Latest / UK Column Radio / Discussing “An Inconvenient Study” — with Del Bigtree

Transcript

Discussing “An Inconvenient Study” — with Del Bigtree · UK Column Radio

0:16
Hello and welcome to the UK column.
0:17
Today I'm joined by someone who needs no introduction, and that
0:21
is Dell Bigtree. Welcome to the program, Dell.
0:24
Thank you for having. Me, Mike, it's good to be here.
0:27
Well, it's a real pleasure. Now, of course, recently you
0:30
have released your latest film, An Inconvenient Study, and just
0:35
tell us a little bit about it and why that film came about.
0:40
Well, as you probably know, I was a producer on the CBS talk
0:45
show The Doctors in America. I won an Emmy Award celebrating
0:49
medicine and science as a television program.
0:52
While I was doing that show, I stumbled onto the investigation
0:56
of vaccines. There's a whistleblower inside
0:59
the CDC that said they were committing scientific fraud on
1:02
the vaccine safety studies is back in 2015, and I made a
1:05
documentary about that called Vaxxed, which many say sort of
1:09
ignited the medical freedom movement around the world.
1:13
From that moment on, I've been taking that investigation
1:16
further into all the vaccines. That film was just about the MMR
1:21
vaccine, but what about all the vaccines we're giving our kids
1:23
here in America? It's about 72 doses, 16
1:27
different vaccines given in seven, you know, 72 doses by the
1:31
time you're 18 years old. I want to know, how do we
1:35
determine they were safe? Because when I was traveling the
1:37
country of Vax, you know, that the second screening of that
1:40
film, which was incredibly controversial, we had lines down
1:43
the block because of the controversy.
1:45
And I want to know who is standing that audience.
1:47
So I said, you know, at the second screening when we started
1:51
our tour, you know, would everyone with a vaccine injured
1:54
child please stand up in the audience?
1:57
And 3/4 of the audience stood up.
2:00
I felt like the oxygen had been sucked out of the room.
2:02
I knew that vaccine injury was real.
2:04
I knew it was a problem. I just made a movie about it.
2:06
But I'd only interviewed, you know, a handful of families on
2:10
the issue. And here I'm staring at, you
2:12
know, 50 families that lives have been changed forever.
2:17
I asked that question every single day for an entire one
2:21
year tour, probably 4 times a day, you know, five days a week
2:26
for an entire year. And every time I asked that
2:29
question 3. As the room stood up and you
2:31
realize that this is a massive, massive problem that is somehow
2:36
being buried. They're humiliating these
2:37
people. They're screaming on the
2:39
television that it's not real, it's not happening.
2:41
These. Parents are suffering at home,
2:43
so obviously that's been a focus of my work.
2:45
When I was traveling the country with Vax back in 2016, someone
2:50
said to me as we were passing up through Michigan, you know, I
2:53
know the head of infectious disease at Henry Ford Health.
2:58
Henry Ford Health is one of our biggest research institutes in
3:01
America and therefore really one of the biggest research
3:03
institutes in the world. And they said, would you like to
3:06
meet him for dinner? I said sure.
3:08
So we sat down to dinner and, you know, he said his name was
3:11
Doctor Marcus Zervos. And he said something very
3:13
interesting when he sat down, he said to me, you know, Dell, I've
3:17
watched your film back. It's very compelling.
3:19
But you keep saying something at these speeches you're giving
3:22
around the country that I found very troubling.
3:25
You keep saying that they've never done the proper science to
3:30
say that vaccines are safe. And he said, so I sit on the
3:33
biggest databases in the world and I went and researched that
3:36
so I could show you the data, show you the science.
3:40
And he said to me, and I'm shocked that I have to sit
3:43
across from you and tell you you're right.
3:45
I did not realize we have never done a proper safety evaluation
3:49
of any of the childhood vaccines that are in the program.
3:53
And he said to me, now that doesn't mean that vaccines
3:55
aren't. Safe.
3:56
It just means we can't say that they're.
3:59
Safe. And I said that's all I'm
4:01
saying. And so that's all I've been
4:02
saying the whole time. So anyway, we had a very nice
4:05
dinner and he said, you know, I'm pro vaccine.
4:07
He brags about he's the reason that they have a mandatory
4:10
vaccine program at Henry Ford Health.
4:12
He said. So I don't know what I could do
4:14
for you, I said. Well, you know.
4:15
Since you really believe in the program and you, you know,
4:19
you're a great researcher, world famous.
4:21
In fact, he had just gotten through a big investigation of
4:24
the Flint, MI water crisis in Flint, MI.
4:28
The health department came under fire for having lead pipes and
4:31
lead water that was poisoning less affluent neighborhoods.
4:35
And he stood up for those people, proved it scientifically
4:38
and came out against the health department.
4:40
So he was a brave scientist also.
4:42
Anyway, I said, would you ever consider doing a study?
4:46
That compares the health outcomes of vaccinated children
4:49
with completely unvaccinated children.
4:52
And and then just let's see who's healthier.
4:55
And he said sure, I would do that study.
4:57
I was. Shocked.
4:58
Really. Because there's something about
5:00
mainstream medicine that has refused to do this study for
5:03
decades? It seems like the most obvious
5:05
study known to man. Why is it the CDC?
5:09
Can't show us a study of Here's vaccinated compared to
5:12
unvaccinated, and the vaccinated are far healthier.
5:14
They're living longer, they have less cancer, they have less
5:16
autism, they have less ADHD, they have less skin issues,
5:20
psoriasis, you know, eczema, gut dysbiosis, all the things that
5:25
our kids are suffering from. Why can't they show us a study
5:28
that the vaccinator the healthiest among us and not just
5:31
here in America? Why is the NHS and NHS never
5:34
done this study? Why is it that not a single
5:37
regulatory medical agency in the world has ever compared these
5:42
two groups of people and show to see vaccinating the vaccinator
5:46
the healthiest? So anyway, I was shocked.
5:49
He said he would do it and we left the dinner.
5:51
It took a couple of years. I kept calling him saying, hey,
5:53
you're going to do that study. Finally by about 2018 or 19, he,
5:57
he, he gave us a very firm, I will do this study.
6:00
I said, look, I only have one rule.
6:02
I'm I'm pretty sure you're pro vaccine.
6:04
So you know it's going to, it's going to be a robust study, but
6:08
whatever the outcome, promise me you'll publish it because you
6:12
know, a lot of doctors come under attack for question the
6:15
vaccine program. Tell me you're going to follow
6:17
through. He said, I will follow through.
6:18
I'll follow the data where it leads me.
6:20
So he did that study and it was finished in 2020.
6:23
It's a study of over 18,000 children.
6:26
So it's a very big study, roughly 2000 of which were
6:30
unvaccinated, so 60. 15,000 vaccinated, 2000 unvaccinated.
6:36
And then he didn't publish the study.
6:38
And so I called and. For a while.
6:41
He wouldn't answer, but eventually he did.
6:43
I said, I don't understand why I thought we had an agreement.
6:45
You would publish the studies. Like I really just, it's, it's
6:49
just not something I can do at this time.
6:51
And he kept pushing it off. So finally I asked him, can I
6:54
fly out and have dinner with you?
6:55
I said sure. And I did something I don't
6:59
usually do as a journalist, which is I, I decided to take
7:03
hidden cameras with me and recording equipment because I
7:06
had a feeling this was the last time this study would ever be
7:08
discussed. Whatever was in it, I hadn't
7:10
even seen it yet, but whatever is in it, I want to know.
7:13
I want to hear it. And maybe someday I'll be able
7:16
to show the public what happened here.
7:18
So that's what I did. I went out, I think it was
7:20
around 2022, I went out and had dinner.
7:23
And I've hidden camera footage of him explaining that it's a
7:26
good study, that he would publish it just as it is only
7:30
one problem. He will lose his career.
7:32
This will be the end of his career.
7:33
When I say why he handed me the study and that study is now
7:37
published. The, I mean, it's now published
7:39
on the Senate website. He didn't publish it, but
7:41
Senator Ron Johnson got a hold of it this year and said I'm
7:44
going to put it on the Senate website.
7:45
I think this is for the public good, which gives him some
7:48
leeway, I guess, on copyright issues.
7:50
But the study is very, very disturbing, Mike.
7:53
It shows that the conclusion is 2.5 times the rate of chronic
7:59
disease amongst the vaccinated. If you compare them to the
8:03
unvaccinated, you're 2.5 times more likely.
8:06
You know, a good study would show a 40% increase in a problem
8:09
or an 80% increase. We're talking about a 250%
8:14
increased risk of having chronic disease when you look at some of
8:18
the details in it, neurodevelopmental disorders
8:21
nearly six times the rate. So I'm sure we're going to get
8:23
into all those details. But that's that's the heart of
8:26
this film. An inconvenience study.
8:27
Is this study how it came about? And the hidden camera footage
8:32
where you know, I'm under attack by Henry Ford help.
8:35
They sent a cease and desist letter.
8:36
They're trying to say it's defamation to say that they
8:40
didn't publish the the study because of the results and all
8:42
those things. But we can get into that.
8:44
Yes. Well, I was just gonna say it's
8:48
interesting because obviously the film's been out for a few
8:50
weeks now. It's millions of people have
8:53
seen it so far. It's the cat is definitely out
8:56
of the bag. But what I'm noticing is because
8:58
you use the term robust study and what I'm noticing in the
9:02
coverage of it out there, the, the, the, the mainstream press
9:06
is now any coverage of it is attacking the study for being
9:09
not robust and being having issues.
9:12
So I mean, how would you, how would you respond to that?
9:15
Yeah, and I'm perfectly, I first of all, I want to say I'm glad
9:19
that I have no problem with people attacking the study.
9:22
That's the scientific method. That's what should have happened
9:24
from the beginning. This, this, this study should
9:26
have been put into peer review and set up for publishing and
9:29
then let every scientist weigh in on what they think the
9:31
quality of the study is and all those other things.
9:34
What I can tell you is this, that you know, Doctor Marcus
9:38
Zervos is the head of infectious disease.
9:41
At Henry Ford Health. He was in charge of the Moderna
9:45
of the arm of the Moderna trials at Henry Ford Health.
9:47
I'm not aware of anyone ever questioning his ability to do a
9:51
study before. So when he does the study, I'm
9:54
pretty sure he knows how to do it.
9:56
And when he says to me at dinner multiple times, it's a good
9:59
study, but they're going to say it's a bad study.
10:01
They're going to attack me. They're going to come after my
10:04
my career. Because as he says in this, you
10:08
know, in the video, you'll see because it's political.
10:10
So those are his statements. And that's why I think it's
10:13
important that people see the film.
10:15
I, there's, you can tell that I'm not, you know, put
10:19
pressuring him in any way you can see.
10:21
It's a very interesting human study this film to see the angst
10:25
and the tension that he has with the, the, the desire to do
10:28
what's right, but not the courage to do it.
10:31
I'll also say this that yes, of course every retrospective study
10:35
there is has, you know, limitations to it.
10:39
It is not the perfect way to do science.
10:42
A retrospective study is. We've got to simply look at
10:45
people that have already made their choices.
10:47
We're not setting up a perfectly controlled study.
10:49
We don't have a placebo group that we control.
10:52
We can't perfectly match age and gender and race.
10:55
And all the things you would do in a really good scientific
10:58
study, all the things every one of these vaccines should have
11:03
had that study. We should have done that study
11:06
before these products were ever put on the market.
11:08
And that's the entire point really of this film.
11:11
They have skipped the safety testing.
11:13
They have skipped those studies where we would have seen, does
11:17
it have side effects? How many side effects?
11:19
What are the actual side effects?
11:20
Because we would have tracked these vaccines like we do every
11:24
drug for two to 10 years and a placebo group.
11:28
So that when you have an issue like, let's say autism, you can
11:32
say, hey, there was just the same amount of autism in the
11:35
group that got the vaccine as the group that didn't get the
11:38
vaccine. That's how science is done.
11:40
But that study has never, ever been done.
11:44
And it's worse. Than that though, isn't it,
11:46
isn't it worse than that because because it's not just that the
11:49
studies haven't been done in the individuals vaccines, the
11:51
studies haven't been done and how these vaccines interact with
11:54
each other and and if you're giving I don't know what in the
11:58
United States, I don't know how many vaccines are given at one
12:01
time to be. 13 up to 13 vaccines in one sitting.
12:05
So how do you how would you even do a study for that?
12:08
Yeah, I mean, I guess give a child 13 vaccines and give
12:12
another one saline, you know, 13 placebo saline injections and
12:16
now let's at least track them for a couple months if not
12:19
years. But you're right, never been
12:22
done. And now when you ask for any
12:24
study like that, some form of a controlled study, because look,
12:27
it's not like we aren't seeing serious health problems in the
12:32
United States. I wouldn't be here, I wouldn't
12:34
be here having this conversation with you if we had the
12:37
healthiest children we'd ever seen, if they were just this
12:39
glowing, radiant, disease free children running and, and, and
12:44
you know, the envy of the world. But it's not the case in
12:48
America. Our children are 54% of them
12:51
have a chronic disease. Robert Kennedy Junior just
12:54
pointed out that 76.4% of adults now have chronic disease, which
13:01
means they need drugs. It's a lifelong disability.
13:05
Only, you know, 75% of America's children could not join the
13:10
military because they cannot pass the health exam.
13:14
This, that makes us the sickest nation of children in the
13:19
industrialized world. It also makes us, this is the
13:22
sickest generation of children we've ever seen.
13:25
And so, you know, with those types, some health records and
13:29
you never did safety studies, we don't know is all the eczema,
13:33
all the psoriasis, all the diabetes, all the lupus, all the
13:37
multiple sclerosis, the, you know, all the neurological
13:40
disorders, all the speeds, delays, you know, all the
13:42
Tourette's syndrome, you know, on and on and on.
13:46
It's due to something. It is some it is, is happening
13:49
because of some toxic attack, because we've gone from 12.8%
13:55
chronic disease just in the 1980s, just 40 years ago, we
13:59
were at 12.8% chronic disease in our children.
14:02
Now that's skyrocketed to 54% in 40 years.
14:05
Genes don't change that fast. We don't evolve that fast.
14:10
There's no explanation for this other than our kids are being
14:13
poisoned by something. And what I would say is when you
14:18
look at autoimmune disease or let's call it immune
14:21
dysregulation, which is the crisis of our times.
14:25
I don't know what the stats are in England, but I'm sure they're
14:27
horrible. I'm sure you're having skin
14:29
allergies and issues and diabetes and many of the same
14:33
things that that we have here. But here in America, you know,
14:36
when you look at what that is, is your immune system has
14:39
somehow gotten dysregulated. It's confused and it's now
14:43
attacking the cells of your own body.
14:46
This is something that isn't happening to any other mammal on
14:50
the planet. Why they're they're breathing
14:52
the same pollution. They're even swimming in the
14:54
same polluted ocean. But we are not seeing autoimmune
14:57
disease. We're not seeing their immune
14:59
systems now attacking their own bodies.
15:01
And so people will say to me, well, Dale, how do you know it's
15:04
not the fluoride in the water that we have in our water here?
15:07
How do you know it's not the glyphosate, the pesticides and
15:10
herbicides that we're spraying on 90% of the crops that we eat?
15:14
How do you know it's not the hormones in our Beep or the
15:16
plastics or the forever chemicals?
15:18
By the way, every one of those things?
15:20
Robert Kennedy Junior talks about this.
15:22
The EPA did a study. When we look at the skyrocketing
15:25
rate of of autoimmune disease, when did it start?
15:28
It starts right in the early 1990s, right where all of those
15:32
things become prolific in our society here in America.
15:35
So it's going to be 1 of about 5 to 6-7 different toxic
15:41
pollutants that's really hit our environment, including vaccines.
15:44
But what I want to say is this, if the issue is, is, you know,
15:50
immune system dysregulation, shouldn't of all those things
15:54
I've just listed, shouldn't we look closest at the one product
15:58
amongst them that was designed to dysregulate your immune
16:03
system to, to, to kick it into OverDrive, to incite it into
16:08
action artificially? There's a product that does,
16:11
it's the vaccines. So, you know, when I stop
16:13
someone on the street and say what's the vaccine to do?
16:15
They, well, it's, you know, it's a tiny bit of virus or bacteria,
16:18
I guess. And you know, because it's so
16:21
small or they kill it, somehow my body's tricked into thinking
16:24
it's had the disease and I develop immunity.
16:26
OK, so we're tricking our immune system, but we're not tricking
16:30
it one time, not five times, not ten times, not 20 times, not 50
16:34
* 72 times. And growing more and more every
16:38
single year, 72 times we trick the immune system of our
16:43
children. And then we're shocked that
16:45
these same children have immune systems that are totally gone
16:49
haywire and are now attacking their own bodies.
16:51
To me, it seems obvious. But look, that is just a
16:55
hypothesis. How do you test that hypothesis?
16:58
How do we test if it's vaccines? They're doing it when you ask
17:01
for those controlled tests now that say it would be unethical
17:04
to do those studies. We can't have a placebo group
17:07
now because we have vaccines available to these kids and we
17:11
can't make them vulnerable to vaccine preventable diseases
17:15
just to do a study. So see, they got us, they got us
17:17
hog tied. Our hands are tied behind our
17:20
back, our feet behind the bottom in our back.
17:22
And the Pharmaceutical industry has gotten away with never doing
17:25
the safety, refusing a safety test, now refusing to do a
17:29
safety test because, oh, that would be unethical.
17:31
And then when you do the last study that's available to you, a
17:34
retrospective study, they point out the flaws.
17:37
Well, it didn't have a control. It didn't have a proper control.
17:40
You didn't perfectly match race to blah, blah, blah.
17:43
And that's what they're doing to this study.
17:45
But Peter Gutcha has been posting a lot about this.
17:48
He's one of the founders of the Cochrane Collaboration.
17:51
I think we just call it Cochrane.
17:52
Now. You know, a world renowned
17:54
scientific group that set out to raise the standards of
17:58
scientific investigation. And he's been posting that he
18:02
has looked closely at this study and he says it perfectly.
18:05
I have seen what Henry Ford is complaining about this study.
18:08
But those anomaly, those potential confounding issues
18:12
cannot explain the size of the differential that we're
18:16
essentially seeing here. We're not seeing a 20% increase
18:20
in neurodevelopmental disorders. We're seeing a 600% increase in
18:27
the, in the scale that they do at the end of the study.
18:30
They look at, you know, over time, over 10 years, what would
18:34
be your odds? You know, what would be the risk
18:37
of having chronic disease? And what they discover is the
18:40
vaccinated, 57% of those children vaccinated will have a
18:46
chronic disease by the time they're 10 years old.
18:49
More than half that's, that's now your coin toss.
18:52
Like I want my kid to be healthy.
18:53
It's a coin toss if you're vaccinating them.
18:55
Meanwhile, the vaccinated in this study, 2000 of them, what
18:59
it shows for them, 17% of them will have a chronic disease.
19:03
That is an astronomical difference that cannot be
19:07
explained by well, there's a few more, you know, African American
19:10
children on the vaccinated side or there was some birth
19:14
difficulties. All that should be looked at.
19:16
And I'll also say this, the study does a very brilliant job
19:21
of testing its weaknesses. For instance, one of the
19:25
weaknesses they say is that the follow up time, the amount of
19:28
years that they follow the children that are unvaccinated
19:31
was shorter. And so that's not fair that some
19:35
diseases may appear later on in the vaccinated group that didn't
19:38
appear in the unvaccinated group.
19:39
Perfectly, perfectly reasonable argument.
19:43
But in the study, they limit the study so that let's just look at
19:46
all the kids that were only in it for one year and what do they
19:49
find? The vaccinated have even higher
19:52
rates of chronic disease. Then they limit it to all the
19:54
children, both unvaccinated and vaccinated, that had to be in
19:57
the program for three years. Same thing, worse for the
20:00
vaccinated and then lasted five years.
20:02
So when they tested timing, it actually got worse for the
20:06
vaccinated. So every way they looked at it.
20:09
And then then they'll try to say, well, unvaccinated kids
20:12
aren't going to their doctors as often.
20:14
This is this is one of the arguments that's made against.
20:16
There's been several studies like this, by the way.
20:18
We'll get into that in a minute. But that's the argument that's
20:21
always made. Well, the unvaccinated don't go
20:22
to doctors. I mean, you could argue probably
20:25
because they're so healthy given what you're seeing in this
20:28
study, but they did some controls.
20:31
They said let's limit it. Let's not have any kids that
20:33
never go to doctors. Let's say you have to at least
20:35
go to the doctor once a year while you're in the program.
20:38
And what they saw is it didn't change the outcome.
20:40
And one other thing they noticed when you looked at the serious
20:43
illnesses like asthma, like, you know, some, I forget the exact
20:48
categories, but the ones where there were unvaccinated children
20:51
that had it, they found that sick unvaccinated children go to
20:55
the doctor about 5 * a year on average and seven times was the
21:00
average for the vaccinated. So what it shows us is if an
21:03
unvaccinated child is sick, they go to the doctor.
21:06
Their parents aren't crazy. They're like my kids having a
21:08
speech delay or whatever it is, I'm going to go to the doctor
21:10
and check this out. So this idea that the
21:13
unvaccinated, we're just not seeing their illness because
21:15
they don't go to doctors, I think that's even disproven the
21:18
study. And so those are the attacks
21:20
that are happening. And I'll just say this, you can
21:24
attack the study. That's the scientific method.
21:26
And it should have happened the other way around.
21:28
It should have been published, you know, by Henry Ford.
21:31
It should have been published by the Senate.
21:32
But they're not going to do it. And so now we're looking at an
21:35
unpublished study and we're we're asking questions.
21:37
The only question that should be asked that I ask at the end of
21:40
this film is why are there about four or five other studies
21:44
exactly like this? All of them, they've tried to
21:47
attack them, but they're all showing the exact same signal in
21:52
every one of these studies. One is by a Doctor Mawson out of
21:56
the University of Mississippi. He did a homeschool study of
21:58
homeschool children and found very similar results I think.
22:02
Five times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders.
22:05
Four times the rate of asthma, very similar to what this Henry
22:09
Ford study. Doctor Paul Thomas out in Oregon
22:13
here in America had a huge pediatric practice and he was
22:17
open minded. He let people they didn't want
22:18
to vaccinate. He let them come to his
22:20
practice. He would still see those kids
22:22
and he realized, Oh my God, I have a very, I could do a robust
22:25
study of my unvaccinated compared to my my vaccinated
22:28
children. He did that.
22:30
He lost his license for doing that study.
22:31
That study was so horrifying that they immediately went in
22:35
and threatened and and ultimately took his license
22:37
away. And that's what happens to
22:39
doctors and scientists that ask this question.
22:42
But here's the thing, the Henry Ford study was not done by
22:45
Doctor Paul Thomas that is open to not vaccinating children.
22:48
It wasn't done. You know, you know, viewing
22:51
homeschool students, which is, you know, was 600 kids.
22:55
This was 10s of thousands of children in a.
22:59
Very pro vaccine. They brag about their vaccine
23:03
program and you know Doctor Marcus Zervos does himself.
23:06
This study was done to prove those other studies.
23:09
Wrong and ended up doing the opposite.
23:12
Prove them right. That to me makes this, I mean,
23:17
now you're talking about what we call reproducible science,
23:20
something that almost doesn't exist in this world.
23:22
Most, most editors of research and you know of magazines like
23:27
British Medical Journal or The Lancet, many of them have come
23:31
out and said we can't reproduce half the science that's being
23:33
published in this this, this magazine, yet this science is
23:38
being reproduced over and over again.
23:40
So as far as I'm concerned, go ahead, poke holes, but you can't
23:44
undo what we're learning in this study.
23:46
Until someone on this earth with a larger database than Henry
23:50
Ford Health has, can do a vaccinated versus unvaccinated
23:53
comparative study and show us for the first time, it'd be the
23:56
first time they've achieved it, that the vaccinated are
23:59
healthier. I want to know why that study
24:01
hasn't been done. I want to know why they aren't
24:03
doing it right now. Why do they say we're rushing to
24:04
it? Why isn't UK saying we're on,
24:07
you know what we're going to prove Delve, Big Tree and Doctor
24:09
Marcus Ervos wrong and Henry Ford Health?
24:11
That's that's I think the issue of our time.
24:14
I believe you're seeing how powerful the Pharmaceutical
24:17
industry is. It has controlled this
24:19
conversation for a very, very long time.
24:21
And as you just put it, put it with this film and this study
24:25
and the other studies that come before it, the cat is out of the
24:29
bag. It's interesting because you
24:31
know, if, if the Pharmaceutical industry was confident in what
24:34
they were doing, if it was confident in, in their product,
24:38
they should be welcoming studies.
24:40
They shouldn't be attacking. And we saw this during COVID as
24:43
well. The doctors were speaking out
24:44
against the Pharmaceutical industry and and against the the
24:47
rush to get COVID vaccines out were attacked in the same way.
24:54
You know, you said that that the attacks were appropriate, but
24:57
but I'd just like to get some thoughts on you about the types
25:01
of attacks. Because in a peer reviewed
25:03
study, it's scientists. Yeah, considering the contents
25:07
of the paper they are looking at it from with some rigor.
25:12
A lot of the attacks that I'm seeing in in the press are don't
25:15
have that rigor and they're quite populist in their in their
25:18
approach. So this isn't the same kind of
25:21
attack as would be seen on a peer review process.
25:25
And so I'd just be interested to get your thoughts on that.
25:28
Well, exactly. I mean, that's what you know,
25:31
we've all seen these videos now when you watch the news where
25:34
they were all saying the same thing from COVID.
25:36
The vaccine is 95% effective, 95% effective.
25:39
Yadda yadda yadda yadda yadda. And they stood by it and they
25:43
were wrong. I just watched the great mashup
25:45
just this morning that was showing how many times Donald
25:48
Trump said he believed that the actual death rate of COVID was
25:52
going to be well below 1%. And all the news pundits that
25:55
said that's a lie. WHO has said it's 3.4 percent
25:59
death across the world? He's lying.
26:01
That's been in misinformation. Well, now we look back and we
26:05
know he was exactly right. And you know, whether you take E
26:07
and Edie's, the great work out of I think it's Stanford, we see
26:11
a death rate from COVID of about .35%, maybe .2%.
26:15
As high as the worst would have maybe been.
26:17
A study shows .5%, so 1/2, 1/2 of 1%.
26:21
So Donald Trump was right. Yet we've never had an apology
26:24
by a single one of those pundits.
26:26
Not a single one of our news anchors, not a single one of the
26:29
doctors or scientists or any from the Imperial College
26:32
apologizing for the disastrous. Statements they made, the panic
26:36
they created by the true misinformation, the social
26:41
distancing. We have now recognized that
26:43
standing 6 feet apart. Or locking ourselves in our home
26:46
was not based in science. It was arbitrary because that's
26:49
what was admitted. Did in a congressional hearing
26:51
by Tony Fauci himself. We know that the masks could
26:54
never stop a particle as small as a coronavirus.
26:57
So what I would say is no matter what we do now, we now live in a
27:01
world where we have to take everything.
27:04
These news anchors and the experts that they bring on, we
27:07
have to take that with a grain of.
27:08
Salt and say I have watched every one of these people
27:11
completely lie or have it dead wrong at the very least, so to
27:16
be completely uneducated on the topic that they claim to be
27:20
experts in. And yet I'm still waiting for an
27:22
apology for the original mistake.
27:24
And so when these people now attack a study like this, the
27:27
same way they attacked the Doctor Peter Mcauliffe's and the
27:31
and the, you know, Doctor Robert Malone's and all of the
27:35
scientists and doctors that came forward during COVID to say we
27:39
shouldn't lock down, this is going to cause more harm than
27:41
good. You know, we should now really
27:44
think about maybe I should be listening to the people in the
27:47
scientists. They're saying this is an
27:49
important study. This study should be seen.
27:51
This study, you know, really could save lives.
27:54
All things that are, you know, a part of this film and many of
27:57
which that doctor Marcus Servos said himself about this study.
28:01
The only reason he's not publishing it because he's
28:03
afraid. He's afraid of being attacked by
28:06
the media that is controlled by the by, you know, he didn't say
28:10
the Pharmaceutical industry. I will.
28:12
Say, by the Pharmaceutical industry.
28:14
So, yeah, when you look at this, and what I mean is I don't mind
28:17
the attacks. I'm not going to be like the
28:19
scientists that are covering up all of this evidence.
28:22
What I'm saying is. Please attack.
28:24
Let's have an open debate. Let's meet in public forums and
28:28
point out what your issue is with this study, and we'll bring
28:32
our scientists in and defend it. And let's let the chips fall
28:36
where they may. But I think you're going to have
28:39
a hard time poking up holes in this study.
28:41
And then when and I and I'm happy to see, you know, real
28:44
scientific interaction on this study, but in the end that's
28:48
just a game happening in science.
28:50
And in the end, we have news anchors that don't know anything
28:53
about this issue. Meanwhile, we can sit here and
28:57
wait till someone. Finally tells us, yes, you know,
29:01
that building is actually burning.
29:03
Or we can go in and get our kids out of it right away and not
29:06
wait for someone to tell us that building looks like it's
29:08
burning. I think I can make the decision
29:10
for myself. Let's just come back on to the
29:14
film itself for a minute. So you said that you did
29:18
something that you don't normally do, which is to take
29:22
secret cameras or hidden cameras with you.
29:25
Why did you decide to do that? You know, for two reasons #1.
29:33
This wasn't, this wasn't really, you know, a news story for me.
29:36
I'm a reporter. I report, you know, I have
29:39
whistleblowers that stay off the record.
29:42
I'm fine with that. This was about a like a
29:46
challenge man to man with a scientist do this study and
29:50
however the chips fall, publish that study.
29:53
In a way, it's like a bet. It's a wager.
29:55
I made a wager with a scientist. I'm going to wager that the
29:58
vaccinator is sicker, but go ahead.
30:01
Whoever wins, they get the pot. And I didn't get, we didn't get
30:05
the payoff. This guy did the study.
30:07
And so on that level, he had to, he had to, you know, come to
30:11
terms with that. And I just thought, but if this
30:14
study shows what I think it's studies it's going to, I mean,
30:17
what what if it shows what I think it's going to find, then
30:21
it's important for the world to know that.
30:23
And I can't just, you know, know it's there and not be able to do
30:28
anything about it. I'm just not wired that way,
30:31
Mike. You know, in some ways I've been
30:33
attacked. Before it being an activist, not
30:35
a journalist. That may be the case that, that
30:39
that may be a a decent argument. I remember when there was the
30:44
earthquakes in Haiti, I was working on the doctors
30:46
television show. And so we went into, you know,
30:49
both bring doctors and medical supplies, but also to capture
30:53
everything that was there. And I remember children
30:55
suffering, people caught, you know, trapped a woman with a
30:58
broken hip. And I'm supposed to, as a
31:01
reporter, really just shoot that show how there's really no one
31:05
around to help them. Mike, I'm not wired that way.
31:08
I'm not going to just watch this person die for a new story.
31:10
I dropped the camera. I carried people, you know, to
31:13
safety. I helped, you know, military put
31:16
up Med tense, all of which would have made great video footage
31:20
for television. But I cared more about the
31:22
people. So that's how I'm wired.
31:25
That's just, you know, if that means I'm not a great
31:27
journalist, I don't know. When I'm watching these
31:28
journalists just sit there and watch a kid getting shot to
31:31
death in the street. It's it's an important job.
31:33
I'm not going to put that. Down.
31:35
That is true journalism. So let me be clear, that's not
31:38
me. I'm not that I'm going to run
31:39
out. I'm going to try and get that
31:40
kid out of harm's way. And that's what I felt like in
31:42
this situation. I'm going to go and bring
31:45
recording equipment. I don't know if it will ever see
31:47
the light of day. I didn't know what I would do
31:49
with it. I didn't have some plan with it.
31:51
I just thought this will be the last time this study will ever
31:55
be spoken of on a professional level potentially if I can't
31:59
talk him into publishing it, which was the main reason I had
32:02
that dinner, was to just try and talk him into publishing this
32:06
study. But if he's not going to publish
32:08
it, then, then I want the world to know why.
32:11
And that's why I took in the recording equipment.
32:14
And look, I'm happy I did. I'm happy I did.
32:17
Yeah, absolutely. And so you know, the world or at
32:20
least significant number of people now does know why the the
32:23
papers in the public, the conversation that you had with
32:26
them is more or less in the public.
32:28
So. So what has the response been to
32:30
the film so far? You know, it's been really
32:32
amazing, as you said, I mean, it's hard to track at this point
32:35
worldwide. You know what, the viewership,
32:37
because we're giving it away for free.
32:39
Everyone can watch it at an inconvenient study.com.
32:43
This is just a film made by my nonprofit, the Informed Consent
32:47
Action Network. I haven't checked this week's
32:49
numbers. I've been doing a lot of
32:51
television, radio and speaking all over the country.
32:54
But the last I checked, you know, we're the 10s of millions
32:58
of views. It's being shared.
33:01
We see hundreds of thousands of people downloading it, which
33:04
means they could be sharing it in in spaces we don't see it
33:07
anymore. I've heard about watch parties
33:10
all over the world, 1020 people in A room text saying you got a
33:14
standing ovation and you know in the hall that we were showing
33:17
it. So and, and what we see online
33:20
is I think the last I checked, 85% of the responses were
33:23
positive. And I'm glad to see that, you
33:26
know, as I've said that there's people that are challenging it
33:29
and say, well, I have this question with it.
33:31
I think all of that is important.
33:33
In some ways, I believe, and I'm sort of bragging that I think
33:35
this film and this study may have just jumped started the
33:40
scientific method, something that has been dead in the world.
33:44
Certainly COVID, you know, put it on life support and it has
33:48
been struggling. So I love the debate that's
33:50
happening. And I just think when you want,
33:53
when you see some of the people that are weighing in, a lot of
33:56
the ones that are coming against it, I think are just reading the
34:00
cease and desist letter by Henry Ford Health.
34:02
They're not reading the study itself.
34:03
They're not even going far enough to watch the film or any
34:06
of that. That's how that's how they dealt
34:08
with COVID. That was my beef with COVID.
34:09
I'm sure it was. Yours is.
34:11
Show me the evidence. That this vaccine is 95%
34:14
effective against, you know, infection and transmission
34:18
because all I could find was the emergency use authorization that
34:21
was put out by the FDA themselves saying this study
34:24
didn't even look to see if it stopped transmission.
34:26
So I have been calling out the lies from the beginning.
34:30
And in the end, people can just take people's opinions for it.
34:34
If we want to live in a world, we let other people decide the
34:37
perspectives that we have, then, then I don't think we have a
34:42
strong and bright future ahead of us.
34:44
But instead, if people want to know, this is a very short,
34:47
concise film. I'm very proud of it.
34:50
We worked hard to not, you know, pack our opinions into it, but
34:54
just state the facts as they now exist.
34:56
And this is really the culmination with Vax was out in
34:59
2016, you know, nine years, you know, later, this is the
35:05
investigation. I've been suing the government
35:07
of the United States since 2017 and winning and getting to the
35:12
bottom of this this issue. Where is the transparency of
35:15
science? I've had an international team
35:17
of scientists read every single vaccine trial that has ever
35:21
taken place. And I have one of the greatest
35:23
constitutional attorneys in the world and Aaron Serie, that one.
35:27
Back here in America, we have a mandated vaccine program and in
35:31
some states there's no way to opt out of it, like Mississippi.
35:35
So we spent three years in court and one back your right to opt
35:38
out of the vaccine program with your children in Mississippi.
35:41
We're in the middle of that case in West Virginia.
35:44
But I'll say to people, because I get labeled, you know, someone
35:47
who spreads misinformation, we've won, you know, multiple
35:51
lawsuits against the government in the United States, and you
35:54
should try to win lawsuits against the government of the
35:57
United States with misinformation.
35:58
It's not happening. It is not what's going on here.
36:01
The misinformation is coming from our government agencies.
36:04
And look, you can understand why they have promoted these
36:07
products for decades, making us believe there's mountains of
36:10
evidence that they don't cause autism, mountains of evidence
36:14
that it's not causing the multiple sclerosis and the
36:16
diabetes and all the ADHD that are all skyrocketing at this
36:21
time. What are they going to do if
36:23
they have to admit we're sorry? Oops, we got it wrong.
36:28
They haven't even admitted they got it wrong on COVID.
36:30
Imagine an entire vaccine program that's created the
36:33
autoimmune disease crisis of the century.
36:37
I mean, is this a partisan issue for people in the states?
36:40
Because I mean, the damage that's being done to children in
36:44
the last 30-40 years, as you say, isn't partisan.
36:48
So because it doesn't only attack Democrats or only attack
36:51
Republicans, it's everybody. But it's the issue of
36:54
vaccination and even the issue of Covad.
36:57
Is that sort of a partisan thing?
37:00
It has become that amongst the population, I would say in the
37:03
population more than probably in our elected officials, you have
37:07
very, very few, I think in less than a handful of actual
37:12
politics. The politicians that will speak
37:14
out against the vaccine program now and ask good questions is
37:17
Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, Ron Johnson and then President
37:25
Trump. Beyond that that those and those
37:28
are Republicans. So you know, they are weighted
37:30
to Republicans. But the rest of the hundreds of
37:33
them are pro vaccine because the number one most powerful
37:37
lobbying in the United States of America is pharma.
37:40
And they all get visited by pharma and they all get their
37:42
campaigns funded by pharma. And pharma has lobbyists in
37:45
their office every other day telling them how great the work
37:48
that they do are and how many lives that they're saving.
37:51
And so, but amongst the people, when you see polls there, it's
37:54
clear that conservatives in, in you know, or in, in the Trump's
38:00
populist movement, if you will, vaccine hesitancy, which is what
38:04
I like to call it is, is really very high.
38:08
But I'm hearing stats about the COVID vaccine in England that
38:12
90% of your own doctors aren't aren't taking the booster shot,
38:15
which means for the first time in history, and we're seeing, I
38:18
think something very similar here, that means there's a total
38:21
lack of trust in the health agencies now, even by doctors
38:26
themselves. So I think this issue is
38:28
growing. I wouldn't say it's completely
38:30
partisan, but at the moment, conservatives tend to learn more
38:33
in this direction. And, and, and I think that's
38:37
because Donald Trump has been so outwardly critical of the
38:41
vaccine program. He obviously brought in Robert
38:43
Kennedy Junior to run HHS, which is maybe the most controversial
38:47
pick in the history of mankind. I'm a little bit biased in that
38:51
I was Robert Kennedy Junior's director of communications when
38:54
he ran for president of the United States.
38:56
So I'm proud of how that worked out.
38:58
We ran him as president so that he could get in control.
39:01
The health agencies. Health has been his number one
39:04
concern for, you know, I think 40 or 50 years has been one of
39:08
the greatest environmental attorneys of all times.
39:10
So we have someone that knows about law, knows about health,
39:14
knows how the frauds take place, know how the corruption is.
39:18
We have an anti corruption government now in our health
39:21
agency with Robert Kennedy, junior doctor Marty Mccary, Dr.
39:25
Mehmet Oz, Jay Bhattacharya. I mean, you know, one of the
39:28
authors of the Great Barrington Declaration is the head of our
39:32
National Institutes of Health, the most funded research, you
39:36
know, institute in the world. You've got Martin Coldorf, also
39:40
of the Great Barrington Declaration is the head of our
39:43
advisory committee on immunization practices.
39:45
So things are changing, and I think because that's happening
39:48
under President Trump, you have the anything but Trump or the
39:52
Trump Derangement Syndrome, as we call it here, pushing
39:55
Democrats against their own best interests.
39:57
So that's how it sort of lays out in America.
40:01
And I mean, there's what, another 2 1/2 years of of
40:06
Trump's presidency to go or to three years of Trump's
40:09
presidency to go? What, what what?
40:12
What happens after? I mean, that's, you know, I'm
40:15
concerned about that. I'm concerned what the backlash
40:18
for the response is going to be the Pharmaceutical industry at
40:21
like, because look, as we've said, right, no matter how much
40:24
as a as a civilization, we are waking up, you know, shows like
40:29
yours and mine are millions of people.
40:31
This film, an inconvenient study, will probably be seen by
40:34
a billion people around the world, you know, at least by the
40:37
time it's it's gone through. But yet no apology from any of
40:42
the news anchors that we watch. No apology from any of the
40:45
hospitals that kept us from seeing our loved ones that use
40:49
remdesivir and ventilators and killed 9 out of 10 of their
40:52
patients during COVID. Blocked the use of ivermectin,
40:55
which has been now proven in studies all around the world to
40:58
reduce death by 80%. Block the use of
41:01
hydroxychloroquine, which was in studies around the world.
41:05
Reduced death by 50%. Certainly have given early all
41:09
of these things, blood of millions, millions of people is
41:11
on their hands and yet not one apology on that one vaccine and
41:15
that one, you know, pandemic. So when you see that all of the
41:19
institutions of power, all The Who, all the gobbies, all the
41:23
Bill Gates, everyone is still lined up to maintain control of
41:29
the world. And let's make it perfectly
41:31
clear, there is no greater way to control the world than
41:36
through their health. And though many of these things
41:40
are sold to us as health initiatives, let's go ahead and
41:43
look at the, you know, Kenya situation where we know that
41:47
they use vaccines to sterilize women in Kenya.
41:50
We've seen issues like that in India.
41:52
Here in America, we use vaccines to cull our deer population or
41:57
wild deer population. Vaccines are used in animal
42:01
populations to sterilize them and slow their expansion and
42:05
their growth. That, I believe, is not
42:08
necessarily what it's being used for.
42:10
I want to be clear, I'm not being a conspiracy theorist, but
42:13
I assure you, in a nation where your leaders keep telling you
42:17
we're overpopulated, we need to reduce population, and then
42:21
those same people put the most of their investment into your
42:25
vaccine programs, then you've got to start listening to them.
42:29
If they're saying their goal is to reduce population and they're
42:32
lining you up, telling you you should never ask a question
42:35
about what we're injecting bring into you, then that is a recipe
42:40
for a world that you do not want to live in.
42:43
So we have a lot of work to do. That's why this film is so
42:46
critical that everyone shares it with everyone they know.
42:49
We still have a vote in America. You still have a vote in the UK.
42:54
The only way we can get out around the power of the
42:57
Pharmaceutical industry and these globalist lunatics is the
43:01
power of the people. We outnumber them, but we have
43:04
to outnumber them. Those in the knowing.
43:06
We have to outnumber those that don't care.
43:09
And that's why a film like this is so important that everyone
43:12
shares. That's why we've made it free.
43:14
We're not trying to make money off of it.
43:16
I want it there for everyone in the world to see it.
43:18
And then with one gigantic, loud voice, we should demand every
43:23
Regulatory agency of every nation that we live in to do a
43:27
vaccinated versus unvaccinated study and prove this Henry Ford
43:31
study wrong. If you can't, then we need to do
43:35
an immediate change. We have to to make an immediate
43:37
reversal because it appears we are destroying the future of our
43:42
species. And if we keep rushing products
43:45
like the COVID vaccine onto the market without proper safety
43:49
testing and forcing everyone on the planet to take it, our days
43:54
are numbered. And you know our I don't see how
43:56
we survive this. We've never had a virus that has
43:59
ever affected enough people to kill us off this planet.
44:02
But when we have stupid leaders and bad science and funded
44:07
pharmaceutical, you know, agendas, we could be really in
44:11
harm's way. OK, well look, we're just about
44:14
out of time. So just one final question.
44:15
And do you think that the that this film has the potential to
44:20
make sure that if in the not too distant future a COVID like gag
44:26
gets played again that we won't fall for it?
44:29
If this film can't do it, I don't know what will.
44:32
I mean, I really mean that. I think this film lays out as
44:36
clearly as anyone can understand it.
44:38
And look, my, my, if you see my text, it's just thousands are
44:41
coming in by the thousands. The emails are coming in by the
44:44
10s of thousands of people saying exactly this.
44:47
I could not explain this to my loved one.
44:49
I just showed this film and now they get it and they're sharing
44:53
with everyone they know. You really, you got to see this
44:56
film. You can say, oh, I know that
44:58
information and you probably really do, but we've never had a
45:01
tool like this that lays it out this clearly and has this study.
45:06
By such a. Clearly, you know, biased, you
45:10
know, institution that should have been able to make it look
45:13
like the vaccinated we're healthier and could not do it,
45:17
in fact, show such alarming rates of illness.
45:21
It is mind boggling. So yes, I think that this study
45:24
is a game changer. I think this film is a game
45:27
changer. You know, I haven't made an
45:29
another movie since Vax. There's been other good movies
45:31
that have come out, but there hasn't been anything that I
45:34
thought had the value or the size or the ability to do what
45:37
Vax did back in 2016. This is that movie.
45:42
This is the one I was proud to make.
45:43
And, and this is the culmination of all of the work that I've
45:47
done with my nonprofit over the last, you know, nine years.
45:51
OK. Well, Del Victory, thank you
45:53
very much for joining me today. Just tell everybody where they
45:56
can watch the film one more time.
45:58
Just go to aninconvenientstudy.com.
46:02
You can download the film, you can download the trailer, you
46:04
can stream it there. You can share links with your
46:06
friends. And by the way, we are posting
46:09
all of the attacks that have been made against it with
46:11
rebuttals on why we think those attacks are not rooted in
46:16
science. So it's all there.
46:17
We're not hiding everything. We're being very, you know, open
46:20
about everything that everyone's saying and having that
46:23
discussion. You can find all of that.
46:25
And the study itself, you can download the study, you can read
46:28
it yourself and come to your own conclusions, which is what we
46:32
have to start doing. We've got to do our own
46:34
research. So an inconvenient study.com.
46:37
You can watch the highwire.com where I have a show every week
46:40
that discusses these issues. Dell, thank you.