You didn't just write a book. You and Susan Humphries Carlson, one of the pivotal books on the history of vaccines. I mean she wasn't Rogan recently chatting about. It. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, that's not what I intended to do. I was just doing research and I just, after a while, I had enough information and data that I thought I should share it because no one seemed to know it. Why? I don't, you know, I was like, why wouldn't people know this? It's it's in the CDC databases.
It's in National Health Service databases. It's all through the medical literature. So why wouldn't anybody know it? But apparently they didn't. I have I have the 10th anniversary edition because it's where's where's the camera? There it is Wait, there we go. No, there we go. There it is. And I have the one that you never speak about, but the. Oh yeah, The Companion. Yeah, that's that.
That was fun. That's got a timeline in it and hundreds of doctors quotes that were against vaccination and against the medical system in general and all sorts of goodies in there. But it's not a book to read. It's just more of a reference. Here's another good book, not by you, but Turtles All the Way Down. It's a great accessory to to your book. I've heard that, but I haven't read it and I generally don't read other books. I agree. That sounds. That sounded really stupid,
didn't it? I don't read the current books, I read old stuff. It's like a musician saying I don't listen to any other music, I just. Listen to my no, when I when I started this, I just said I'm just going to read all the literature and ignore any current like books that have been written so I wouldn't get biassed right. So, so I kind of stick with that. So I don't really read any. Roman, this is your first appearance on my UK column show.
So for my UK column audience who might not know who you are, what is your background? Very quickly, let's get it out of the way so that it's not boring. Well, it is boring. So I have an engineering background. I did computers for a lot of years and at one point I had young kids. I'm going to keep it short, right? So I had young kids and I decided that after listening to the Gary Knoll programme that, you know, I was a little worried about neurological damage of from vaccines.
I didn't think it was that big of a deal. But I did some research and I started reading books and I found a book by Neil Miller. And then there was a chart showing the client and mortality rate of measles by 95% before there was a vaccine in 1963. And I thought, well, this guy's a lunatic. This can't be true because I had
a belief system in vaccines. I don't know where it came from, but I didn't anyway, so I went to a local library and I found Almanacks and the third one if I got some data from there every 10 years from measles deaths. And I charted it on my graph paper. So this was over 25 years ago and it was basically the same chart. And I still didn't believe it because I thought, you know,
maybe the Almanacks wrong. I mean, I just, I just couldn't accept it. So then I ended up going to Yale Medical where I walked in, had no idea what I was doing, and I found these big olive green books called US Vital Statistics. I was like, well, it's probably in there. So I started getting data from
there. I went in back and put in my spreadsheet and eventually I charted it and I had this chart of measles, which we'll see in a little while that showed a decline of 98% in mortality for measles before there was a vaccine, which just blew my mind. And then I saw that for all sorts of other diseases something just didn't fit. And I questioned myself a long time. I thought maybe I did something wrong. Am I misinterpreting the data? But eventually I realised the data's correct.
Our perceptions of reality were incorrect, or at least my perceptions were. And then so I started writing for a little while. I had some proto chapters and I knew I had to have a doctor and I heard Suzanne Humphreys on the air on Gary. No actually I think it was. I didn't know who it was. I just turned tuned in in the middle and I heard this lady. I was like she's talking about smallpox and I was like I listened for a while. I was like that's my Co author. I knew it was.
I gave her a call. We got together, spent four years, got the book out. Short story. So what is the gist of of of your work? Using data and history to, you know, really kind of just understand what really happened as far as infectious diseases, what our real history is, what caused the decline in infectious diseases? Could it couldn't have been vaccines or antibiotics because this came in near the tail end,
as we'll see in these charts. So the charts is where I started and then I dig dug deeper into the the medical literature and found all sorts of very interesting things going on and I'm still learning new things. There's always more to learn. And so that's the gist of the book. There's a lot of, you know, subtopics like eugenics, that type of thing that was served in the 19, early 1900s, late 1800s and how that was used to justify even compulsory vaccinations.
So if we can like sterilise people, then we can, you know, enforce vaccinations and all sorts of stuff like that that's, you know, you don't learn about in school generally or in just regular old books. And I never found out this stuff in them and the normal literature. Show me some shots. Sure. So we'll start, let's see. Hopefully I'm moving here. So anybody who has wants to get this information or wants to contact me, here's my contact stuff, right.
So we'll start with the data. So This Is Us Vital statistics data and it shows disease rates for five infectious diseases. And it also shows when we had mass production of penicillin, streptomycin and where the whooping cough vaccine and measles vaccine came in and there's no scarlet fever vaccine, right? So these this is what happened from the early 19 from 1900 on. So all these disease mortality
rates declined. And then later on these interventions came in and the last one coming in as the measles vaccine in 1963. And this is where we basically have a 98% decline in mortality, whooping cough down 90 / 90% before they came out with a vaccine. So clearly there's some other factors that were involved in the decline in mortality. So they, they have statistics starting in 1900 in England, they began in 1838. And you can see the mortality rate, especially for a scarlet
fever was huge. Scarlet fever was a big killer and you see these big spikes up and down. Then around 1875, these things start to decline until you came out with ADTP vaccine in 1957 in England and we're down over 99%. Measles vaccine 1968, we're down 100% virtually. So these things were not a big problem by the time that medical underventions came out. And so you have penicillin again in 1944 and these types of antibiotics and other medical
interventions. So it wasn't even medical interventions to 'cause this massive decline in death rate. And you can see it even in various states. Here's Massachusetts and here you have tuberculosis. Tuberculosis was one of the biggest killers in the 1800s, but you never really hear about tuberculosis much in the United States is not even part of the vaccine schedule. So that basically went down to 0. All these diseases you can see a measles is at the bottom there,
the green line. And that hit near 0 for quite a few years before they came out with a vaccine. And if anybody wants to actually verify the data, you can go here, go to the link. Here's all the data that was used to create that chart back here. So this is the very first chart I created, the green one that's measles deaths. And you can see in 1963 that's we're down about 98%. The chart on the left is from the US Vital Statistics report, but in the 60s.
So this is actually in this particular report that the CDC had, but essentially no one seemed to pay attention to the, you know, low mortality rate that we're kind of obsessed with doing vaccines. Some of these charts show up in other books. This one's from a particular book and you can see the vaccine, which actually was introduced in 1957 was already down 98% or so. And here they say in in there and they in that book, they say you were down 97% in mortality rate from 19 O 1 to 1945.
So pretty much the problem was solved. You also have these various quotes from medical journals. This is from 1959 where they're talking about how measles was not really a serious disease. And I can spend more time in any of these quotes, but I don't want to like take too much time, right? And here's 1 from 1960 where they're questioning whether because whooping cough was a mild disease by this point there, he was questioning whether we really need to have a vaccine in the 1st place.
And another article in The Lancet 1977, no evidence of vaccination played a major role in decline in incidence and mortality, which is what we see in these charts. We see the the mortality had already been taken care of, right? The funny thing, Roman, is that people don't like history. So they'll they'll immediately respond by saying something like, yeah, but that was 50 years ago. That was seven years ago. We have a much better understanding now.
Yeah, I guess. But the data is the data. The data shows you exactly what happened. And history is boring. Yeah, I agree. I hated history when I was in high school. I was like, history. No thanks. Boring. No. I think, I think what I'm what I'm suggesting is that it actually is important what was happening historically because.
Oh yeah, it's it's it's incredibly important because without knowing the history, you just buy into whatever the current paradigm is. So the paradigm is vaccine saved us. This is what we need to do. But when you look at the data, the mortality rate for every disease I'm talking to, every single so called infectious disease was down almost 100% or 100%. So you take tuberculosis, we don't vaccinate for that in the United States. That's not a real problem.
Scarlet fever went to 0 without a vaccine. And then you have the ones you know about which are whooping cough and measles because we have a vaccine. That's why you know about them. If we never had a vaccine, you wouldn't even think about measles or whooping cough. It wouldn't even be on your radar because it would be. So, you know, it would be considered mild. So just like it's saying in this Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health back in 1981, what are we saying here?
Whooping cough, muses, are no longer important causes of death or severe illness, and it's only occurring in a small minority of children who are disadvantaged, malnourished. Otherwise, most children get over it and without too much trouble, which is different than at least my perception was that these diseases were really deadly. Whooping cough, which is basically coughed to death. Measles would somehow just, you know, totally take you over and kill you. This is my perception.
But it turned out that wasn't even, that wasn't true either. All these diseases became more and more mild until they were just not a major part of mortality statistics. But if you listen to the media and it's like every time there's a measles case, people think they're all going to die. So, but it's just simply not true.
And this is a very important study. 500 consecutive cases of whooping cough back in 95. And the conclusion is most cases are mild and you don't have to worry about, parents can be reassured. A serious outcome is unlikely. Now, most people think whooping cough, like I said, you're basically coughed to death and that's what's going to happen.
This is not what happens. And you can there's there's different journal articles and books from the time that talked about the decline in mortality rate from these diseases were down 90% before 1940, before there was anything available. This guy McCormick, this is a really long quote from 1951. And he was noticing that the the decline in all these diseases had nothing to do with basically any kind of medical intervention because the ones they had medical interventions for
declined at the same rate. The ones they didn't have, which is what you see in the charts. McKinley talked about this. Medical measures had very little to do with the mortality decline. We always are told that it's our medical system that did it right. And it's generally that's not true. It's our, you know, our health improved radically from the 1800s into the mid 1900s. That's what really did things, you know, and there's a whole bunch of things behind that.
Engineering projects, electricity, replacing horses with cars, sanitation, hygiene, all these things came in. That's what really caused the mortality decline. It wasn't these medical interventions. And you can see that in the chart. So they had a chart in their study. You see the the, the solid line going down, down, down. And you also see very interesting the GDP, how much we spend on healthcare from 1930s goes up, up, up starts at 3 1/2% and by the 1970s, eight and a half percent.
And now we're actually close to 18% of our GDP, or one in $5 spent on healthcare. So and now and now people are the unhealthiest they've ever been. Yeah, I think my opinion is that we peaked. We had peak health in the 60s, seventies, 50s, sixties, 70s. After, you know, around 1980, things started going downhill and we got hooked on medications to fix everything.
We got hooked on junk foods, we got hooked on the Internet and all these things that made us weaker and weaker and less healthy obesities, you know, off the charts. Vitamin D deficiency is really rampant and people are unfit. You can go to like a Walmart or in a big box store and you see people walking around and they're not doing too good and people are in little carts and you know, people are pale. They're just unhealthy looking for the most part.
There's, there's exceptions, but the this is not what it was like in the 50s and 60s and 70s. People are generally thin and you know, relatively fit. But now it's just just, you know, the health of our societies have degraded, especially in the Western, Western world. It's a good point that you made now about the Western world, because I think in many Eastern bloc or just Eastern countries, I mean you still don't really see I really.
Yeah, I really don't know. I've seen a few videos like from Moscow or some places in China and people look relatively thin still and they look relatively healthy. Is that, you know, I don't have any data on that, but that's just my perception. Yeah, I mean, I was in Hong Kong last year and I struggled to find any fat people. Yeah, a number of years ago. Well, this is now about 20 years ago or 15 years ago, I was in Stockholm and I was shocked.
People were walking around. Everybody looked pretty, pretty, pretty good shape. And that wasn't the case. When I came back to New York City, I was like, wow, what a difference, you know, quite shocking. I don't know how Stockholm is now, but that was because that was a while ago. But yeah, other other places are, you know, doing fairly well health wise.
United States not so much in other Western countries I understand too, like Australia. So people go well, you know, at least we have a vaccine and the vaccine is giving us extra protection. So here in this chart we have from England from basically nineteen O 1 to 2008.
And we had the more this is like the total number of deaths from whooping cough and the whooping cough vaccine came in way at the tail end 1957. And in the in the 70s there was a scare about the DTP vaccine causing neurological damage, which it did. And we see a drop in vaccination and the medical system panicked and they got the vaccination rates back up. That's the dotted blue line. But you'll see that during that big drop, there's no increase in deaths. Nothing, nothing happened.
There might have been more cases because they were looking for them, but nothing really happened right. Then we have an example of Sweden where they were 84% of the children who had three shots were still being found to have whooping cough by, you know, whatever test they were using. And they determined the DTV vaccine was ineffective and there was concerns over safety. So they discontinued nationally the 9/19/79, the whooping cough vaccine.
And so for 17 years they had no national programme for whooping cough. And you can see in this chart, by 1953, most of the problem was already taken care of anyway. And for those 17 years, there is really no difference in mortality rate from, you know, from whooping cough. There was it's basically didn't do anything. So they had they were just as good having no vaccine as having a vaccine as far as mortality rate from whooping cough.
And so then some people tell me, well, at least we have some protection and so we should do it anyway. OK, but you're, you're these guys are they screw around with your biology without really knowing what they're doing. So what they replace the DTP vaccine, which they found eventually, you know, they finally conceded that, yeah, it caused some neurological damage. So they came out with a so called safer vaccine, the Dtap. The the small A is attenuated
pertussis. And this is from Doctor James Cherry. And everybody should go find this article and read it. And what he's saying here is all children primed by the DTAP vaccine will be more susceptible to whooping cough throughout their lifetimes. And there was no easy way to decrease this increased lifetime susceptibility. So what he's saying here is we with this linked epitome suppression, they've messed up your immune system response permanently.
So now you're more susceptible to whooping cough. So he also suggested that and this guy is the world expert on pertussis and pertussis immunisation. So he, he recommended that everybody should get a vaccine for the rest of your lives every three years for the D TAP because it wears off. And so he, this is his way of like, oh, well, how are we going to protect everybody? Well, we'll just vaccinate everybody every three years.
Back in the, in the 50s, it was supposed to be one shot protects you for life. But now it's like, oh, well, you just have to take a shot every three years, no big deal. So by screwing up your immune system forever, they that's what they're recommending. So everybody should be really disturbed by this. I was disturbed by this when I first read it. And everybody should download it. And then you can always ask your doctor and say, Hey, what about this? Why is my immune system screwed up?
Did you guys know this? No, they didn't know when they were doing this. They just assumed it was a better idea. And they just start doing it on the, on the, on the population. Then we can talk about the flu vaccine that's a little different. So flu and pneumonia deaths down 90% before there was a vaccine. So there still was somewhat of a problem, right? And then they began vaccinating in the 70s, there was a big swine flu disaster. So vaccination rates peaked up a
little bit and went back down. And by the, you know, 2000s were at like 95% or whatever it is, 80 percent, 7580%. In 65 year olds or or older, but you'll see here the brown line, that's the mortality rate and the mortality rate after 40 years is essentially the same. So the flu vaccine hasn't decreased mortality. It's basically they're, they're always emphasising get your flu vaccine, get your flu vaccine. But the death rate hasn't changed in over 40 years.
It's actually longer than that. I've updated the chart since then But so it's about 50 years of no real no benefit. And this is a very interesting quote and every should get this too from cell host and microbe. And this is Fauci is the third author on this and I'm just going to read the whole thing cuz it's important. After more than 60 years of experience with influenza vaccines, very little improvement in vaccine prevention of infection has been
noted. As pointed out decades ago and still true today, the rates of effectiveness are best approved influenza vaccines. I should move this out of the way would be inadequate for licensure for most other vaccine preventable diseases. It is not surprising that none of the mucosal respiratory viruses have ever been controlled by vaccines. So viruses, mucosal respiratory virus. High mortality rates have thus far eluded vaccine development efforts.
So this is an admission that the vaccine for the flu has not worked, but we're still going to do it. They still recommended every year. So they're not looking at their own literature and saying, well, this has not worked. What they're doing is they're coming out with new vaccines because they have new ideas after 60 years of failure. Well, let's try it this way.
Maybe that will work. And then they experiment on the public because the public doesn't know they're being experimented on. And This is why it's good to know history. It's good to know what's going on in the medical literature. And, you know, it's really important. And I think if you know this stuff, you, you go back and go, yeah, you start questioning
everything just like I did. So the final thoughts on all this, you know, contrary to popular belief, it wasn't antibiotics and vaccines that saved us from all these various things, from scarlet fever to tuberculosis and, you know, whooping cough and measles. It was something else.
It wasn't vaccines because sometimes you didn't even have a vaccine, as in the case of scarlet fever, or they're not really used, as in the case of tuberculosis, which by the way, again, tuberculosis was the giant killer. That was around 400 to 450 deaths per 100,000. And then scarlet fever was like 120 deaths per 100,000. Whooping cough and measles were down in the 40s to 60. So just they were a lot less bigger of a problem than these
other diseases. But we don't really think about the other diseases because we don't have a whooping. You know, we have a whooping cough vaccine, We have a measles vaccine. And that's why we know about those. The other ones we forgot about, even though those were much bigger killers. So then comes the question which I had was like, well, if it wasn't that, what did change? You know, why did we have a
decline in mortality rate? And we have this perception of the good old days where people had top hats and twirled parasols and everything was just wonderful. But that's not how most people lived. It just hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on. Yeah, This, this, this thing about everything being terrible only really occurred after the advent of the Industrial Revolution, right? Yeah, a lot of that is true,
right. So you have people streaming into cities, overcrowding, this is later, this is in the 30's, the Hooverville, this is outside this big cities, you know, economic problems, right, Right. So what you had is, you know, starting in the late 1700s, early 1800s, you start to have people crowding into these cities. So you had to have this horrible housing where people were just crammed in there and it was filled with their own waste.
It was filled with vermin. And this is how a lot of people lived. So if you, if you looked at the, let's say, 1850s London, you had the West End where the rich people lived. It was, you know, pretty good. It was OK. They had some paved streets and generally they were OK. Then you had the West End of London where there were hundreds of thousands of people living on the, you know, what they called the ragged edge of the misery. They were extremely poor. They were malnourished.
They lived in their own faeces and, and people had to, you know, do whatever they could to make a make a penny. And you know, over 80,000 women turn to prostitution just to make some kind of money. So it was really just an amazing divergent a few miles apart and at the rich over here. And then you had the miserable pour over here that struggle to stay alive. There's no sanitation or sewage. Everything just went into the streets.
So you would just throw all your waste into the into those into the streets, or you have some kind of common Privy and all that stuff ended up going to your water supply, which was mixed with industrial waste from Tanners and other factories. So that was all where your water came from and you would have to drink that. So now you're drinking contaminated water. We also had no real good transportation except everything was done with horses and they
had to go to the bathroom too. So they pooped in the streets and peed in the streets and that went into your water supply or you walk through it and dragged it into your your house or apartment or Hubble. So that's another thing that we had back then. We also had enormous amounts of air pollution because how did you heat everything coal? How did you do anything with, with industry's coal? And you burnt coal and it went up into the atmosphere.
And the London fog was not a fog like I used to think when I was a kid. Oh, it's just foggy in London. OK. No, that was just industrial pollution. So that come down and settle onto the streets. Sometimes it was so bad you couldn't even see the sun at at noon. So you're now you're in a industrial chimney breathing this stuff in, day in, day out. So that's another impact on your health. The food supply was abysmal because we didn't have refrigeration.
So, you know, things would get slaughtered. A lot of times they slaughtered animals inside the cities. And this is what you ate. You just ate food that was decaying. It was, you know, you know, some of the milk, milk was horribly infected with contamination. And so people are eating this disease food when they're living in this horrible environment. At various times, there's people just basically starving to death. They're just literally starving to death.
So of course you wouldn't be too healthy if you're starving to death. We just mentioned the gross overcrowding. So you had tonnes and tonnes of people just jammed in. And this is kind of a horrifying. So people would die in these apartments, their family members would die and that's where they stayed. The rotting corpses would stay with them because they had to somehow get these people buried, right? So, so you had these people jammed in together. Working was horrifying.
A lot of people had to work 12/16/18 hours a day just to try to stay alive. So not only were they malnourished, living in a industrial toilet, breathing in smog, but they also had to work and huge amounts of time it, you know, really just mind numbing, soul crushing labour. And you know, and this is shocking because no one would actually do this these, you know, these days is child labour. So you had children as young as 3-4 or five years old working in mines, working in factories.
And it's not surprising that a lot of these children ended up just basically destroyed, you know, basically cripples their, their health would have been just completely destroyed. And then if you did get sick with something, whatever it may be, here's a case of a 7 year old girl who was working, who was probably malnourished, who was, you know, working non stop and exposed to these elements. And then she got some kind of case of measles and then died, died in the sun.
And then we had medicine coming in and they had a lot of very bizarre notions. They were bleeding people for centuries for almost every condition. They were giving people toxic medications based on mercury and arsenic and strychnine. And they had this thing called a hot regimen for things like like smallpox where they would put you in a room, deprive you of fresh air, fresh water, maybe give you a little mercury and keep you very hot. And a lot of people just died from that treatment.
So they might be treating smallpox or measles, but then the treatment itself was deadly. And then there are, there's hundreds of doctors that realise vaccination and the only vaccine then was against smallpox. And we like to think, you know, we have a vaccine. You take a nice clean hypodermic needle put in your arm. But that's not what the original vaccine was. What they would do is they would take a sharp instrument called The Lancet and they would cut
your arm repeatedly. And then we take this pus from some unknown source and smear it into your arm. And that's what a vaccine was. And so you can imagine you might get sepsis, you might get all these different diseases because you're putting some unknown material filled with microbes and putting it into your blood supply.
So there are a lot of doctors like this, Henry G Hanchett, who, you know, determined that vaccination is worthless and it's harmful and creates all these other diseases. This is a sketch from the Poor man's Guardian in the 1847. And this is a representation of how people lived. So you have that middle layer. It's just they're just jammed in there. Upstairs, there's a bunch of beds that people are jammed into. And people even lived in the in the basement.
They have basement apartments where people lived in the sewer with a vermin. This is where they lived. It's just pretty unimaginable because that would have been filled with faeces and rats and cockroaches. But that's where you would stay. And this is how millions of people live their lives. And this is I was talking about in London in the 1860s, you have hundreds of thousands in the East End of London that were the miserable poor and, you know, 80,000 women turning to prostitution people.
You know, just, it was just horrifying. And so you have all these things, hazardous housing, sewage, the horses dropping dung everywhere, the coal in the atmosphere. And by the way, you're also blocking out sunlight so you're not in the way people dressed. You got almost no sunlight on your skin. So vitamin D levels would have been near 0. Vitamin C was already probably near 0. vitamin A was probably near 0. So you're massively
malnourished. So you have also starvation, overcrowding, the brutal punishing work, child labour, neglected care, deadly medicine and vaccination. How could anybody be healthy? And so, you know, despite the way I used to think about things that there was, it was really nice. They had carriages and they went to the balls and it was really nice. That's not the way it was for a lot of people. There's a poor girl who was a one of these people working in the cotton factories early 1900s.
So what changed? There was a massive health revolution. That's what I call, they used to call the sanitation revolution. And what's what started shifting is what I already mentioned. So we started having different things change throughout the many decades starting around 1870 and going all the way to, you know, 1940s, fifties and
60s. And so we have public water coming in, pipes and sewers, hand washing, getting rid of all these slum apartments, moving in the industries outside from the outside, the cities, tanneries and slaughterhouses, improving the milk supply, union and labour laws, child labour laws, public schools, people. Instead of going to factories, you went to school and learn how to read and write.
So that was great. Proper handling of of food, vastly better nutrition, fruits and vegetables, exercise, sunshine, great engineering projects. Electricity has transformed the world. Now you have a refrigeration, you have cars instead of horses carrying Everything Everywhere, the flush toilet tackling the water and air pollution. No more bleeding, no more medications based on mercury and arsenic, less smallpox
vaccination. So what they did for 100 years, they would put that puss in your arm and go from arm to arm to arm. So they had arm to arm vaccination for 100 years and basically just the overall general improvement in society and standard of living. This is what changed everything. Yes, but it doesn't make money. It doesn't make money for the Pharmaceutical industry. It makes money for farmers and engineers, but that's not a lot
of money. So what you're telling me, ultimately, Roman, is that vaccines didn't eradicate these diseases, plumbers did? Yeah, plumbers, engineers, there was hundreds of thousands of people, activists that said we're going to clean up the streets, we're going to get rid of these slums. You know, all these things came. We're not going to let children four or five or six work in in factories anymore. We'll only allow 12 year olds and then 16 year olds and 18 year olds.
And then we said, well, we're not going to let people work 70 hours a week, 80 hours a week in horrible conditions. We're going to clean up the factories. We're going to limit it to 60 hours, 50 hours, 40 hours. So then eventually we had life in the, you know, forties, 50s and 60s was so much different than it was in the 1800s. So anybody alive in the 1800s would have been just blown away at the transformation. So essentially it went from life
like this to life like this. And these are pictures from the 50s, sixties and 70s. That's how I grew up on them bottom right hand corner with the little bikes and everything. It's great and horrible clothes that my mom made me wear, but you know, so we went the. Year growing up, I had a BMX and I was. I remember it was one of those banana bikes. I don't know what kind of brand it was. Yeah, I know. It's like, OK, that's not a thing anymore.
Anyway. So you had life on the left where child labour and pollution and horrible conditions to the Fifties, 60s and 70s when we had optimal health and we had a society transformed, but then we forgot that that happened. So I call it the world's greatest health revolution.
We forgot about it. If we knew about it, and this goes back to your point, if we knew about this history, we wouldn't be susceptible to everything has to be medical, medical, this, medical that we talked about that we have healthcare, but we have medical care.
We don't have healthcare. So it's a we've tied those two words together very, you know, I don't know if it was done on purpose, probably was, but you know, we don't have healthcare which promotes the things that actually made the difference, not just some kind of drug for everything or shots for
everything. And so by there, you can find these things in the Thirties, 40s and 50s in the literature saying, hey, yeah, we don't really have to worry about measles, scarlet fever, whooping cough, because we have advances in sanitary science. We have refrigeration. We have better water supplies. So everything's more or less taken care of. It keeps on dropping. And we can expect complete eradication of these diseases, which we did because scarlet fever went away and tuberculosis
went away, more or less. But then people, you know, continue to focus on vaccination as some kind of solution to something we didn't really need to solve other diseases that we probably don't think about anymore. Pelegra Berry Berry scurvy, These are big, big problems too. Scurvy in particular was a deadly problem.
And people would think and logically so that somebody came out of the ship and then people started getting sick and losing their teeth, that there was some kind of infection going around. So there was always this idea, these things that were infective. So scarlet fever, pellagra Berry Berry, once thought to be, you know, infectious diseases, but they just turned out to be vitamin C deficiency and vitamin
B3 and B1 deficiencies. And if we map out the deaths from measles and scurvy, scurvy was a less less of a killer by this point. But you can see they map almost directly. So as measles deaths went down, scurvy deaths went down because they're tied together. Same thing with whooping cough. You can see the death rate declining for scurvy and whooping cough, which is not surprising. The overall health of the people improved. Then you didn't have a problem.
And then there's studies that showed just vitamin A could reduce the overall mortality rate for let's say measles, right? So Doctor Klenner, who everybody should know who that is, but we forgot about him too use vitamin C, just vitamin C for measles. And he had no problem with measles by just giving them vitamin C. He also used it in all sorts of different conditions and always has spectacular results. But vitamin C is not a big money maker. So it was basically ignored.
So basically we had a massive health transformation from the again around 18601870. So by the time we hit the 1950s, sixties and 70s, we were done. We were happy. We should have just kept on going in that direction. But we shifted further and further away from health and towards less health and more pharmaceutical solutions for every problem and every a shot for every problem. And so today we're all obese, we're vitamin D fit. Well, not everybody, but a lot of people are.
And then people get hooked on these medications, which also cause increased nutritional problems like depleting your magnesium. And we're also magnesium deficient because of our industrial aquaculture, by the way. So instead of correcting those fundamental problems and getting people to exercise, eat properly, we say, well, eat whatever you want, get fatter and fatter and then we'll give you Ozempic or we'll do a
Bastric bypass. And and you know, they're starting to test for vitamin D and they're finding like pretty much everybody's, you know, deficient in vitamin D. And what's the solution there? Sunshine, sunshine, fresh air. Just like it was determined in the early 1900s, people finally figured out the solution to health was pretty easy. But we've over complicated it with the, you know, giant Pharmaceutical industry or, you know, healthcare. So we can go back to the original idea behind
vaccination, which was smallpox. OK. And it's very interesting. I found this quote from 1688. And Thomas Sydenham, which is considered the father, father of English medicine, he noted that when he did his particular treatment, not doing that hot regimen, that he found that smallpox was a slight and safe disease. He found that the people who are doing this hot regimen because he promoted this cool regimen, that's where the people were
dying from a smallpox. And he actually communicate with this doctor Cole, and he tried it as well. And he found that. Well, OK, yeah, you're right. You found the cure for smallpox. Don't do the hot regimen. Just do the cool regimen. This is our hero that people worship in the medical system is Edward Jenner. He came up with this idea of taking pus from a cow. Actually, he thought it was from a horse and scratching it onto somebody's arm, which was already a procedure called
inoculation. They would take pus from somebody who had smallpox and scratching it into their arm. And he decided that, you know, cow pox is so well, that's a lot better. So it's, it's perfectly easy to do. It's perfectly safe and will keep you sip here from smallpox for life, which wasn't true. Doctors from 18-O518101817 all found that that wasn't true. They wrote about in the medical journals, but they were.
Again, ignored. And here's one guy who also John Birch in 1814, who noted that about 2/3 of the most smallpox deaths for centuries was because of this hot regimen and using these heating cordials and I'm sure other medications as well. So it wasn't the disease that was killing them. It was these poor medical interventions and you never knew where your vaccine came from. So it could have came from a
variety of different animals. The main factions end up being from a cow, which they had really hard time finding this supposed cow virus, but Jenner actually think thought it came from horses. So a lot of the vaccine material actually came from this disease called the grease.
They also another big faction that those are the ones in the yellow circles was taking pus from somebody who died from a smallpox or had smallpox or was had a blanket on them from smallpox, which they would then hang on a cow's head or transfer to a cow. And then the cow was somehow magically transform it. So you had these three different factions mixing into all this different vaccine material that
you would scratch onto your arm. And then for 100 years they'd go from arm to arm to arm to arm, you know, scratching the stuff from people's arms. And that's what a vaccine was. They also had something called retro vaccination. So they would take this pus from animals, put it back on humans and back to animals again to supposedly make it more virulent so it would actually do what it was supposed to do.
And they found out by the late 1800s that when they started using the microscope, they will look at this vaccine material under the microscope and they would find all sorts of fungus and bacteria and, and traces of blood. And this is what the vaccine was being used and promoted and scratched onto people's arms for over 100 years. And this is a a correspondence with a vaccine manufacturer and then early 1900s from Doctor Hodge, who wanted to know where
this stuff came from. And they had to admit eventually it was basically from a tramp that had smallpox who slept in the stables and somehow the cows got sick. So that's where their vaccine material came from. And I mentioned this before, they used a sharp knife called The Lancet. And this is where they would, you know, scratch, scratch your arm and then put the material
into your arm. And this article from 1882 showed the how they actually put lots and lots of people into room and just mass vaccinated them. Just scratch, put some stuff in, scratch, vaccinate, you know, over and over again without any kind of concept of hygiene. There was no alcohol to clean the wound or anything. And they just went from person to person to person. Nobody would do that today. So the picture on the left is what was called a good arm. This is what was supposed to
happen. So you got 5 scratches there. You put the, you know, the supposed vaccination, cowpox, horsebox, whatever, whatever was in that vial or from the last person who got it. And they would smear that into your arm and you would get this massive inflammation as you might expect. And sometimes if it was good, it would just die down. And supposedly we're protected.
Of course, you weren't really protected, as they found out really early on. That's where we get the concept of revaccination because despite what Jenner said, it wasn't protecting you for life. They decided, well, we'll just vaccinate you every 10 years. Some people said every five years. Some people said every three years, some people said every year. So they kept on like changing the goal, you know, changing what what they were doing because it was just a giant
experiment. Nobody really knew. And the picture on the right, somebody had a, you know, horrible reaction. You can see a massive wound and that was considered, you know, not such a great, you know, vaccine that was called a bad arm. And according to this guy, Scott Tebb, one in 10 people had bad arms and high fevers. So vaccination wasn't that simple magical procedure. And we often see pictures on the Internet. It's like, oh, that that boy
didn't have a vaccine. So he's all broken out and pustules. But they didn't don't often show you the results of, you know, sometimes a vaccine basically causing you to deteriorate and die. And this is 11 picture of a Miss Fanny Lent who apparently died a horrible death after her vaccine in. So in 18711873, after about 70 years of vaccines, there was a massive outbreak of smallpox. And this is in London.
This is from The Lancet. And so they're here, they're saying the 122,000 vaccinated persons still got smallpox, so the vaccine wasn't working. They hemmed and hawed and tried to figure out why it didn't work and said well, maybe we just need to change things up a little bit.
Not that the whole idea failed. Doctor Millard, who was in Leicester, England, who initially was a pro vaccine guy, saw that the Leicester method of isolation and and cleaning up the city streets was what was really actually working. And he wrote a book in 1914 and he noticed that enteric fever and scarlet fever were declining at the same time smallpox was declining. He also noted that people were less and less people were getting vaccines.
So the number of people were vaccinating was going down, which we can see in this chart from Lester. So the blue line is how many people were vaccinated and the grey ones are smallpox deaths. And by the late 1800s, vaccination rates plummeted because the people of Leicester said we had enough of this. They knew people that were injured by vaccines, they saw that it didn't work during the
big 1871 to 73 disaster. So they, they protested and they won and they're vaccinated rates, which were already declining, plummeted down to like 10%. And Despite that, and despite medical men saying, well, you're all going to die, you're going to all suffer, that never happened. So smallpox deaths remain low despite virtually no vaccination rates.
I mean, it spiked up a little bit, but very little vaccination was being done in Leicester that eventually spread to all of England. So you can see vaccination rates are declining. And then so by 1921, we're down to 40% of the people are being vaccinated. But there's never been a resurgence of smallpox deaths. And here we see during the heyday of vaccination, that's the first long red arrow, the deaths for children basically
stayed the same. It wasn't until the health revolution of 1875, while vaccination rates were decreasing, you can see the mortality rate for all children was going down after around 1875, despite falling vaccination rates. So what did It wasn't the vaccine. It was basically the health revolution that changed everything. And like every other disease, by the end of the 1800s, early 1900s, smallpox became just as mild as chickenpox.
As a matter of fact, here's an article of 1913 where he said smallpox and chick pox are very difficult to distinguish. And so here's a an example of somebody with smallpox that you would never see on the Internet because it doesn't show massive pustules. This is was a case of smallpox wasn't a big deal because it by that time it was pretty mild.
So when you where you had one in five deaths in the 1800s, that plummeted to very low levels and in this particular case 98% down in mortality rate by 1913. And if you look at the statistics, and this is from public health reports, so you have the early 1900s and 19-O2, you had X number of deaths from smallpox, then it plummeted down to almost nothing. So you had a 98% decrease in mortality rate over those 40
years. So smallpox wasn't a big deal by that point, which is kind of hard to believe because we've been all programmed to think smallpox deadly, right? And at the same time, we had vaccination rates plummeting by 1948 when they got rid of compulsory vaccination. In England, only 18% of the people are vaccinated, so it wasn't widespread. And Doctor Millard in 1948 wrote about this in the British Medical Journal.
He said because of the conscientious clause that was introduced, most people were not vaccinated, 2/3 were not vaccinated. Smallpox never made a comeback and never was, you know, high mortality rate. So that kind of, he kind of, you know, basically said, well, we didn't really need vaccines in the 1st place, which again, he was originally a pro vaccine, but over his years, he determined that that was not really true.
And then a doctor, Thomas Mack talked about this in 2002 and you can find his articles on the Internet too. He, he, he, he realised it was economic development, or as I call it, the health revolution that made the difference. It wasn't from universal vaccination. And he also noted that long before the, The Who, the World Health Organisation started the eradication programme, smallpox disappeared from many countries as they developed economically.
So it wasn't from this, you know, big grand vaccine across the world thing that's often, you know, talked about. Doctor Crichton was tasked with writing an article for the Encyclopaedia Britannica in 1888. There he decided not to just go with talking points. He actually did a research because he was a big researcher. So he was in the library all the time. And he concluded that that vaccines weren't the magical thing that, you know, he had been taught.
And he wrote a very scathing article in the Encyclopaedia of Britannica that went in and remained there until the 1920s. And he wrote two books on vaccination and Jenner, and everybody should go find those or read those are quite powerful. But the medical profession as a whole ignored him. And his career was more or less destroyed. And he ended up a poor, poor, poor person, despite, you know, being a very smart guy and writing a couple books on the topic.
He wrote a, he wrote books on the history of Britain. He was a really deep researcher and really smart guy. Of course, he didn't go along with the programme.
So that was the end of him. So, you know, everything changed as the sanitation revolution took hold and we got rid of toxic medications and these toxic treatments, just like all the other diseases that we talked about before smallpox became mild and eventually just faded away, just like scarlet fever and all these other diseases, despite, you know, falling vaccination rates. So it's not the story we were told. It's a lot more, you know, a lot
more different, right? So, so far, what what we can conclude is that vaccines have had little to no impact at all. That's that's my conclusion. I think people sometimes say, well, the incident rate of measles went down, but it wasn't that big of a deal. You know, we forgot to look at what are people's vitamin C levels and vitamin A levels. If we had done focused on real health, then a lot of other diseases wouldn't have manifested either.
But we're not focused on the health, we're focused on medical interventions. If we had. Learned I was actually wrong. I said little to no impact. They actually had either no impact or they harmed people. I mean they cut to incident. Right.
And, well, yeah, Qatar. But if you look at the smallpox vaccine, which was, you know, highly problematic if you're scratching pus into somebody's arm, they had all sorts of diseases, including many doctors concluded tuberculosis was tied to that and cancers and all sorts of other things. As you might imagine, if you put fungus and bacteria and whatever else into your arm, into your blood supply, it probably not a good idea. So yeah, that would have been a
big negative. It's actually very destructive. And yeah, you have Qatar and you have other incidents too. So yeah, so there's been a big giant negative, but there's a there's a positive spin all the time. Oh, Jenner created the cowpox vaccine. Therefore, it's killed smallpox, even though it wasn't really just from a Kyle, it was from a horse and corpses and everything else. This is like a big mishmash going from arm to arm to arm. Do we have time for a little
polio? Well, not not really having polio, but talk about polio. So, so this is the classic picture that people think of polio and that's why we have a vaccine so we don't end up like this poor little guy. And Doctor Kleiner noticed in or commented in 1952 that there were a lot more people with rheumatic fever that were crippled for then there were from polio. But because you don't see the the problems, it's not the same thing. If you see people crippled and
it's like, OK, that's a problem. But if you don't see, it's like, who knows? Who cares? So there was there was a sphere of infantile paralysis that was promulgated in the media. So here's an article from, what, 1916? So there's an outbreak of some kind of polio inside the city there. But I want to make sure that people understand that polio was a very low incidence disease. So if you look at this particular chart, it's the line at the very, very bottom.
It's, you know, we had more cases like say syphilis or malaria in the United States. Then we have had a polio. Polio is very, very low. And then here's from particular Vermont State Department of Public Health 1924 article, and this is a picture of Vermont. And the little red dots are the cases of polio or paralysis, and you can see they're just all over the place. There's a few dots here and
there. There's no outbreak in a city centre that you might imagine if it was some kind of infectious agent. So it just scattered about. And again, here is 1 from 1912. This is just a few dots here and there. Again, it's not. It's just these isolated cases across the state.
And what's very interesting is this is a couple charts or one chart with two time periods on it, 19161931 and you can see polio spikes up during the summer, peaking in August and then goes back down towards 0. So the cases of these this what they called polio was very seasonal. It didn't happen in the winter. It was basically a summer disease. Wasn't it also related to pesticides? Yeah, we'll get there.
So, So what maps to that? Well, first, what's interesting, there was many people observing that it's not highly infectious that people were in hospitals and there's nobody ever like infected somebody else. And people, children would sleep with their, you know, their, their brother or their family member that was had some kind of paralysis, but they never caught it. So it wasn't like contagious in any, you know, sense of the word here.
There's somebody's talking about a doctor enter a nurse. And nobody ever caught polio for 35 years at this particular hospital. So it wasn't like this massively contagious thing that we might imagine. And here's the pesticide. So they're using lead arsenate. This is what they would be spreading, spraying onto crops at the time. And they, you basically spray it on and then you wouldn't like wash off the, the apples or
whatever. And in case of apples, it was the coddling moth that they're worried about because it was decimating crops. So anyway, so during the hot weather months, they would be spraying the stuff onto the crops. You would go home and you'd have an apple or some kind of food and you're getting a dose of lead arsenate, which is known to cause paralysis. And eventually they got rid of that, but then they replaced it
with DDT. But so they were spraying this stuff on this more correlates with the the diagrams. We just saw it. It was a summer disease tied with the same time these lead arsenate pesticides that are well known to cause paralysis. And actually here's you know, some of the lead arsenate, the third phase of chronic arsenical intoxication is marked by peripheral neuritis and off which is often mild at first, but which may progress to motor
and more severe cases paralysis. So so this is known about lead arsenate which is was being used all over the place. You know, supposedly polio virus is only in men, you know, in humans. But during these times people noticed that horses, sheepdogs, cats, hogs and birds were being paralysed at the same time, which makes sense if they were
exposed to lead arsenate, right? So this particular doctor said just based on the epidemiology, appears that it's not really a living microorganism or a virus, but a toxin. And during the mid 1900s, there was a lady called Doctor Kenny, sister Kenny, sorry, not doctor, she wasn't a doctor. So here is a picture of her in a using her particular therapies, which she rallied against what the current the the medical
treatments of the time were. If you had some kind of condition, they would force your arms, your legs to be straightened out. They were put them in cast and they would do these surgeries. And she said that's the reason people are having paralysis for the most part, right? So she said, no, no, we're going to do like massage and hot, hot packs, which we do today. And, you know, basically that's the modern way of having therapy and rehabilitation.
Here's another picture of her with a successful patient. So she had a very high cure rate of polio by using these techniques and not using the medical treatment techniques. And here's Doctor Kleiner again. He had 60 out of 60 successful cases by using by using polio, by using vitamin C. He didn't use polio. So he used that which is a strong detoxification agent. So he had success with that and he was disturbed that his information was never used.
It was just, you know, just kind of sidelined. So these are all the different like pieces of history about polio that you might not know, that you can decide for yourself whether you know the vaccine did too much. But there's also another part to that story is the original diagnosis for polio would be done. So if you had paralysis and you had paralysis within 24 hours, still, that was considered a case of polio. There was no need for any kind of laboratory confirmation.
You were paralysed. 24 hours later, you're still paralysed. You have polio. That's what it was. So they disabled, they disabled it, right? So that that's, you know, this is 1950s, right, or before the 1950s. But when they, when they eventually had the vaccine in 1954, they changed the definition. The definition became you had to be paralysed 60 days later. So you basically created a whole new condition. So the first one was you're paralysed within 24 hours, OK, you have that.
But then they just changed the definition. So you have to be paralysed 60 days later, which according to Doctor Kleiman, it's like almost nobody had that. So you automatically got rid of polio just by the definition change. A similar thing happened in in India. So here's the original polio. You see that there's a, there's a, the, the green lines, the polio cases. And we can see that when they started vaccinating for polio very heavily in 1996, they also
changed the definition. They created a new thing called ACE, a acute flaccid paralysis. And part of that is you have to have original residual paralysis after 60 days. That's when it changed in 1997. So now we have a new disease called acute flaccid paralysis and that's the big green line going up at the the little blue line on the bottom is the new
polio definitions. But if we stayed with the old polio definition and didn't have AFP, then the levels of paralysis have increased since they vaccinated. But by a definition change, suddenly polio is going away. And so according to this article, there was an extra 640,000 children developed with paralysis during the years 2000 to 2017 because but those cases never really counted because it
wasn't considered polio. So again, a definition change really made a, you know, big difference in what you perceive. That's the best vaccine ever. A changing definition. Yeah, certainly. They really did that with polio quite often after 2012, the number of oral polo vaccines, because sometimes they were giving kids four or five or more
of these vaccines. That kind of this idea is like just keep on hammering them, which I, you know, it looks pretty clear that the increase in paralysis, but after 2012 they start, they started to reduce those and you see the, the number of paralysis cases started to drop off because they said, well, we've tackled polio so we can start decreasing the number of vaccines, which they didn't really do. They just changed the definition.
So that's my little spiel on polio, which again was a pretty low incidence disease. It was spread apart. Yeah, I mean, you, you say no incidents, but it's one of the most spoken about in the last 100 years. Yeah, so we had a big media blitz and we saw people in iron lungs, we saw people in braces, and that tugs at your heartstrings, right? So if you had, if you're debilitated by some other disease that causes damage to your heart, well, you don't see that.
So that doesn't get any media attention, right? So, you know, you know, this idea of being paralysed kind of freak people out. And there was a lot of media attention to it. And then there was a big push for the the vaccine and eventually they came out one and came out with one in 1954. And then after that they change the definition. So of course polio would just
vanish. And there's still people, apparently they still get these paralysis problems and they get put on not those big metal lung machines because we don't have that technology anymore. We they get put on ventilators. I actually bought that book, The Moth in the Iron Lung. Yeah, there was a particular study, I think it was in Michigan in 1958, where they, you know, they tried to isolate, you know what caused the paralysis. And only a small fraction of the people were found to have like,
polio virus. There was a bunch of other different viruses. In many cases, there was no detectable pathogen that they could find at all. It was just like, Oh yeah, none. I don't have that. I don't have that chart in here, but which is kind of interesting. So, you know, they've made it sound like there's just this one little virus and that causes paralysis and nothing else does. And never, nothing ever else
did. But I think the the history shows that, you know, we had things like the LED arsenate was causing problems because before really the late 1800s, there wasn't really much paralysis ever detected. It only happened when they started using these kind of industrial pesticides. The trend is the same no matter which disease you look at. Yeah, that's what I found out. So you had typhoid fever, typhus. You had scarlet fever, you had cholera.
All these things declined to near 0 by the 1940s, fifties and 60s. Some had a vaccine, some didn't. It all had to do with cleaning up the environment. And again, if we learn that lesson, we wouldn't be doing the things we're doing today. We would be getting exercise. We'd be getting fresh air, plenty of sunshine, good quality Whole Foods, not junk foods. We wouldn't be people. Struggle with this so much though.
I mean you you in the most. For the most part, when you say stuff like this, people will call you a quack. Yeah, well, I've been called worse, but I think the data shows that. And I think that, you know, I, I actually live that lifestyle and I feel great and I feel better now than I did in my 30s. And then, you know, we're, we're being stupid with plastic pollution. We got microprostix everywhere, nanoplastics getting into our
system. So we're destroying our own environment just for conveniences. And and then we use the medical system to try to fix everything, which I think is just not the right thing to do. So I think we need a second health revolution where people actually try to get healthy through exercise, sunshine, clean water or good food, you know, don't eat garbage. And it's not that hard. Well, it is psychologically hard, but the concept isn't hard.
It's like, well, I can have an apple or I can have this junky breakfast cereal. You know, there's you can make better choices all the time. And yet that's the thing with health is you make these choices like every day. It's like this morning, I this morning I went for 1/2 hour walk yesterday, went to the gym for two hours. So that's my workout. I eat all Whole Foods. I get plenty of sunshine. I de stress, try to have a good day, laugh, have do meaningful work, have good social
connections. These are all how you build health. The other way to do is, you know, eat junk and drink Coca Cola and dunk a Donuts and don't exercise and don't get any sunshine and then start deteriorating. Then run to a doctor and hope they can fix it. Yeah. Then you take a pill. I need to Ozempic now, you know, because if you ignore your health, you're going to get sick. And then you run to somebody that's going to try to fix it for you with a magic pill.
And those never really work. Have you seen this, a huge lawsuit now against Ozempic, I think something to the tune of $2 billion. Yeah, yeah. But that's part of the business model, right? So they'll make X number of billion dollars, they'll settle out of court, but they still made still made a huge profit. That's how the business model works. They already know that they're going to get sued at some point. That's a real kind of illness in our society.
It's like as long as you're making a dollar, that's OK. It doesn't matter what we make. Who cares if it, you know, has, you know, so called side effects? It doesn't matter because as long as we make money. And same thing with the food industry. You know, people know they're making garbage food. They figure, well, that's up to them not to eat our garbage product because they're making lots of money from it. And it's, you know, extends to the agricultural system.
It's like, oh, we know we're making substandard food. A lot of them people know that it's like, and we know it's magnesium deficient, but we're going to do it that way anyway. We could be doing regenerative farming and organic farming, but we don't make as much money of that. We can't sell pesticides to those people. So that's no good. And the advertisers along for the ride too. We're going to advertise whatever you want, you know, so you can have a Coke and a smile
and diabetes too. You can have, you know, you can have Doritos and obesity, you can have all these wonderful things that we're going to promote and show young people having a great time with it, you know, and then, you know, financial industries all invested in all this stuff. So it's a big what I call the sickness industrial complex. And I think we need to change direction and go back towards,
you know, natural living. But the again, you, as you point out, nobody makes money off of that sunshine's free clean water. Well, that could cost you some because our piping system in United States awful in a lot of places. And so a lot of things are free. Exercise is free. You don't have to go to a gym. You can just go out and exercise. So and you could choose to have Whole Foods or you can choose to eat garbage and garbage food is very alluring.
It gets people addicted. There's a reason there's food scientists. It's to get you hooked on these things. But if we all shifted towards the other end, the amount of money we'd spend on healthcare would plummet from 18% back down to maybe 3% where it belongs for accidents. Where medicine's great, you get into a car accident? Super. But these chronic conditions are because of our lifestyle, not because anybody can really fix them except for yourself.
OK, we are over time Roman, let's come in for the final lap. How can I follow your work and get your Well, I've got your books, but I can somebody else get your books? Sure. Let's just put this up here. We'll skip all this stuff. Here's my contact. I'm on XI. Like Twitter better. That's a better name, but OK, it's X. You can go on my sub stack. I have articles on all this stuff, the charts, they're all free. Or you can go to desalinus.com. You can find the books there
from all over the planets. It's translated into seven other languages. We just released Chinese, so if anybody reads Chinese, it's on there and there's the contact and you can follow me on Telegram too. So whichever way you want. If anybody has questions, you want the charts, they're on dissolvinglucius.com. They're on my sub stack so you can always find them. Robin Best Janik, thank you for joining me in the trenches. Thanks much for having me.