
produce the healthiest humans in other words, integritive medicine community.
And that's really what I've been building for the last
twenty odd years. And funnily enough, I'm going to Ohio
next week for a big thirty five strong expert panel
(09:57):
think tank to do exact that, to bring the region
AGG leaders together with the integrative medicine leaders so that
we can build strategy that links to you.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
Know, you you are way ahead of your time.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
I mean, honestly, this hasn't really even today you don't see.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
I mean, I'm glad.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
You're going to Ohio for thirty five people, but thirty
five people is a microcosm.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
It is still so much lacking.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
It's a think it's a think tank. So these are
the leaders in many leaders in the field, so that
we can really it's a closed door think tank invitations only.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
Today's podcast is brought to you by Dimetria Products. Dimetria
is based in Carlsbad, California, and they manufacture ultra high
quality dietary supplements using chi Qi technology. Chi as you
probably know, is the energy that runs throughout our bodies
(10:57):
and is the basis of Chinese medicine. You use the
code ageless and get twenty percent off your order. I
highly recommend Gimetrio's products.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
I personally use.
Speaker 4 (11:08):
The complete aminos, the heart gems and the methusel Life
which is an RNA and DNA subling will spray. The
website to go to is www dot Jimetria dot com
slash gi Qi hyphen Technology and there you'll find out
(11:31):
more about this fascinating company, their products and the technology.
Speaker 3 (11:38):
But you know, we were in the nineteen eighties, we
were fighting against life essay, you know people, the fact
that we still have to try and fight the fact
that we you know, back in nineteen ninety one, I
wrote one of the first papers that was showing deep
scientific concern for GMOs and the outdoor release GMOs in
(12:01):
our field site in the UK. Actually the first outdoor
trial of GMOs using l seed rape was conducted and
visiting US professor and myself pended a paper in a
fairly minor journal because we had to put it into
minor journal. Major journals wouldn't have accepted it. But called
Buyer Control News and we said, guys, this idea of
(12:23):
having a two hundred and fifty meter boundary zone between
a GM crop and a non GM crop, thinking you
can keep it clear is complete madness because we know
what gets caught up in the jet streams that moves across.
And we've been studying this with a feeds and you know,
(12:43):
tokings and other things. So this was lunacy. But right
now you know in fact that Trump administration is trying
to deregulate GMOs. They're trying to do the same that
they're going exactly in the wrong direction.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Oh my gosh, that's that's sharp with the elon. I
mean with Robert F. Kennedy.
Speaker 3 (13:03):
Yes, you've got Kennedy who's got a view that's pretty
closely aligned. You know, we were in the in the
US Senate in January pushing to get Bobby Kennedy in.
Our legal counsel Jonathan Emoord and myself wrote a book
called in fact we can we can call that out
but the MAHA Mandate reversing America's Chronic disease Epidemic. So
(13:29):
we wrote a book and distributed to every single Senator.
Bobby gets in, but you you will know that his
his hands are largely tired, and you've got many opposing forces.
Donald Trump wants to do stuff that's good for business,
and sometimes it doesn't matter which kind of business chemical businesses,
(13:51):
pharmaceutical businesses are, you know, which we would argue two
very very concerning businesses that are I'm very I'm.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
Very shocked about that because it can't seem like the
drug industry and then of course the food industry were
targets right at the very beginning in January when they
had that meeting with RFK and the top people from
the you know, even Monsanto and Bear and Abbott and
all the you know, the big guys and the General Mills,
(14:24):
General Foods, Procter and Gamble. They were all there, and
you know, and they were being challenged. But apparently that
hasn't held wait for going forward with respect to what
you're just talking about.
Speaker 3 (14:38):
You know that there's progress in some directions, and there's
progress and opposite directions. You know, perhaps you can use
as an analogy one of the reasons for the breakdown
in the relationship between Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Yes,
the savings that that Elon must work hard to create
(14:58):
through DOGE. It's immediately undone by the big beautiful bill.
So this is quite typical of the characteristics of this
administration where you've got some stuff that is really moving
in the right direction of other stuff going in the
opposite direction, so not coherent.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
Are you saying that the US is going to be
the leader waving the flag for whatever happens in the
future with respect to the work that you're.
Speaker 3 (15:28):
Doing, Well, yeah, Look, the opportunity is huge. I mean,
having Bobby Kennedy heading up HHS is a massive opportunity.
We are actually developing twenty eight initiatives, eight of them
we've already unleashed this year that are going to be
(15:49):
creating a seed change to regulation around food, drugs, dietary supplements,
health products generally. So we are, you know, pushing very
very hard to use constitutional grounds case law that there
was a phenomenal change in underlying case law when the
(16:14):
Chevron doctrine that was passed in nineteen eighty four. That
really was the vehicle that US agencies government agencies were
using to overreach, whether it's the FDA, the FDC, the EPA,
they were able to use any point of legal ambiguity
and go, do you know what we will make the
(16:35):
determination so that that's how they overreach, that's how they
go beyond the law, and that was overturned on the
twenty eighth of June last year. And that's one of
the reasons that Jonathan has joined us. Jonathan Emoud also
known as the FDA Dragon Slayer because he's won more
cases against the FDA than any other attorney fourteen and county.
(17:01):
He joined our team. He said, Rob, you know, we've
worked together for twenty years. He's six of his fourteen
wins have been on behalf of our organization. But now
he's in house and we're you know, in the space
of a year, we got twenty eight initiatives that we're
using to really bust open the market the ability to
(17:26):
communicate scientific truth that the amount of censorship that has
built up over the decades is I mean that this control,
this monopolization that the drug companies have had even over nutrients,
you know, and disease claims. So one of our actions
(17:46):
is using a particular clause in the FDA Modernization Act
that Jonathan wrote many years ago, basically says if a
health agency health authority makes an authoritative claim around a
nutrient disease relationship. So you know, one of the ones
that people know a lot about that's now authorized is
(18:11):
the use of folate or folic acid the risk of
neural tube defects. But if we're going to be looking
at the ability of cocuminoids, for example, some of these
compounds in tumeric to cancer risks, there's a huge amount
of data on that. The drug companies are busy working
(18:32):
on it. But what happens is that government authorities like
the Office of Doughtary Supplements within the NIH, on their
website actually say that, But if you're a commercial customer
you want to sell a doutary supplement containing that product,
you can't put the claim on your You're can only
(18:55):
put a structure function claim on your label. Now, we've
got a list of about one hundred and fifty key
claims nutrient disease claims that health authorities, primarily the NIH,
are making about nutrients and diseases, and basically, using this
clause in the FDA Modernization Act, we're petitioning the FDA
(19:16):
to say, guys, we want all of those to be
able to be used in public speech, including commercial speech.
Now that for the first time take away this control
by the drug companies to control speech, so they are
the only ones who can talk about drugs in relation
to disease. We want to be able to talk about
(19:38):
nutrients or food in relation disease. If we can't do that,
we cannot make America healthy again.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
You know, it.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
Seems like countries like Switzerland as an example in Austria,
there's some far ahead in terms of their belief in natural, functional,
integrative medicine, and yet they don't ever get used as
the examples for countries like the US or Great Britain
as role models to follow some of their precepts.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
So why is that?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Basically because the essentially that the drug companies and the
food companies and the agrochemical companies used two major bases
in the industrialized world. One is Europe, the EU. And
you've got to remember, up until Brexit, the UK was
one of the key drafters of EU legislation. Most of
(20:34):
the legislation run drugs, agrochemicals GMOs has been created by
the Brits. So now that you've got Brexit, it really
is one and the same thing. So you've got that
as one major area and then the US is the other.
And essentially what's happened over the last eighty or so
years is that we've developed a corporatetocracy. This is where
(20:57):
essentially very large corporations into into the functioning of government
and are no longer separate entities, and they work in
their joint interest. The government wants to control and corporations
want power and control, and that's one of the reasons
we've seen extreme censorship. It's one of the reasons we've
(21:19):
seen the licensing system for drugs develop as a pay
to play system. You pay your money and then you're
allowed to call your products safe and effective, even if
the scientific data says otherwise that it's not safe. We
(21:40):
know that drugs can be the third leading cause of
death in Western society Peter Gotcher and others, and if
it's ineffective, and we know from multiple publications BMJ Clinical Evidence,
before it was closed down, had evaluated three thousand mainstream
interventions and found that only ten percent of them had
(22:02):
been scientifically found to be beneficial.
Speaker 2 (22:04):
So from why were they closed down? I think I
know the answer.
Speaker 3 (22:10):
Because we were exactly very good rhetorical question, Michelle. It
is because all of us were using that as evidence
for the fact that the drug regulation story system does
not work. But we're in the middle of major academic
studies we've published. We've submitted a major paper that looks
(22:31):
at drug and food definitions in eighteen different jurisdictions in
the world over one hundred and twenty year period, and
that's in peer review at the moment. And what it
shows incredibly clearly when you take a bird's eye view
of what's happened over the last one hundred and twenty years,
is that originally food and drug law was out there
(22:54):
to protect us, the city consumer. Over this last one
hundred and twenty years, it's shifted. Now it protects the corporations.
And we've got a situation where food is killing us
and drugs are killing us, the two things.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
You know, Robert, that is such a sobering statement, but
it's so true.
Speaker 2 (23:16):
I mean, the.
Speaker 1 (23:17):
Industrial revolution changed everything in terms of the priorities and
the concern for the health of the individual versus the
health or the bottom line of the corporate entity. So
and when we say corporate, we're talking about, you know,
not just the corporations, but the medical establishment and the
(23:38):
government entities that are controlled. So I mean it is
like a three pronged monster at least three is there
would there be any country that you would use as
a role model for what you're trying to achieve with
your alliance.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
You know, there isn't really a country that has got
it all right. I mean, it's really interesting when you
look at small generally, you have to look to small
countries where they have many things more right, Places like
Costa Rica are developing some pretty interesting regulatory systems because
they really understand the power of nature. I mean, one
(24:22):
of the reasons that we don't see it in any significant,
you know, large country is that the the industrial complex,
whether it's the censorship industrial complex, the agricultural industrial, medical
industrial complex, these complexes have become so dominant that they
use regulation as a mechanism to essentially further their own ends. So,
(24:48):
you know, we saw it during COVID when you know
a few countries Zambia, Tanzania decided to reject the receipt
of COVID vaccines and immediately they've faced penalties. I mean
that this is the way in which.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
They were punished.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
They were punished. So the incentive to be able to
stand out there and go against the flow is questionable
and you know, this is this is I think one
of the reasons that there was so much excitement around
the arrival of Donald Trump. You know, the reasons he
got in because people thought he's not from that system.
(25:31):
Let's see what he can do. And so you know,
hopefully that that there is you know, COVID in many respects,
has been backfired on the system. They wanted to use
it as a catalyze more control. What it's done instead
(25:52):
is it's woken a whole bunch of people who were asleep,
you know, on the tiller.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
So and particularly it only you know, we don't need
to get into the vaccine parte, just to you know,
it would be irresponsible not to mention that the vaccine
has really caused an awakening because it was done within
such a speedy time to you know, basically it was
done with good intention, but there has never been a
(26:21):
vaccine that's developed and produced and used so quickly in history.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
So you know, it usually goes the other way. It's
like a ten year period, but this was in what.
Speaker 3 (26:32):
Nine months, and of course it was it has been misclassified.
We are considering illegal action on its classification because it's
really not a vaccine at all. I mean, it's only
a vaccine because they have modified the definition of a vaccine.
So a vaccine is any substance that modifies the you know,
(26:56):
the immune response, and basically, you know, generally speaking, it's
it's it's only a very small part of the immune response.
Typically it's an antibody response. You can equally argue that
there are a whole range of natural substances that also
fulfill the definition of a vaccine, whereas the average person's
(27:19):
interpretation of a vaccine. The only way in which you
can argue that everyone should be vaccinated is if a
vaccine actually reduced a transmission and establishment, yeah, it was
established very early on. This one doesn't. So basically a
medical treatment and and it is also a gene therapy product,
(27:44):
so you know, and of course, what they've done, I
mean what they've done in the UK in the recent
amendment to the Medicines Regulations that passed a law to
make it illegal to call it a gene therapy product,
because everyone's calling the gene therapy product. So that this
is the way in which legislation has used to control
(28:06):
the space.
Speaker 1 (28:07):
So you know, you've had a lot of resistance just
you know, obviously because of what you're doing, you're going
against the you know, industrial complex. But I noticed on Wikipedia,
which I always thought was pretty reliable, but yet they
even said there something that was kind of pejorative about
your work, like, oh, he went against science, you know,
(28:30):
And so how do you deal with those kinds of
challenges in your professional life which you wear.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
It as a badge of honor in essence, I mean, honestly,
and everything that we do, we we call what we
do good science and good law. I have been astonished
over the last five years, particularly since COVID, but it
was happening. It was part of a creep that was
(28:57):
going on well before that. The deterior and the quality
of science, it's staggering. I read things in major journals like,
you know, BMJ, probably less so it's is now one
of the best medical journals, I feel. But the Lancet
New England Journal Medicine JAMMA that is astonishing. The abstract
(29:22):
does not reflect accurately the results. The methodology is not
clear enough for someone to be able to duplicate the
experiment because they leave a whole bunch of data aut
The statistical significance is interpreted as being equivalent to biological significance,
(29:44):
when actually they're only finding statistical significance because they're looking
at a randomized controlled trial in which the internal validation
standards are so tight, there's so little other sources of variation.
They just get a statistic the signific significant result. But
they make the assumption that if you take that same
(30:05):
intervention into the real world, you'll get the same result.
And this is the difference between efficacy, which you measure
under experimental conditions in a randomized control trial, and effectiveness.
So I've been a critic of that system. I've exposed
a lot of it. And the only tactic that they use.
(30:27):
All of us who have stood up and been dissenters
of the mainstream scientific process all accused of engaging in pseudoscience.
Speaker 2 (30:39):
That's what they said about you.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
So and once you then enter the realms. We have
a big interest in biophysics, and you know as as
applied to healthcare. So if you look at, say the
development of frequency devices in healthcare, this is one of
the big emerging areas of medicine. But of course it's
(31:04):
very threatening to drug companies, it's very threatening to some
of the mainstream medical device companies and it's pushed into
it's marginalized essentially, So as soon as you deal with
those more fringe areas, that should be encouraged, because that is,
you know, as Einstein said, the next frontier of medicine
(31:26):
will be frequency. We are frequency beings. And you know,
as if biochemistry and molecular biology and genetics was the
end game, of course it's not the end game. It's
part of a much bigger picture. And we are early
in our journey in understanding even how humans function, and
(31:48):
we are ultimately we've got to be very, very open.
So to be a good scientist, to be even a
skeptic scientist, you have to have an incredibly open mind.
And one of the big disturbing changes in the scientific
mainstream is that so many of these scientists have become
incredibly narrow minded. That's not good for science.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Well knowing that, but these studies are often funded by
the very people that are intended to gain by the results.
So how can we say that it's true science if
it's if it's not, if it's not.
Speaker 3 (32:24):
Abductive Because the part of the part of being narrow
minded is to make sure that you do things that
please your sponsor your funder and essentially the whole scientific
system is controlled by money. Now nature doesn't do that.
You know, We've always in my academic work we would
(32:44):
always use really complex ecosystems as our learning grounds. So
if we look at jungles, rainforests, and coral reefs, these
are the most complex systems we know about, and the
interchange of energy, the exchange, I mean, there's still a
bunch of organisms eating one another, but out of all
(33:06):
of that is a degree of coordination and feedback that
yields something that is stable, sustainable, beautiful. And you know,
we as humans, we go in with a very limited
understanding of this. And right now we are I believe
that a bifurcation point in human evolution because we're now
(33:29):
beginning to meddle with our own genome where we seem
to be happy doing that. We are happy to turn
the human body into a pharmaceutical factory, which is what
happens when you use technologies like mr and a body
to produce whatever medicine you wanted to do. mRNA is
(33:51):
seen as a very very expansive platform for pharmaceutical industry,
which is why they want nothing to be said negative
about it, which is why it was a big cover
up on the number of people that have been adversely
affected by COVID chaps go ahead, no, no, no. So
so we're at this this, this point where where we
(34:13):
should be having a public debate over are we going
to accept a kind of transhuman future in which we
blur the you know, the the the interface between natural biology,
if you can call it natural biology and synthetic biology
(34:34):
and technology. And that's beginning to happen. Censorship prevented any
public discussion and and now you can see they're trying
to deregulate you know, crisper technology, gene editing, what I
called GMO version two, and you know, the average person thinks, well,
(34:55):
you know, governments wouldn't allow something that was dangerous. It
must all be tested. We keep hearing people saying that
it's safe, just like COVID vaccines were safe, but there's
been no public discussion.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
And then what about the future with technology, you know,
the very things that you just mentioned, But then adding
in biotech and AI and you know where we're heading
is is that are they selling their soul those companies?
It looks like biotech is already in the you know,
in the in the hands of the drug companies, so
(35:30):
they're owned by drug companies.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
Yeah, already again is what about EI.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
Well, drug companies are certainly buying up many small biotech companies.
They use the small innovative biotech companies as they're R
and D. No, they don't want to spend money internally.
Big drug companies don't spend money anymore, and the same
amount of money the same investment in R and D
(35:59):
as they used to go and snap up other biotech
firms and then merge their operations.
Speaker 1 (36:04):
They justify their prices by the fact that their R
and D costs are so high.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
So yeah, you're saying R and D class. That means
the acquisition of.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
These little biotech companies, not the R and D that
they would have done roally.
Speaker 3 (36:18):
Where So AI AI to come back the second body
of question, AI is absolutely here to say to stay.
I personally have no problem with AI when it's used externally.
When it's used as an intelligent system in the same
way that we use a computer as an intelligent system,
(36:39):
it is incredibly helpful to process vast amounts of data
that allow us to get information much quicker and be
able to analyze and interpret data, which is what science
is all about. So an incredibly valuable tool. However, in
the wrong hands or in the wrong place is you know.
(37:01):
So let's look at, say, the use of AI to
create a downloadable synthetic memory, which is one of the ways,
which is it's being contemplated, it's being used. Now that
for me is where it's crossed the line. It's across
the line because you know that that really fits perfectly
(37:25):
well with you know class Schwab's view has put forward
in his twenty seventeen book The Fourth Industrial Revolution, where
he looks at twenty three different technologies. You know, if
you use AI to create designer babies, for example, I
would have a problem with that. You no longer allow
(37:48):
this extraordinary process that nature uses to decide what's good
and bad. I mean, nature exchanges genetic material all the time.
It decides through natural selection processes and evolution, what should stay,
what should change, what should adapt, what should become more
resilient less resilient. But once you start using essentially machine
(38:15):
learning and AI to do that, you're susceptible to programs
that are produced by people who have specific goals.
Speaker 2 (38:25):
Inn and one of those is controlled.
Speaker 3 (38:29):
Yeah, one of those is absolutely control. So yeah, I
think we have to watch AI like a hawk. I
think it's I think to be anti AI makes no
sense either, exactly, Yeah, cautiously.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
The point though, is that if you look at AIS,
if you want to take it to a spiritual level,
the decision between good and evil, and humanity has demonstrated
they have a tougher time choosing between good and evil
and their everyday practices. So now we're adding another layer,
a technological layer that is also forcing us to pick.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
Between good and evil, because there's a plenty of evil
that AI can can create, but there's also plenty of good,
as you've just said.
Speaker 3 (39:18):
So I find it really interesting to pose questions to
AI models or machine learning models. Many of them are
not true AI, the more machine learning. But if you
pose questions across different platforms, so you ask Grock versus Google,
Gemini versus Chatter GBT, for example, you'd be amazed at
(39:41):
the differences and results. And you can see that Google,
in my mind, provides the most standard status quo type
response consistently. You know, if you look at Google, one
of the largest, you know, tech platforms in world, many
(40:02):
of the people involved with it are big on control,
control of information. They you know, Google's and YouTube's medical
misinformation policy is absolute madness, you know, basically, unless you're
saying what the governments say, what the FDA, the NIH say.
They've taken off recent very recently, they've taken off the
(40:25):
World Health Organization off their their medical misinformation policy, which
is interesting.
Speaker 2 (40:32):
I didn't know that.
Speaker 3 (40:34):
We just saw it a couple of weeks ago when
we checked, because we've been campaigning against Google because of
that policy. Basically, they said, if a information around medicine,
whether it's disease treatment or prevention, if it does not
comply with the views and perspectives of local national health
(40:57):
authorities or the WHO, it's just allowed. So that was
a mechanism that they could censor almost anything if it
if it didn't support a WHO kind of CDC kind
of view. So that that that has changed a little bit,
but that's no doubt the result of the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (41:18):
So tell me more about why the United States of America,
the leading industrial nation in.
Speaker 2 (41:26):
The world, is number eighty in healthcare.
Speaker 1 (41:32):
How did we get to be so low on the
ratings and that and how do those ratings get established
in the.
Speaker 2 (41:41):
In the first place.
Speaker 3 (41:43):
Okay, So so the this is a the major organization
that is involved, funded by Bill Gates, that has been
behind the global burden of disease studies and the same Actually,
what they're looking at is healthy life years, health adjusted
(42:04):
life years, so it's healthy life expectancy, So you can
look at longevity. Longevity is a useful marker for all
of us who are interested in anti aging. But what's
really interesting is to look at how many years do
we remain completely healthy, free from morbidities or comorbidities. And
(42:26):
in those terms, the IHME data puts America eightieth, with
the view that it will by twenty fifty move below
one hundredth in the global rankings. So not only puts
it at the bottom of all industrialized high income countries,
(42:49):
it puts it at the bottom of many or very
low down in the list of medium income countries. Yet
the US spends more money on healthcare it sets of
twelve dollars per capita per annum than any other country
by long range. So you know, if you look at
say countries like Peru, they do better than the US.
(43:13):
So what's causing it, Well, it is the usual culprits,
But trying to get really firm data on how it
all fits together and which is more important than the
other is tough. But it is the food and the
food quality, but it's not it's also how Americans eat.
(43:38):
So you know a lot of people thinking about the
what what you put into your mouth every day, but
you've got to think of the how. So the how
is going to be how frequently do you eat, how
much do you eat? When you eat? What is the
composition and the quality of the foods that you are consuming.
When are you consuming sweet foods in relation to savory foods?
(44:02):
And I'll just give you an example of you you
know this practice of people in Western societies but also
many Eastern societies of eating sweeter things after a main meal.
What that does when you've got the protein, fats, and
carbs in your diet and then you have something sweet
and immediately afterwards, you buffer your insulin response, You blunt
that insulin response. So whereas if you get hungry in
(44:26):
the middle of the morning, middle of the afternoon, you go,
all my energy levels are going, and you put in
biscuits or chocolate or candy or anything like that, or
you take you know, sweetened sodas. It's a nightmare for
your blood sugar. And because insulin resistance, which underpins metabolic
(44:51):
disease and type two diabetes and obesity, is to do
with the frequency of insults of high blood sugar and
raised insulin. If you then have three main meals a
day and then you consume snacks in between, so that
you maybe six seven eight eating episodes per day, imagine
(45:15):
you keep on insulting your cells and the cell membranes,
making them more and more insulin resistance. So and we
think about how we eat well, chewing thirty times every
mouthful to allow the digestive enzymes to synchronize, so all
(45:38):
the amlasers released in the salivary enzymes, and you've got
sufficient stomach acid. Look at the fact that PPIs, PPI
drugs and antacids are amongst the most common pharmacy and
pharmaceutical products used in the US. You know, use a
PPI drug, you are cutting your acid in your stomach,
(45:59):
which you need to chemically digest food. He eat too quick,
you don't release then the pancreatic enzymes, the bile enzymes,
and everything else that are needed to digest your food. Properly.
If you eat your food while you are driving your car,
while you're watching CNN News looking at the latest things
(46:20):
that are happening in Israel or anywhere else in the world,
you are not going to be in rest and digest mode,
your parasympathetic autonomic side of your nervous system, and you
need to be in the parasympathetic mode. What happens is
that people in fight and flight mode on the simple
(46:41):
side of there, and you can't digest food properly.
Speaker 1 (46:44):
And that's what people eat on the run, like you say,
or they're stressed out already and they're eating because they're stressed.
They're only fuel to the fire because the stress is
already fight or flight and the sympathetic nervous system is
on overdrive. Turned out, you're adding into that food that
are probably more carbs, not complex carbs or.
Speaker 2 (47:07):
Regular starchy carves that.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
You know, make it even more difficult to create the
insulin response.
Speaker 3 (47:15):
Correct, So the mechanical breakdown if we look at say carbs, yes,
it's the amount of carbs, but you can look at
kids breakfast cereals that whole grain written on them. But
the whole grain is so mechanically processed. That if you
look at the you know, work of Jenny Brand Miller
(47:38):
from Professor Jenny Brown Miller from Sydney University. If you
go to glycemic index dot com, you can put in
the search bar and look at how we respond to
different foods and you'll find that those whole grain cereals
behave exactly like sugar if.
Speaker 2 (47:53):
They are sugar. If you look at the ingredients, there's
all of them. Are almost all of them have you know,
a very high sugar.
Speaker 3 (48:02):
Count exactly, but it's not even where the sugar count
is lower because of the degree of processing. Carbohydrate chains
are mechanically broken down their process. This is ultra processing.
So ultra process foods upfs are another big part of
the problem. So, and then coming back to the how
(48:23):
the other thing I wanted to say is, you know,
if you people know that the Mediterranean diet is healthy,
but it's also how people in the Mediterranean eat. They
take an hour off, they slip around a table, they
put on some nice music if it's in the evening,
they make up, got a candle on, and they move
themselves beautifully into parasympathetic mode. They exchange they're not looking
(48:47):
at the you know, CNN on the television at the
same time. So that's a big part of it. But
what about sitting. So you know, people say, oh, you
need to take more exercise, Well, sitting is the new smoking.
Sitting is one of the most dangerous things that we do.
We sit in the wrong way and if we if
you link that to posture, our posture, our muscular skeletal
(49:13):
system is falling apart. You know, Americans, the muscular skeletal system.
If you look at the work being done, you know,
in the field of advanced biostructural correction, it's extraordinary. How
you can I mean, this is a if you're like
a branch of chiropractic that's been essentially sidelined because it
(49:35):
is so effective and it basically runs against many of
the norms that are pushed out there that you can't
really do much about someone who's becoming chipotic. You know,
we see a bit upper part of the spine collapsing
because we're stuck in front of our comparisons.
Speaker 1 (49:51):
And you know a lot of times I've kept to
catch myself as I'm looking down at.
Speaker 2 (49:56):
My phone that you know, I phones in my hand
and I'm looking reading emails.
Speaker 1 (50:01):
And I'm thinking, you know what your neck is going
to get completely you know what you look at what
you see when you see elderly people who have that
problem with their spine.
Speaker 2 (50:13):
I forgot the name of it, but you know they're all.
Speaker 3 (50:16):
Yeah, they got twists and the spine, which happens because
their vertebrae have basically fallen off the stack and then
that turns into kyphosis and they move forward in the
upper part cervical butt of there. So I'm talking to
you now standing I haven't sat at my and you
(50:38):
know it's yeah, it's easy to do, but we we
don't do it. Sitting is a really really dangerous thing
to do. But but physical exercise, I mean, American people
are way way too sedentary. Stress is another factor. You know,
if you're fearful about your financial situation, your relationships, you're
(51:00):
job prospects, that is a killer. Chemicals in the environment,
you know, we know chemicals in the food, but in
the air, in the water, you know, p fat chemicals,
forever chemicals, flora alcohol substances. These are organic fluorine compounds,
some of the most dangerous compounds around. Americans are being
(51:21):
absolutely loaded by them through the food We're pushing the
FDA to release more data. The last time it released
data was twenty nineteen. They're trying to argue that only
meats and seafood are contaminated with the pfas. We've done
testing of even kale and even organic kalet. It's all
(51:44):
contaminated and this stuff builds up in your body.
Speaker 1 (51:47):
Well, recently they came out with protein powders, yes, the
p fassion, and you know, everybody thinks, oh, I'm taking
a protein powder. I must be doing the right thing
from my body, from my cargen and like lash gen.
And then they look and see these articles about now
they're full of forever chemicals.
Speaker 3 (52:08):
Yeah, exactly, so chemicals. You know. I think another aspect
that increasingly is coming out of the field of clinical
psychology as well as clinical psychoeuroimmunology, is that our locus
of control, our ability to feel in control of our lives.
(52:33):
It turns out that is a really important health determinant.
And you know, social isolation is one of the biggest
less people get so sick, and they often people who
are socially isolated don't feel that they have control over
(52:54):
their lives. They're waiting for the States, someone else, their
doctor to control them. That is super unhealthy.
Speaker 1 (53:01):
Well, that is the World Economic Forum. That is Claus
Schwab's vision. It's a totalitarian vision that we're you know,
we are going to be. You will own nothing and
you will be happy, and.
Speaker 2 (53:14):
You will also be you know, under our thumb, under
our control.
Speaker 3 (53:20):
So you will sign a social contract that makes sure
that you do. It's kind of like a hive mentality.
It turns human beings into you know, worker bees for
the system, and we're all working for the queen bee
in there exactly.
Speaker 1 (53:37):
Well, so we're gonna be cut off here in a
little bit, I know, the time we go by very fast,
and just from Radfest and talking to you and Mel
and Phil Mickens and you know, our mutual friend and
you know, I just I when even you were you
were friends with Mark too, right from epic team.
Speaker 3 (53:59):
Absolutely, yeah, yeah, absolutely, I'm just taking the products today, yeah,
rosales for years, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (54:06):
I Marcus, I take his epicy every day.
Speaker 3 (54:09):
But levels are doing well.
Speaker 2 (54:12):
Yeah. Yeah, it's a good thing, even for women. It's
a good thing.
Speaker 1 (54:16):
But I knew that we would be able to talk forever,
because it's just you're just have so much knowledge and
so much experience.
Speaker 2 (54:22):
But before we go, I know you've written a book, and.
Speaker 1 (54:26):
Why don't you talk to us about that and your
little offer, not little, but your nice offer for our viewers.
Speaker 3 (54:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (54:33):
Look, we we wrote a book a couple of years
ago called Reset Eating, and it's about resetting your metabolism
fundamentally so using food as medicine, and we take people
through a journey. It's got lots of pictures and images.
It takes the science that hopefully makes it pretty accessible
(54:55):
to people how you can without any drugs just by
changing what you're eating and when you're eating and how
you're eating to reset your metabolism. One of the goals,
you know, people think about what do you do with food?
While you eat healthy food, you try and reduce the calories.
(55:15):
What we say, what your goal should be is to
achieve what we call metabolic flexibility. It's a scientific concept
that basically means that you can use multiple fuels for energy,
so it means you can use carbs.
Speaker 3 (55:33):
But of course, when we all did science as kids
at school and UNI, we learn about the crib cycle
and mitochondria and you remember just had carbohydrates feeding through consons,
you turn biruve into the mitochondria and then running through
electron transport to produce ATP. Well, the bottom line is
(55:54):
we can also use protein. So you know, this is
what's happening now with GLP receptor agonets, with weight loss jams.
You see the people with skinny arms, Well, what's happening
is they're consuming so little food that the body goes,
holy cow, where are we going to get energy from?
And it's burning muscle sopa is now, you know, accelerated sarcopenia,
(56:20):
age related muscle wastings being separated by these very very
dangerous But of course we can also burn fats. But
if you keep on consuming carbs, you literally put your
fat burning apparatus. The better oxidation of fatty acids go
through the liver. All of that just goes to sleep.
And of course we all store, you know, maybe half
(56:43):
a kilogram of glycogen, which is you know, the storage
form of glucose in our liver and our skeletal muscles.
So if you go along to the gym the fitness
suite and you try and take thirty minutes of exercise
every every day, you can put a tick in the box,
but all you'll be doing is burning that glycogen. So
(57:04):
we also teach people how you can combine strength training
together with more longer periods of activity. Human beings are
designed to be active ten hours a day. Behavior is
a big part of the reason why we got it wrong.
But this book is primarily about food. Reset Eating. We
would love to give away a copy now. One of
(57:26):
the reasons we can't give away many copies is basically
we're sold out. We are in the middle of a reprint.
We have a handful of copies sitting in our office
in the States, in Virginia. We will, happily the first
person is am I right that messages Michelle, they will
(57:46):
receive a signed copy of Reset Eating that is now
out of print. You'll see it on Amazon, and you'll
see it's temporarily off sale because we're waiting for the
reprint to go.
Speaker 2 (57:58):
That is that is so generous And I know it's.
Speaker 3 (58:02):
Dollars is the list price on Amazon?
Speaker 1 (58:04):
Yeah, but it's a it's a bit, it's a real
it's a real generous offer to our viewers. And I
hope somebody who's watching right now gets on the phone
or gets on the email. My email is the th
and then my name M I C H E L
E h U G H T S and then company
(58:26):
spelled out singular at Gmail.
Speaker 2 (58:29):
So whoever sends that email to me and they'll get
a sign copy, right.
Speaker 3 (58:36):
You'll be able to sign it absolutely.
Speaker 1 (58:38):
Autograph it, okay, perfect, and then once you get the
new ones in print, I'd love to get a copy.
I don't want to completely with a limited one now,
but I want to definitely read that book.
Speaker 2 (58:50):
So all right, well, Rob, thank you so much for
coming on today. And I know it's a little bit
later there for you.
Speaker 3 (58:56):
Right, it's it's it's approaching eight p I'm in the
evening for dinner time.
Speaker 2 (59:04):
Yeah, I wanted today.
Speaker 1 (59:06):
We'll have to have you back because I really wanted
you to share with everybody what your perfect day looks like,
because you're so knowledgeable about the.
Speaker 2 (59:14):
Nutritional part and then of course the exercise.
Speaker 1 (59:17):
And so at some point, maybe next because we're booked
through May of next year.
Speaker 2 (59:22):
But sometime next year, if you would come back and
we will go into my work.
Speaker 3 (59:26):
I'm a sixty five year old guy. I just have
my sixty fifth birthday.
Speaker 2 (59:31):
You're amazing.
Speaker 3 (59:32):
I'm not healthier than I've been at any other stage
of my life. So this idea that we have to
get less healthy as we get what we do is
we learn more about health, we learn how to drive
this incredibly sophisticated system human body and mind and spirit.
And that's what it's all about.
Speaker 1 (59:51):
And a big part of it is attitude, because you know,
I just like every day I say thank you to
God for allowing me to be twenty years younger biological.
And I think people need to understand that biological age
is really the right measurement, not chronologue. That chronological is
just how many years you've gone around the sun. But
(01:00:12):
if your body is twenty years older than your chronological age,
you're in deep trouble.
Speaker 2 (01:00:17):
But if your body is, you know, ten.
Speaker 1 (01:00:19):
Twenty years younger, like I'm sure yours is, and you
look younger, you know, so you got it both ways.
Speaker 3 (01:00:26):
Both the internal work now we've got we've got fantastic
tools like true diagnostics. You know, I was just going
to tell you I.
Speaker 1 (01:00:33):
Just finished my true Diagnostics test. So Ryan is a
good friend of mine. I adore him and Ryan Smith
and he's been on my podcast. So yeah, so I'll
be getting those results. It'll be my third or second
time doing their test. And then I did the telomere
test with the spectro cell. So the pla mare length
(01:00:54):
is another measurement of your biological age. And then DNA
the DNA company at a Toronto does your epigenetic DNAs.
It also gives you a measurement of So there's there's
so much technology today.
Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
That tells you guides you, uh.
Speaker 1 (01:01:11):
And then and then all the other tools like photo
biomodulation and and no red light therapy, I mean, and
other other therapies.
Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
I just got Weber Medical.
Speaker 1 (01:01:22):
I don't know if you know them out of uh,
they're out of Germany. Robert Weber, Yes, and he just
sent me his watch and that you know, you use
that a couple three times a day and it puts
it's a laser technology.
Speaker 2 (01:01:36):
So there are a real medical device.
Speaker 1 (01:01:38):
Company, not a consumer although they're you know, their watch
is now addressing the consumer market. But yeah, there's so
much available today to be able to not only measure,
but to practice and to feel the results with the
help of these aids that are are out there.
Speaker 2 (01:01:59):
And we didn't even get into the.
Speaker 1 (01:02:01):
Brain that you know the gut bring access and how
how much knowledge it helps to improve those.
Speaker 3 (01:02:08):
Two get the verigal turns sorded. And of course this
is what if you look at I. E. Vader or
traditional Chinese medicine. They understood the relationship between the gut
brain connection and they own, you know, centuries ago. So
we're catching up in the West before we.
Speaker 1 (01:02:26):
Say goodbye, would you just give us your website so
people can look at your alliance.
Speaker 3 (01:02:31):
So I'll give you two websites, so we'll give our us.
One is very much focused on the political work that
we do. Is we we have calls to action all
the time, to congress, to different government agencies. We are
you know, we're launching legal campaigns and initiatives all the time, lawsuits,
(01:02:55):
et cetera. So that is a n H which stands
for Alliance for Natural Health, a n H dash U
s a dot org. So a n h U s
a dot org. If you want more information on the
health side, to our international website, which is a n
H no dash at a n H International dot.
Speaker 2 (01:03:18):
Org international spelled out.
Speaker 3 (01:03:20):
Spelled out in full H International dot org and both
of them have weekly newsletters that you can sign up
to correctly. So there's a load of information coming through
through both of them. I would urge you to to
sign up to both.
Speaker 2 (01:03:35):
Awesome, okay, Rob, Well, have a good dinner.
Speaker 3 (01:03:39):
Thank you so much. Michelle's such a pleasure to see
you go.
Speaker 2 (01:03:44):
Are you going to be at a forum or you know?
Speaker 3 (01:03:47):
Do you know? I'm Our schedule is so tight at
the moment, there's no whether I will or I won't,
but I think I yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:03:59):
Now I always go with Phil. Wherever Phil goes. I
like to know because each the way.
Speaker 2 (01:04:07):
All right, Well, very good, take care Okay tears m
Good morning everyone. This is Michelle Hughes from Ageless and Timeless.
My guest today is actually a brit He's from England
and his name is Rob Burkirk and he has been
in the health and wellness space for it well since
at least two thousand and two, in an active role
as the executive director.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I guess is that your title, Rob.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
That is right, Michelle?
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Yeah, of the Alliance for Natural Health International, correct.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
Yeah, and the USA as well, and that's as well.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Yeah, that's why I said international because you added the USA.
You have someone here for about fifteen years and then
and you took over the responsibility for so you have
a really busy.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Life and we have we have another office in Amsterdam
as well. So yeah, so where are you?
Speaker 2 (01:06):
Where are you today? Doing this podcast?
Speaker 3 (01:08):
Today? I'm doing the podcast from the UK. I'm actually
a Dutch national, so I'm not a Dutch national and
next week I'll be back in the States, so literally
I moved backwards. It will Yeah, you know.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
I do remember you telling me that, and you'd have
a Dutch last name anyway, so you have a British accent.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
That's strange, I do.
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Yeah, I was I was a victim of the British
boarding school system when my parents were living the other
side of the world.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Right, and you went to uh, you went to school
at Imperial College.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Right.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I did my my university. Yeah. I did my my
master's and PhD in post doc all at Imperial College.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
How would you compare Imperial College to what what university
in the US would be comparable.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
To Imperial, Oxford and Cambridge of the really the three
top universities in the UK. So the equivalent to Yale, Harvard,
you know.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Yeah, Okay, I went to Oxford. I'm proud to say
I had my little stint on the Thames and I
learned how to punt. Yeah. It was a graduate program
from where I went to undergraduate in the University of
Massachusetts in Amherst, Massachusetts.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
I don't know if you know that, but it's a very.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Absolutely, very progressive school, and they had a program for
graduate students to go over to England and to Oxford.
I mean, so I was at Saint Hilda's College and
so we spend like a summer. It was about three
and a half months. It was really funny because when
I went over there, I was as skinny as a
(02:49):
reel and I mean, you know, like like people when
I came back to pick me up at the end,
they couldn't recognize me because we had been eating all.
You know, the food was so bad at those days
in Saint Hilda's.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
So we went on the high you know, on the
main street, and we.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Would go to all the pastry shops and eat all
the cars. So we were certainly not your poster children
for healthy eating that at that time. But it was
because England didn't have or Oxford didn't have really good
quality food.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
I know that's changed now and certainly.
Speaker 3 (03:24):
Lunch and it's changed a lot. And of course the
other thing is your microbiome wouldn't have been adjusted to
you know, moving from a US dot to a European
or a UK diet. It wouldn't be adjusted, so that,
you know, that.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Is so true. And not only that, but I was
there in the summer, but I got the.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
Worst nasal or you know, sinus and fetched and cold
that I'd ever had in my entire life. I've never
been so sick where I actually had to take antibiotics,
which I refused. You know, in my adult life, refuge
is to do unless it's a real crisis. Well, that
(04:03):
was a real crisis. So I think the weather, even
though it was warmer, it was still damp, and you know,
coming out of New England, even with the.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Humidity, it just I just wasn't used to it.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
So that was an adjustment to the health and wellness.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
You were not epigenetically adapted to the United Kingdom. There
you go as a result, Michelle. Yeah, and it's the
same people going the other way. You know, we're as
we become more and more global citizens. You could argue
that we've seen over the last fifty years or so,
food's becoming more and more similar. But still there are
(04:45):
pretty big adjustments.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
So Rob start us off by telling us more about you.
Everybody always wants to know who is your guest, Michelle,
and why did you choose him or her to come
on your show? So give us some thumbnails of your background.
What influenced you to become who you are today.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Well, I've had a lifelong interest in really getting under
the covers of understanding what nature is and why it is,
even to the point of really trying to understand what
life is. You know, we I was giving a talk,
it was a couple of years ago in a huge
(05:29):
mansion in the UK. There were two of us who
were key speakers, and I had a load of top
doctors and scientists in the audience, and I was sitting
between two oak trees. I'd taken everyone out of the
lecture theater. It was a beautiful summer's afternoon, unlike the
weather that you had when you're an auto. And I said, look,
(05:49):
let's start by talking about life. What is life? And
I was a standard that amongst these doctors and scientists,
you know, people were very unsure or what life is?
You know that when when someone dies in chemistry, exactly
the same chemistry you know is still there. What happens
(06:12):
is an electrical and bioelectrical and electromagnetic impulses, including from
the heart and the brain stopped. But you know, bottom
line is we haven't got a clear view of it.
So I was a kind of kid growing up in
Africa that was fascinated by the jungle and by the bugs.
And I, you know, was being pushed during my schooling
(06:35):
years towards economics. And I thank god my grandmother in
Holland said why are you doing economics? She swayed me
back and I became an ecologist, so I carried on
studying nature. I then became very concerned about the way
corporations were interfering with our environment and with our choices.
(07:00):
I then spent ten years or so campaigning in Australia
on getting chemicals out of foods and agriculture and you know,
for termite control, you name it. That that was my
goal for ten years. I then went back into academia,
went back to Imperial College, did a master's and a PhD,
(07:23):
and then seven years of postdoc in the field of
sustainable agriculture, but looking particularly at you know, food quality
and how to produce the healthiest foods with the highest
nutrient values that didn't become inundated with disease and insects
and all the rest of it. The more I did
(07:43):
that work, the more I realized that the chemistries that
were required in a plant to avoid being ravaged by
pestant disease were the same chemistries that were beneficial to humans.
We eat small quantities of them. And at Imperial College
(08:03):
we had a big, you know, biology and ecology department,
but also a big medicine department. Whenever I would talk
to the medics, I was always amazed that they had
no interest or no understanding when I'd say, hey, look,
we're studying these really interesting glucascinholates, for example, in cruciferous vegetables,
and you know, we find in the cruciferus vegetables that
(08:27):
have high levels there's no need to use pesticides. These
things act as natural pesticides. But look, I've been reading
papers that say that when you consume small amounts of
these compounds, they're really protective against cancer. And I remember
specifically asking one of the top on cologists that Imperial
this question is about glucasinolates, and he looked at me
(08:50):
as if I had two heads and said, I don't
know what you're talking about. We do chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery.
And round about two thousand and two I was offered
a permanent I was offered permanent tenure at Imperial College,
and so I had to make a decision as to
whether to become an academic for the rest of my life,
(09:14):
build my research group, or go back to my campaigning roots.
And by this stage I was really concerned about how
nature was being completely stripped apart, and you know, I
wanted to create a linkage between those of us who
(09:35):
produce the healthiest foods on the planet and those who
produce the healthiest humans in other words, integritive medicine community.
And that's really what I've been building for the last
twenty odd years. And funnily enough, I'm going to Ohio
next week for a big thirty five strong expert panel
(09:57):
think tank to do exact that, to bring the region
AGG leaders together with the integrative medicine leaders so that
we can build strategy that links to you.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
Know, you you are way ahead of your time.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
I mean, honestly, this hasn't really even today you don't see.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
I mean, I'm glad.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
You're going to Ohio for thirty five people, but thirty
five people is a microcosm.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
It is still so much lacking.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
It's a think it's a think tank. So these are
the leaders in many leaders in the field, so that
we can really it's a closed door think tank invitations only.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
Today's podcast is brought to you by Dimetria Products. Dimetria
is based in Carlsbad, California, and they manufacture ultra high
quality dietary supplements using chi Qi technology. Chi as you
probably know, is the energy that runs throughout our bodies
(10:57):
and is the basis of Chinese medicine. You use the
code ageless and get twenty percent off your order. I
highly recommend Gimetrio's products.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
I personally use.
Speaker 4 (11:08):
The complete aminos, the heart gems and the methusel Life
which is an RNA and DNA subling will spray. The
website to go to is www dot Jimetria dot com
slash gi Qi hyphen Technology and there you'll find out
(11:31):
more about this fascinating company, their products and the technology.
Speaker 3 (11:38):
But you know, we were in the nineteen eighties, we
were fighting against life essay, you know people, the fact
that we still have to try and fight the fact
that we you know, back in nineteen ninety one, I
wrote one of the first papers that was showing deep
scientific concern for GMOs and the outdoor release GMOs in
(12:01):
our field site in the UK. Actually the first outdoor
trial of GMOs using l seed rape was conducted and
visiting US professor and myself pended a paper in a
fairly minor journal because we had to put it into
minor journal. Major journals wouldn't have accepted it. But called
Buyer Control News and we said, guys, this idea of
(12:23):
having a two hundred and fifty meter boundary zone between
a GM crop and a non GM crop, thinking you
can keep it clear is complete madness because we know
what gets caught up in the jet streams that moves across.
And we've been studying this with a feeds and you know,
(12:43):
tokings and other things. So this was lunacy. But right
now you know in fact that Trump administration is trying
to deregulate GMOs. They're trying to do the same that
they're going exactly in the wrong direction.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Oh my gosh, that's that's sharp with the elon. I
mean with Robert F. Kennedy.
Speaker 3 (13:03):
Yes, you've got Kennedy who's got a view that's pretty
closely aligned. You know, we were in the in the
US Senate in January pushing to get Bobby Kennedy in.
Our legal counsel Jonathan Emoord and myself wrote a book
called in fact we can we can call that out
but the MAHA Mandate reversing America's Chronic disease Epidemic. So
(13:29):
we wrote a book and distributed to every single Senator.
Bobby gets in, but you you will know that his
his hands are largely tired, and you've got many opposing forces.
Donald Trump wants to do stuff that's good for business,
and sometimes it doesn't matter which kind of business chemical businesses,
(13:51):
pharmaceutical businesses are, you know, which we would argue two
very very concerning businesses that are I'm very I'm.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
Very shocked about that because it can't seem like the
drug industry and then of course the food industry were
targets right at the very beginning in January when they
had that meeting with RFK and the top people from
the you know, even Monsanto and Bear and Abbott and
all the you know, the big guys and the General Mills,
(14:24):
General Foods, Procter and Gamble. They were all there, and
you know, and they were being challenged. But apparently that
hasn't held wait for going forward with respect to what
you're just talking about.
Speaker 3 (14:38):
You know that there's progress in some directions, and there's
progress and opposite directions. You know, perhaps you can use
as an analogy one of the reasons for the breakdown
in the relationship between Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Yes,
the savings that that Elon must work hard to create
(14:58):
through DOGE. It's immediately undone by the big beautiful bill.
So this is quite typical of the characteristics of this
administration where you've got some stuff that is really moving
in the right direction of other stuff going in the
opposite direction, so not coherent.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
Are you saying that the US is going to be
the leader waving the flag for whatever happens in the
future with respect to the work that you're.
Speaker 3 (15:28):
Doing, Well, yeah, Look, the opportunity is huge. I mean,
having Bobby Kennedy heading up HHS is a massive opportunity.
We are actually developing twenty eight initiatives, eight of them
we've already unleashed this year that are going to be
(15:49):
creating a seed change to regulation around food, drugs, dietary supplements,
health products generally. So we are, you know, pushing very
very hard to use constitutional grounds case law that there
was a phenomenal change in underlying case law when the
(16:14):
Chevron doctrine that was passed in nineteen eighty four. That
really was the vehicle that US agencies government agencies were
using to overreach, whether it's the FDA, the FDC, the EPA,
they were able to use any point of legal ambiguity
and go, do you know what we will make the
(16:35):
determination so that that's how they overreach, that's how they
go beyond the law, and that was overturned on the
twenty eighth of June last year. And that's one of
the reasons that Jonathan has joined us. Jonathan Emoud also
known as the FDA Dragon Slayer because he's won more
cases against the FDA than any other attorney fourteen and county.
(17:01):
He joined our team. He said, Rob, you know, we've
worked together for twenty years. He's six of his fourteen
wins have been on behalf of our organization. But now
he's in house and we're you know, in the space
of a year, we got twenty eight initiatives that we're
using to really bust open the market the ability to
(17:26):
communicate scientific truth that the amount of censorship that has
built up over the decades is I mean that this control,
this monopolization that the drug companies have had even over nutrients,
you know, and disease claims. So one of our actions
(17:46):
is using a particular clause in the FDA Modernization Act
that Jonathan wrote many years ago, basically says if a
health agency health authority makes an authoritative claim around a
nutrient disease relationship. So you know, one of the ones
that people know a lot about that's now authorized is
(18:11):
the use of folate or folic acid the risk of
neural tube defects. But if we're going to be looking
at the ability of cocuminoids, for example, some of these
compounds in tumeric to cancer risks, there's a huge amount
of data on that. The drug companies are busy working
(18:32):
on it. But what happens is that government authorities like
the Office of Doughtary Supplements within the NIH, on their
website actually say that, But if you're a commercial customer
you want to sell a doutary supplement containing that product,
you can't put the claim on your You're can only
(18:55):
put a structure function claim on your label. Now, we've
got a list of about one hundred and fifty key
claims nutrient disease claims that health authorities, primarily the NIH,
are making about nutrients and diseases, and basically, using this
clause in the FDA Modernization Act, we're petitioning the FDA
(19:16):
to say, guys, we want all of those to be
able to be used in public speech, including commercial speech.
Now that for the first time take away this control
by the drug companies to control speech, so they are
the only ones who can talk about drugs in relation
to disease. We want to be able to talk about
(19:38):
nutrients or food in relation disease. If we can't do that,
we cannot make America healthy again.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
You know, it.
Speaker 1 (19:47):
Seems like countries like Switzerland as an example in Austria,
there's some far ahead in terms of their belief in natural, functional,
integrative medicine, and yet they don't ever get used as
the examples for countries like the US or Great Britain
as role models to follow some of their precepts.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
So why is that?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Basically because the essentially that the drug companies and the
food companies and the agrochemical companies used two major bases
in the industrialized world. One is Europe, the EU. And
you've got to remember, up until Brexit, the UK was
one of the key drafters of EU legislation. Most of
(20:34):
the legislation run drugs, agrochemicals GMOs has been created by
the Brits. So now that you've got Brexit, it really
is one and the same thing. So you've got that
as one major area and then the US is the other.
And essentially what's happened over the last eighty or so
years is that we've developed a corporatetocracy. This is where
(20:57):
essentially very large corporations into into the functioning of government
and are no longer separate entities, and they work in
their joint interest. The government wants to control and corporations
want power and control, and that's one of the reasons
we've seen extreme censorship. It's one of the reasons we've
(21:19):
seen the licensing system for drugs develop as a pay
to play system. You pay your money and then you're
allowed to call your products safe and effective, even if
the scientific data says otherwise that it's not safe. We
(21:40):
know that drugs can be the third leading cause of
death in Western society Peter Gotcher and others, and if
it's ineffective, and we know from multiple publications BMJ Clinical Evidence,
before it was closed down, had evaluated three thousand mainstream
interventions and found that only ten percent of them had
(22:02):
been scientifically found to be beneficial.
Speaker 2 (22:04):
So from why were they closed down? I think I
know the answer.
Speaker 3 (22:10):
Because we were exactly very good rhetorical question, Michelle. It
is because all of us were using that as evidence
for the fact that the drug regulation story system does
not work. But we're in the middle of major academic
studies we've published. We've submitted a major paper that looks
(22:31):
at drug and food definitions in eighteen different jurisdictions in
the world over one hundred and twenty year period, and
that's in peer review at the moment. And what it
shows incredibly clearly when you take a bird's eye view
of what's happened over the last one hundred and twenty years,
is that originally food and drug law was out there
(22:54):
to protect us, the city consumer. Over this last one
hundred and twenty years, it's shifted. Now it protects the corporations.
And we've got a situation where food is killing us
and drugs are killing us, the two things.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
You know, Robert, that is such a sobering statement, but
it's so true.
Speaker 2 (23:16):
I mean, the.
Speaker 1 (23:17):
Industrial revolution changed everything in terms of the priorities and
the concern for the health of the individual versus the
health or the bottom line of the corporate entity. So
and when we say corporate, we're talking about, you know,
not just the corporations, but the medical establishment and the
(23:38):
government entities that are controlled. So I mean it is
like a three pronged monster at least three is there
would there be any country that you would use as
a role model for what you're trying to achieve with
your alliance.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
You know, there isn't really a country that has got
it all right. I mean, it's really interesting when you
look at small generally, you have to look to small
countries where they have many things more right, Places like
Costa Rica are developing some pretty interesting regulatory systems because
they really understand the power of nature. I mean, one
(24:22):
of the reasons that we don't see it in any significant,
you know, large country is that the the industrial complex,
whether it's the censorship industrial complex, the agricultural industrial, medical
industrial complex, these complexes have become so dominant that they
use regulation as a mechanism to essentially further their own ends. So,
(24:48):
you know, we saw it during COVID when you know
a few countries Zambia, Tanzania decided to reject the receipt
of COVID vaccines and immediately they've faced penalties. I mean
that this is the way in which.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
They were punished.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
They were punished. So the incentive to be able to
stand out there and go against the flow is questionable
and you know, this is this is I think one
of the reasons that there was so much excitement around
the arrival of Donald Trump. You know, the reasons he
got in because people thought he's not from that system.
(25:31):
Let's see what he can do. And so you know,
hopefully that that there is you know, COVID in many respects,
has been backfired on the system. They wanted to use
it as a catalyze more control. What it's done instead
(25:52):
is it's woken a whole bunch of people who were asleep,
you know, on the tiller.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
So and particularly it only you know, we don't need
to get into the vaccine parte, just to you know,
it would be irresponsible not to mention that the vaccine
has really caused an awakening because it was done within
such a speedy time to you know, basically it was
done with good intention, but there has never been a
(26:21):
vaccine that's developed and produced and used so quickly in history.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
So you know, it usually goes the other way. It's
like a ten year period, but this was in what.
Speaker 3 (26:32):
Nine months, and of course it was it has been misclassified.
We are considering illegal action on its classification because it's
really not a vaccine at all. I mean, it's only
a vaccine because they have modified the definition of a vaccine.
So a vaccine is any substance that modifies the you know,
(26:56):
the immune response, and basically, you know, generally speaking, it's
it's it's only a very small part of the immune response.
Typically it's an antibody response. You can equally argue that
there are a whole range of natural substances that also
fulfill the definition of a vaccine, whereas the average person's
(27:19):
interpretation of a vaccine. The only way in which you
can argue that everyone should be vaccinated is if a
vaccine actually reduced a transmission and establishment, yeah, it was
established very early on. This one doesn't. So basically a
medical treatment and and it is also a gene therapy product,
(27:44):
so you know, and of course, what they've done, I
mean what they've done in the UK in the recent
amendment to the Medicines Regulations that passed a law to
make it illegal to call it a gene therapy product,
because everyone's calling the gene therapy product. So that this
is the way in which legislation has used to control
(28:06):
the space.
Speaker 1 (28:07):
So you know, you've had a lot of resistance just
you know, obviously because of what you're doing, you're going
against the you know, industrial complex. But I noticed on Wikipedia,
which I always thought was pretty reliable, but yet they
even said there something that was kind of pejorative about
your work, like, oh, he went against science, you know,
(28:30):
And so how do you deal with those kinds of
challenges in your professional life which you wear.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
It as a badge of honor in essence, I mean, honestly,
and everything that we do, we we call what we
do good science and good law. I have been astonished
over the last five years, particularly since COVID, but it
was happening. It was part of a creep that was
(28:57):
going on well before that. The deterior and the quality
of science, it's staggering. I read things in major journals like,
you know, BMJ, probably less so it's is now one
of the best medical journals, I feel. But the Lancet
New England Journal Medicine JAMMA that is astonishing. The abstract
(29:22):
does not reflect accurately the results. The methodology is not
clear enough for someone to be able to duplicate the
experiment because they leave a whole bunch of data aut
The statistical significance is interpreted as being equivalent to biological significance,
(29:44):
when actually they're only finding statistical significance because they're looking
at a randomized controlled trial in which the internal validation
standards are so tight, there's so little other sources of variation.
They just get a statistic the signific significant result. But
they make the assumption that if you take that same
(30:05):
intervention into the real world, you'll get the same result.
And this is the difference between efficacy, which you measure
under experimental conditions in a randomized control trial, and effectiveness.
So I've been a critic of that system. I've exposed
a lot of it. And the only tactic that they use.
(30:27):
All of us who have stood up and been dissenters
of the mainstream scientific process all accused of engaging in pseudoscience.
Speaker 2 (30:39):
That's what they said about you.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
So and once you then enter the realms. We have
a big interest in biophysics, and you know as as
applied to healthcare. So if you look at, say the
development of frequency devices in healthcare, this is one of
the big emerging areas of medicine. But of course it's
(31:04):
very threatening to drug companies, it's very threatening to some
of the mainstream medical device companies and it's pushed into
it's marginalized essentially, So as soon as you deal with
those more fringe areas, that should be encouraged, because that is,
you know, as Einstein said, the next frontier of medicine
(31:26):
will be frequency. We are frequency beings. And you know,
as if biochemistry and molecular biology and genetics was the
end game, of course it's not the end game. It's
part of a much bigger picture. And we are early
in our journey in understanding even how humans function, and
(31:48):
we are ultimately we've got to be very, very open.
So to be a good scientist, to be even a
skeptic scientist, you have to have an incredibly open mind.
And one of the big disturbing changes in the scientific
mainstream is that so many of these scientists have become
incredibly narrow minded. That's not good for science.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Well knowing that, but these studies are often funded by
the very people that are intended to gain by the results.
So how can we say that it's true science if
it's if it's not, if it's not.
Speaker 3 (32:24):
Abductive Because the part of the part of being narrow
minded is to make sure that you do things that
please your sponsor your funder and essentially the whole scientific
system is controlled by money. Now nature doesn't do that.
You know, We've always in my academic work we would
(32:44):
always use really complex ecosystems as our learning grounds. So
if we look at jungles, rainforests, and coral reefs, these
are the most complex systems we know about, and the
interchange of energy, the exchange, I mean, there's still a
bunch of organisms eating one another, but out of all
(33:06):
of that is a degree of coordination and feedback that
yields something that is stable, sustainable, beautiful. And you know,
we as humans, we go in with a very limited
understanding of this. And right now we are I believe
that a bifurcation point in human evolution because we're now
(33:29):
beginning to meddle with our own genome where we seem
to be happy doing that. We are happy to turn
the human body into a pharmaceutical factory, which is what
happens when you use technologies like mr and a body
to produce whatever medicine you wanted to do. mRNA is
(33:51):
seen as a very very expansive platform for pharmaceutical industry,
which is why they want nothing to be said negative
about it, which is why it was a big cover
up on the number of people that have been adversely
affected by COVID chaps go ahead, no, no, no. So
so we're at this this, this point where where we
(34:13):
should be having a public debate over are we going
to accept a kind of transhuman future in which we
blur the you know, the the the interface between natural biology,
if you can call it natural biology and synthetic biology
(34:34):
and technology. And that's beginning to happen. Censorship prevented any
public discussion and and now you can see they're trying
to deregulate you know, crisper technology, gene editing, what I
called GMO version two, and you know, the average person thinks, well,
(34:55):
you know, governments wouldn't allow something that was dangerous. It
must all be tested. We keep hearing people saying that
it's safe, just like COVID vaccines were safe, but there's
been no public discussion.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
And then what about the future with technology, you know,
the very things that you just mentioned, But then adding
in biotech and AI and you know where we're heading
is is that are they selling their soul those companies?
It looks like biotech is already in the you know,
in the in the hands of the drug companies, so
(35:30):
they're owned by drug companies.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
Yeah, already again is what about EI.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
Well, drug companies are certainly buying up many small biotech companies.
They use the small innovative biotech companies as they're R
and D. No, they don't want to spend money internally.
Big drug companies don't spend money anymore, and the same
amount of money the same investment in R and D
(35:59):
as they used to go and snap up other biotech
firms and then merge their operations.
Speaker 1 (36:04):
They justify their prices by the fact that their R
and D costs are so high.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
So yeah, you're saying R and D class. That means
the acquisition of.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
These little biotech companies, not the R and D that
they would have done roally.
Speaker 3 (36:18):
Where So AI AI to come back the second body
of question, AI is absolutely here to say to stay.
I personally have no problem with AI when it's used externally.
When it's used as an intelligent system in the same
way that we use a computer as an intelligent system,
(36:39):
it is incredibly helpful to process vast amounts of data
that allow us to get information much quicker and be
able to analyze and interpret data, which is what science
is all about. So an incredibly valuable tool. However, in
the wrong hands or in the wrong place is you know.
(37:01):
So let's look at, say, the use of AI to
create a downloadable synthetic memory, which is one of the ways,
which is it's being contemplated, it's being used. Now that
for me is where it's crossed the line. It's across
the line because you know that that really fits perfectly
(37:25):
well with you know class Schwab's view has put forward
in his twenty seventeen book The Fourth Industrial Revolution, where
he looks at twenty three different technologies. You know, if
you use AI to create designer babies, for example, I
would have a problem with that. You no longer allow
(37:48):
this extraordinary process that nature uses to decide what's good
and bad. I mean, nature exchanges genetic material all the time.
It decides through natural selection processes and evolution, what should stay,
what should change, what should adapt, what should become more
resilient less resilient. But once you start using essentially machine
(38:15):
learning and AI to do that, you're susceptible to programs
that are produced by people who have specific goals.
Speaker 2 (38:25):
Inn and one of those is controlled.
Speaker 3 (38:29):
Yeah, one of those is absolutely control. So yeah, I
think we have to watch AI like a hawk. I
think it's I think to be anti AI makes no
sense either, exactly, Yeah, cautiously.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
The point though, is that if you look at AIS,
if you want to take it to a spiritual level,
the decision between good and evil, and humanity has demonstrated
they have a tougher time choosing between good and evil
and their everyday practices. So now we're adding another layer,
a technological layer that is also forcing us to pick.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
Between good and evil, because there's a plenty of evil
that AI can can create, but there's also plenty of good,
as you've just said.
Speaker 3 (39:18):
So I find it really interesting to pose questions to
AI models or machine learning models. Many of them are
not true AI, the more machine learning. But if you
pose questions across different platforms, so you ask Grock versus Google,
Gemini versus Chatter GBT, for example, you'd be amazed at
(39:41):
the differences and results. And you can see that Google,
in my mind, provides the most standard status quo type
response consistently. You know, if you look at Google, one
of the largest, you know, tech platforms in world, many
(40:02):
of the people involved with it are big on control,
control of information. They you know, Google's and YouTube's medical
misinformation policy is absolute madness, you know, basically, unless you're
saying what the governments say, what the FDA, the NIH say.
They've taken off recent very recently, they've taken off the
(40:25):
World Health Organization off their their medical misinformation policy, which
is interesting.
Speaker 2 (40:32):
I didn't know that.
Speaker 3 (40:34):
We just saw it a couple of weeks ago when
we checked, because we've been campaigning against Google because of
that policy. Basically, they said, if a information around medicine,
whether it's disease treatment or prevention, if it does not
comply with the views and perspectives of local national health
(40:57):
authorities or the WHO, it's just allowed. So that was
a mechanism that they could censor almost anything if it
if it didn't support a WHO kind of CDC kind
of view. So that that that has changed a little bit,
but that's no doubt the result of the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (41:18):
So tell me more about why the United States of America,
the leading industrial nation in.
Speaker 2 (41:26):
The world, is number eighty in healthcare.
Speaker 1 (41:32):
How did we get to be so low on the
ratings and that and how do those ratings get established
in the.
Speaker 2 (41:41):
In the first place.
Speaker 3 (41:43):
Okay, So so the this is a the major organization
that is involved, funded by Bill Gates, that has been
behind the global burden of disease studies and the same Actually,
what they're looking at is healthy life years, health adjusted
(42:04):
life years, so it's healthy life expectancy, So you can
look at longevity. Longevity is a useful marker for all
of us who are interested in anti aging. But what's
really interesting is to look at how many years do
we remain completely healthy, free from morbidities or comorbidities. And
(42:26):
in those terms, the IHME data puts America eightieth, with
the view that it will by twenty fifty move below
one hundredth in the global rankings. So not only puts
it at the bottom of all industrialized high income countries,
(42:49):
it puts it at the bottom of many or very
low down in the list of medium income countries. Yet
the US spends more money on healthcare it sets of
twelve dollars per capita per annum than any other country
by long range. So you know, if you look at
say countries like Peru, they do better than the US.
(43:13):
So what's causing it, Well, it is the usual culprits,
But trying to get really firm data on how it
all fits together and which is more important than the
other is tough. But it is the food and the
food quality, but it's not it's also how Americans eat.
(43:38):
So you know a lot of people thinking about the
what what you put into your mouth every day, but
you've got to think of the how. So the how
is going to be how frequently do you eat, how
much do you eat? When you eat? What is the
composition and the quality of the foods that you are consuming.
When are you consuming sweet foods in relation to savory foods?
(44:02):
And I'll just give you an example of you you
know this practice of people in Western societies but also
many Eastern societies of eating sweeter things after a main meal.
What that does when you've got the protein, fats, and
carbs in your diet and then you have something sweet
and immediately afterwards, you buffer your insulin response, You blunt
that insulin response. So whereas if you get hungry in
(44:26):
the middle of the morning, middle of the afternoon, you go,
all my energy levels are going, and you put in
biscuits or chocolate or candy or anything like that, or
you take you know, sweetened sodas. It's a nightmare for
your blood sugar. And because insulin resistance, which underpins metabolic
(44:51):
disease and type two diabetes and obesity, is to do
with the frequency of insults of high blood sugar and
raised insulin. If you then have three main meals a
day and then you consume snacks in between, so that
you maybe six seven eight eating episodes per day, imagine
(45:15):
you keep on insulting your cells and the cell membranes,
making them more and more insulin resistance. So and we
think about how we eat well, chewing thirty times every
mouthful to allow the digestive enzymes to synchronize, so all
(45:38):
the amlasers released in the salivary enzymes, and you've got
sufficient stomach acid. Look at the fact that PPIs, PPI
drugs and antacids are amongst the most common pharmacy and
pharmaceutical products used in the US. You know, use a
PPI drug, you are cutting your acid in your stomach,
(45:59):
which you need to chemically digest food. He eat too quick,
you don't release then the pancreatic enzymes, the bile enzymes,
and everything else that are needed to digest your food. Properly.
If you eat your food while you are driving your car,
while you're watching CNN News looking at the latest things
(46:20):
that are happening in Israel or anywhere else in the world,
you are not going to be in rest and digest mode,
your parasympathetic autonomic side of your nervous system, and you
need to be in the parasympathetic mode. What happens is
that people in fight and flight mode on the simple
(46:41):
side of there, and you can't digest food properly.
Speaker 1 (46:44):
And that's what people eat on the run, like you say,
or they're stressed out already and they're eating because they're stressed.
They're only fuel to the fire because the stress is
already fight or flight and the sympathetic nervous system is
on overdrive. Turned out, you're adding into that food that
are probably more carbs, not complex carbs or.
Speaker 2 (47:07):
Regular starchy carves that.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
You know, make it even more difficult to create the
insulin response.
Speaker 3 (47:15):
Correct, So the mechanical breakdown if we look at say carbs, yes,
it's the amount of carbs, but you can look at
kids breakfast cereals that whole grain written on them. But
the whole grain is so mechanically processed. That if you
look at the you know, work of Jenny Brand Miller
(47:38):
from Professor Jenny Brown Miller from Sydney University. If you
go to glycemic index dot com, you can put in
the search bar and look at how we respond to
different foods and you'll find that those whole grain cereals
behave exactly like sugar if.
Speaker 2 (47:53):
They are sugar. If you look at the ingredients, there's
all of them. Are almost all of them have you know,
a very high sugar.
Speaker 3 (48:02):
Count exactly, but it's not even where the sugar count
is lower because of the degree of processing. Carbohydrate chains
are mechanically broken down their process. This is ultra processing.
So ultra process foods upfs are another big part of
the problem. So, and then coming back to the how
(48:23):
the other thing I wanted to say is, you know,
if you people know that the Mediterranean diet is healthy,
but it's also how people in the Mediterranean eat. They
take an hour off, they slip around a table, they
put on some nice music if it's in the evening,
they make up, got a candle on, and they move
themselves beautifully into parasympathetic mode. They exchange they're not looking
(48:47):
at the you know, CNN on the television at the
same time. So that's a big part of it. But
what about sitting. So you know, people say, oh, you
need to take more exercise, Well, sitting is the new smoking.
Sitting is one of the most dangerous things that we do.
We sit in the wrong way and if we if
you link that to posture, our posture, our muscular skeletal
(49:13):
system is falling apart. You know, Americans, the muscular skeletal system.
If you look at the work being done, you know,
in the field of advanced biostructural correction, it's extraordinary. How
you can I mean, this is a if you're like
a branch of chiropractic that's been essentially sidelined because it
(49:35):
is so effective and it basically runs against many of
the norms that are pushed out there that you can't
really do much about someone who's becoming chipotic. You know,
we see a bit upper part of the spine collapsing
because we're stuck in front of our comparisons.
Speaker 1 (49:51):
And you know a lot of times I've kept to
catch myself as I'm looking down at.
Speaker 2 (49:56):
My phone that you know, I phones in my hand
and I'm looking reading emails.
Speaker 1 (50:01):
And I'm thinking, you know what your neck is going
to get completely you know what you look at what
you see when you see elderly people who have that
problem with their spine.
Speaker 2 (50:13):
I forgot the name of it, but you know they're all.
Speaker 3 (50:16):
Yeah, they got twists and the spine, which happens because
their vertebrae have basically fallen off the stack and then
that turns into kyphosis and they move forward in the
upper part cervical butt of there. So I'm talking to
you now standing I haven't sat at my and you
(50:38):
know it's yeah, it's easy to do, but we we
don't do it. Sitting is a really really dangerous thing
to do. But but physical exercise, I mean, American people
are way way too sedentary. Stress is another factor. You know,
if you're fearful about your financial situation, your relationships, you're
(51:00):
job prospects, that is a killer. Chemicals in the environment,
you know, we know chemicals in the food, but in
the air, in the water, you know, p fat chemicals,
forever chemicals, flora alcohol substances. These are organic fluorine compounds,
some of the most dangerous compounds around. Americans are being
(51:21):
absolutely loaded by them through the food We're pushing the
FDA to release more data. The last time it released
data was twenty nineteen. They're trying to argue that only
meats and seafood are contaminated with the pfas. We've done
testing of even kale and even organic kalet. It's all
(51:44):
contaminated and this stuff builds up in your body.
Speaker 1 (51:47):
Well, recently they came out with protein powders, yes, the
p fassion, and you know, everybody thinks, oh, I'm taking
a protein powder. I must be doing the right thing
from my body, from my cargen and like lash gen.
And then they look and see these articles about now
they're full of forever chemicals.
Speaker 3 (52:08):
Yeah, exactly, so chemicals. You know. I think another aspect
that increasingly is coming out of the field of clinical
psychology as well as clinical psychoeuroimmunology, is that our locus
of control, our ability to feel in control of our lives.
(52:33):
It turns out that is a really important health determinant.
And you know, social isolation is one of the biggest
less people get so sick, and they often people who
are socially isolated don't feel that they have control over
(52:54):
their lives. They're waiting for the States, someone else, their
doctor to control them. That is super unhealthy.
Speaker 1 (53:01):
Well, that is the World Economic Forum. That is Claus
Schwab's vision. It's a totalitarian vision that we're you know,
we are going to be. You will own nothing and
you will be happy, and.
Speaker 2 (53:14):
You will also be you know, under our thumb, under
our control.
Speaker 3 (53:20):
So you will sign a social contract that makes sure
that you do. It's kind of like a hive mentality.
It turns human beings into you know, worker bees for
the system, and we're all working for the queen bee
in there exactly.
Speaker 1 (53:37):
Well, so we're gonna be cut off here in a
little bit, I know, the time we go by very fast,
and just from Radfest and talking to you and Mel
and Phil Mickens and you know, our mutual friend and
you know, I just I when even you were you
were friends with Mark too, right from epic team.
Speaker 3 (53:59):
Absolutely, yeah, yeah, absolutely, I'm just taking the products today, yeah,
rosales for years, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (54:06):
I Marcus, I take his epicy every day.
Speaker 3 (54:09):
But levels are doing well.
Speaker 2 (54:12):
Yeah. Yeah, it's a good thing, even for women. It's
a good thing.
Speaker 1 (54:16):
But I knew that we would be able to talk forever,
because it's just you're just have so much knowledge and
so much experience.
Speaker 2 (54:22):
But before we go, I know you've written a book, and.
Speaker 1 (54:26):
Why don't you talk to us about that and your
little offer, not little, but your nice offer for our viewers.
Speaker 3 (54:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (54:33):
Look, we we wrote a book a couple of years
ago called Reset Eating, and it's about resetting your metabolism
fundamentally so using food as medicine, and we take people
through a journey. It's got lots of pictures and images.
It takes the science that hopefully makes it pretty accessible
(54:55):
to people how you can without any drugs just by
changing what you're eating and when you're eating and how
you're eating to reset your metabolism. One of the goals,
you know, people think about what do you do with food?
While you eat healthy food, you try and reduce the calories.
(55:15):
What we say, what your goal should be is to
achieve what we call metabolic flexibility. It's a scientific concept
that basically means that you can use multiple fuels for energy,
so it means you can use carbs.
Speaker 3 (55:33):
But of course, when we all did science as kids
at school and UNI, we learn about the crib cycle
and mitochondria and you remember just had carbohydrates feeding through consons,
you turn biruve into the mitochondria and then running through
electron transport to produce ATP. Well, the bottom line is
(55:54):
we can also use protein. So you know, this is
what's happening now with GLP receptor agonets, with weight loss jams.
You see the people with skinny arms, Well, what's happening
is they're consuming so little food that the body goes,
holy cow, where are we going to get energy from?
And it's burning muscle sopa is now, you know, accelerated sarcopenia,
(56:20):
age related muscle wastings being separated by these very very
dangerous But of course we can also burn fats. But
if you keep on consuming carbs, you literally put your
fat burning apparatus. The better oxidation of fatty acids go
through the liver. All of that just goes to sleep.
And of course we all store, you know, maybe half
(56:43):
a kilogram of glycogen, which is you know, the storage
form of glucose in our liver and our skeletal muscles.
So if you go along to the gym the fitness
suite and you try and take thirty minutes of exercise
every every day, you can put a tick in the box,
but all you'll be doing is burning that glycogen. So
(57:04):
we also teach people how you can combine strength training
together with more longer periods of activity. Human beings are
designed to be active ten hours a day. Behavior is
a big part of the reason why we got it wrong.
But this book is primarily about food. Reset Eating. We
would love to give away a copy now. One of
(57:26):
the reasons we can't give away many copies is basically
we're sold out. We are in the middle of a reprint.
We have a handful of copies sitting in our office
in the States, in Virginia. We will, happily the first
person is am I right that messages Michelle, they will
(57:46):
receive a signed copy of Reset Eating that is now
out of print. You'll see it on Amazon, and you'll
see it's temporarily off sale because we're waiting for the
reprint to go.
Speaker 2 (57:58):
That is that is so generous And I know it's.
Speaker 3 (58:02):
Dollars is the list price on Amazon?
Speaker 1 (58:04):
Yeah, but it's a it's a bit, it's a real
it's a real generous offer to our viewers. And I
hope somebody who's watching right now gets on the phone
or gets on the email. My email is the th
and then my name M I C H E L
E h U G H T S and then company
(58:26):
spelled out singular at Gmail.
Speaker 2 (58:29):
So whoever sends that email to me and they'll get
a sign copy, right.
Speaker 3 (58:36):
You'll be able to sign it absolutely.
Speaker 1 (58:38):
Autograph it, okay, perfect, and then once you get the
new ones in print, I'd love to get a copy.
I don't want to completely with a limited one now,
but I want to definitely read that book.
Speaker 2 (58:50):
So all right, well, Rob, thank you so much for
coming on today. And I know it's a little bit
later there for you.
Speaker 3 (58:56):
Right, it's it's it's approaching eight p I'm in the
evening for dinner time.
Speaker 2 (59:04):
Yeah, I wanted today.
Speaker 1 (59:06):
We'll have to have you back because I really wanted
you to share with everybody what your perfect day looks like,
because you're so knowledgeable about the.
Speaker 2 (59:14):
Nutritional part and then of course the exercise.
Speaker 1 (59:17):
And so at some point, maybe next because we're booked
through May of next year.
Speaker 2 (59:22):
But sometime next year, if you would come back and
we will go into my work.
Speaker 3 (59:26):
I'm a sixty five year old guy. I just have
my sixty fifth birthday.
Speaker 2 (59:31):
You're amazing.
Speaker 3 (59:32):
I'm not healthier than I've been at any other stage
of my life. So this idea that we have to
get less healthy as we get what we do is
we learn more about health, we learn how to drive
this incredibly sophisticated system human body and mind and spirit.
And that's what it's all about.
Speaker 1 (59:51):
And a big part of it is attitude, because you know,
I just like every day I say thank you to
God for allowing me to be twenty years younger biological.
And I think people need to understand that biological age
is really the right measurement, not chronologue. That chronological is
just how many years you've gone around the sun. But
(01:00:12):
if your body is twenty years older than your chronological age,
you're in deep trouble.
Speaker 2 (01:00:17):
But if your body is, you know, ten.
Speaker 1 (01:00:19):
Twenty years younger, like I'm sure yours is, and you
look younger, you know, so you got it both ways.
Speaker 3 (01:00:26):
Both the internal work now we've got we've got fantastic
tools like true diagnostics. You know, I was just going
to tell you I.
Speaker 1 (01:00:33):
Just finished my true Diagnostics test. So Ryan is a
good friend of mine. I adore him and Ryan Smith
and he's been on my podcast. So yeah, so I'll
be getting those results. It'll be my third or second
time doing their test. And then I did the telomere
test with the spectro cell. So the pla mare length
(01:00:54):
is another measurement of your biological age. And then DNA
the DNA company at a Toronto does your epigenetic DNAs.
It also gives you a measurement of So there's there's
so much technology today.
Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
That tells you guides you, uh.
Speaker 1 (01:01:11):
And then and then all the other tools like photo
biomodulation and and no red light therapy, I mean, and
other other therapies.
Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
I just got Weber Medical.
Speaker 1 (01:01:22):
I don't know if you know them out of uh,
they're out of Germany. Robert Weber, Yes, and he just
sent me his watch and that you know, you use
that a couple three times a day and it puts
it's a laser technology.
Speaker 2 (01:01:36):
So there are a real medical device.
Speaker 1 (01:01:38):
Company, not a consumer although they're you know, their watch
is now addressing the consumer market. But yeah, there's so
much available today to be able to not only measure,
but to practice and to feel the results with the
help of these aids that are are out there.
Speaker 2 (01:01:59):
And we didn't even get into the.
Speaker 1 (01:02:01):
Brain that you know the gut bring access and how
how much knowledge it helps to improve those.
Speaker 3 (01:02:08):
Two get the verigal turns sorded. And of course this
is what if you look at I. E. Vader or
traditional Chinese medicine. They understood the relationship between the gut
brain connection and they own, you know, centuries ago. So
we're catching up in the West before we.
Speaker 1 (01:02:26):
Say goodbye, would you just give us your website so
people can look at your alliance.
Speaker 3 (01:02:31):
So I'll give you two websites, so we'll give our us.
One is very much focused on the political work that
we do. Is we we have calls to action all
the time, to congress, to different government agencies. We are
you know, we're launching legal campaigns and initiatives all the time, lawsuits,
(01:02:55):
et cetera. So that is a n H which stands
for Alliance for Natural Health, a n H dash U
s a dot org. So a n h U s
a dot org. If you want more information on the
health side, to our international website, which is a n
H no dash at a n H International dot.
Speaker 2 (01:03:18):
Org international spelled out.
Speaker 3 (01:03:20):
Spelled out in full H International dot org and both
of them have weekly newsletters that you can sign up
to correctly. So there's a load of information coming through
through both of them. I would urge you to to
sign up to both.
Speaker 2 (01:03:35):
Awesome, okay, Rob, Well, have a good dinner.
Speaker 3 (01:03:39):
Thank you so much. Michelle's such a pleasure to see
you go.
Speaker 2 (01:03:44):
Are you going to be at a forum or you know?
Speaker 3 (01:03:47):
Do you know? I'm Our schedule is so tight at
the moment, there's no whether I will or I won't,
but I think I yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:03:59):
Now I always go with Phil. Wherever Phil goes. I
like to know because each the way.
Speaker 2 (01:04:07):
All right, Well, very good, take care Okay tears m
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
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.