➡ The American Academy of Pediatrics advises against vaccinating children with skin conditions like eczema, or if a family member has a skin disorder, due to potential risks. Despite this, the guidelines are often overlooked. The article also discusses the history of chickenpox diagnosis and critiques common surgical procedures like knee arthroscopy, which is found to have limited benefits and potential harm. Lastly, it questions the validity of a study claiming COVID-19 vaccine recipients are at risk of sudden death for 15 years, arguing that such claims should be based on solid evidence, not speculation.

➡ A 47-year-old man who had received the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine died from acute pulmonary hemorrhage 555 days later. Despite the autopsy revealing no blood clot, the study claimed he died from hypertensive cardiovascular disease. This case, however, does not provide evidence that the vaccine increases the risk of sudden death for 15 years. The article also discusses varicoceles, a condition that can affect male fertility, suggesting that improving blood flow and diet, regular exercise, and certain herbal treatments may help alleviate the condition.

➡ The text discusses the benefits of a good diet and regular movement for improving blood flow and reducing issues like hemorrhoids and varicose veins. It also explains atrial fibrillation, a heart condition caused by an energy deficit in the heart, and suggests that its treatment should focus on restoring the heart’s metabolic integrity. The text also questions the existence of vitamins and elements in their isolated forms, suggesting that they might be created during the process of extraction and not naturally present in the substances from which they are extracted.

➡ The speaker discusses various topics, including homeopathy, communication between humans and nature, skepticism about vaccine shedding, and the importance of critical thinking. They express doubt about the existence of viruses and the effectiveness of vaccines, and emphasize the need to question belief systems. They also mention the impact of shame and blame in our society, and how these can influence our thinking and actions. Lastly, they encourage open-mindedness, empathetic listening, and logical reasoning in conversations about these topics.

Okay, welcome, everybody. Let’s see if the sound is on, I think so. Today is another Wednesday webinar. Today is Wednesday, May 14, 2025. And thank you everybody, for joining me. We appreciate your support. Just a few things to say here. First, some of you may have noticed that our Instagram account was. What is the word? Blocked, or taken down or removed from Instagram because of violations of community standards, whatever those are. It’s similar to when I was having issues with the California Medical Board and they said I was putting out YouTube content that was unauthorized. And I asked them what was it that I said that was unauthorized? And the guy said, I don’t know, because I didn’t see it.

And so I asked him if there was anybody there who I could speak to, who I could see, asked, find out whether what I was going to say was authorized or not. And he said no. And so I said, how am I supposed to know whether it’s authorized? He said, just look up the CDC and say what they say. So I think it’s similar here. I don’t know how we would know what the community standards are. We don’t know what we said that violates them. We don’t know anything that we said that was incorrect. And like I said to the California Medical Board, if somebody shows me that what I say is incorrect, that is factually, provably incorrect, I will be the first one to take it down and say that I got it wrong.

And here’s the part that I got wrong, and maybe here’s what’s right. If I know that, I’m happy to do that, Mr. Instagram. So if you please let us know we’re good. I think we’re going to try to put the new Instagram. We’re going to try a different Instagram title or handle or something. So we’ll put that in the show notes and the chat. And we hope that everybody who’s interested, who’s currently following us on Instagram, we’ve taken a long time to build up the followers and to improve the content and to put more videos and little clips.

And so it seemed to us like we were doing great and really helping people to understand what this is all about. So I hope you go to the next new account or whatever it’s called. So we will put that in the show notes and in the chat. The second thing is there was a. Apparently a wonderful conference at Confluence on a farm in Texas that just finished last week. I unfortunately wasn’t there, but my son Asher was there, and we had a booth and he got to meet a lot of our customers and a lot of members of our clinic.

And it’s really great when we can do that. And so he met a lot of really great people and a lot of our supporters. And we wanted to thank you for that and thank you for all the support. And hopefully you got some good stuff and hopefully you got to ask Asher a lot of questions and find out more about what we’re doing. And as always, we appreciate your support and I hope you had a great time. I heard it was a great event with an amazing vibe, an amazing lineup of speakers, etc. I wish I was more I could go.

It’s not that I’m physically unable to go. I just kind of hate traveling and maybe I’ll reconsider. But again, thanks everybody for saying hello and for joining the group at Confluence. So today is I want to get to some questions that keep lingering and I keep not getting to because I talk too much. But I did have a few things that I happened to run into in the week that I thought I would share just to keep the momentum going about what I’m talking about with issues which I think are sort of current events. So let me bring some of these up.

I’m going to share here. So unfortunately I still have the same problem of when I go to save a article, it doesn’t look at all like what I think it should look like, but. But the actual words are there. So this article came was called the variation on the theme by Fenner, the pathogenesis, in other words the cause of chickenpox. And it was from the Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Science in San Antonio. And it was published in Pediatrics 1981. And there’s the citation for any of you who want. I looked up this on the place that I look up articles and they didn’t have it.

So this was the best I could do is to get the abstract. So this was a old article on what is the cause of chickenpox from 1981. And the thing I wanted to mention so that what’s the theme that I was meant saying that we’re going to continue. And I think this is so important for understanding the whole scam of so called infectious diseases. And I’ve shown that the slide about how when they want to create a pandemic or epidemic or something, one of those kind of things, they lump all the diseases that have similar symptoms and signs into one.

And then when they want to say that the epidemic or pandemic is resolved or lessening, usually because of a vaccine, they then call that one disease into a whole bunch of other ones. And that’s the sort of scam that they’re running. So this caught my attention because this was a quote that sort of exemplifies that. So in a study exemplifying both brevity and experimental design and brilliance in execution, Fenner delineated the pathogenesis of acute exanthems. That’s febrile diseases that have skin rashes. So he lumped together the human diseases of smallpox, chickenpox, measles and rubella. That’s called German measles because of the similarities in clinical presentation after a relatively long incubation period, even though etiologically these diseases are caused by a diverse group of, of DNA and RNA viruses.

And then they list the virus. Now, the important thing I wanted to mention here, and the thing that caught my eye, is the whole reason for this study was these diseases that Fenner is studying and trying to find the cause of. Smallpox, chickenpox, measles. German measles are so similar in clinical presentation, in other words, the signs and symptoms, in other words, the experience that the child has that nobody can actually tell them apart. So that creates a dilemma for the practitioner who’s attempting to try to tell them apart and to determine which one of these the child has.

Because by looking at them and hearing their story, there’s no way to figure that out. It’s so interesting to me. I keep saying this, but I still remember hearing this in medical school. I graduated in 1984, so not much after this article was written. And they would show us different pictures of these different diseases. And of course at the extremes they look different, but the sort of mild or moderate cases, they all look the same to me. And I can remember being on the verge of like raising my hand and saying, I don’t really see the difference here.

But of course that would have been looked frowned upon because then you would have admit you’re ignorant and you can’t see what’s in front of your eyes, even though I can guarantee that everybody in the room was thinking the same thing. And somehow we all managed to think we were the stupid ones and we couldn’t see that these rashes that really looked identical somehow were different. So anyways, this guy selected an animal model and then he selected a certain virus called mousepox. And then he did some unnatural things like injected some, some of this mouse pox virus, which of course, course wasn’t a virus.

At all but a broken down cell culture through abraded skin. And then he got some symptoms and then he was able to say this is now mouse pox. So this brilliant executed scientific design was basically nonsense. But the point is the whole reason he had to do it was because nobody can tell these diseases apart. Which is exactly what I was saying. Okay, so the next one, and I’ve actually shown this slot, this abstract before and it’s so interesting. So this is an article about Eczema vaccinatum and this is again an old article from Pediatrics, 1958.

Here’s the citation there, the DOI number if you want to try to look it up. I tried to look it up but couldn’t find it. This is from the Department of Pediatrics, University of Southern California and Children’s Hospital of la. And they’re talking about this illness called Eczema vaccinatum, which is severe eczema related to a vaccine. Again, I wanted to basically read the abstract. So there were nine cases of this Eczema vaccinatum including two fatalities. Two people died, seven were caused by contact of a child with eczema with a recently vaccinated sibling. Suddenly appearing umbilicated vesicles superimposed upon atopic eczema are almost diagnostic of Eczema vaccinatum or Eczema herpeticum.

These do not occur with mere secondary bacterial infection. So this is a very specific look where you get fluid filled vesicles on top of the usual eczema. They say they can use hyper immune gamma globulin for specific therapy. It’s frequently iatrogenic, I.e. Dr. Caused and uniformly preventable. And here’s the important point, and I’ve said as far as I know, I could be wrong about this because it’s hard to find. But this is still the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics. So that’s 42, 60 years later. Of course nobody knows this and of course nobody follows it, but they’ve never had any scientific refutation of these guidelines.

So officially the guidelines of the American Academy of Pediatrics are one, no child with atopic eczema, that’s like skin rashes or other skin disorder should be vaccinated. To put that in clear English, if you have a child who has a skin issue, don’t vaccinate them. The risk is too high. No child should be vaccinated if any member of his family has eczema or, or any other skin disorder. So if you have a cousin, relative, mother, father, brother, sister, who has eczema or atopic dermatitis or psoriasis or any other skin disease. The American Academy of Pediatrics says it’s too dangerous to vaccinate them.

Parents of children with eczema should be notified at the onset of the disease of the danger from vaccination. Contact, meaning getting a vaccine or contact with somebody who did get the vaccine. If a sibling or child with atopic eczema is vaccinated, he must be completely separated for the child for at least 21 days. In other words, if you have a child who has eczema and their sibling has to be vaccinated for some reason, then you need to separate them for at least 21 days. Forms used by state and local health departments for parents consent to vaccination should include an appropriate warning of contraindications, which is never done.

This should be a reportable disease, which it isn’t. Patients recently vaccinated must be excluded from pediatric wards containing patients with atopic eczema, other diseases of the skin, burns or healing surgical incisions. Vaccination may be recommended at 2 months of age, especially for babies from strongly allergic families. I don’t know where that came from. Bottom line is, if your child has eczema, anybody in your family has eczema, don’t have them get anywhere near a vaccine, either themselves or anybody else who’s been vaccinated. And again, as far as I know, that’s still the recommendations and nobody follows it.

And at least it’s a good start since nobody should be vaccinated whether they have eczema or skin condition or not. That’s obvious. But at least we got the skin conditions. And since pretty much everybody has somebody in their family with a bit who’s had a rash at some point, that means everybody shouldn’t be vaccinated, which is also obvious. Okay, next one. The first description of chickenpox as a disease by William Heberden the elder in 1710 to that’s when he lived in 1767. So this was published in Pediatrics, April 1970. There’s the citation. So this is the first time chickenpox was diagnosed, was fingered as a different disease.

So he wrote in some they say a few other people came close, but this is the first guy. These pox break out on many without any illness or previous sign. In others they are preceded by a little bit degree of chilliness, lassitude, cough, broken sleep, wandering pains, loss of appetite and feverish for three days. And this is one of the things I wanted to point out. And I don’t know how many times in medical school I learned in another learning about medicine that. So you can tell this is a disease because the first sign of the illness is they break out in a rash or it could be preceded by signs of sickness.

And since those are the only two options there are, in other words, you either were sick before the rash or you weren’t sick before the rash, it’s obvious that that is the only two possibilities. And so in other words, it’s meaningless in some patients I have observed them to make their first appearance on the back, but this perhaps is not constant. And again, I just want you to notice the wording. In other words, sometimes it’s on the back first and sometimes not, which of course is the case, because those are the only two options. Most of them are of common size of smallpox, but some are less.

And so here they’re the same size as smallpox, but some are less. I never saw them confluent, run together, nor very numerous. The greatest number which I ever observed was about 12 on the face and 200 over the rest of the body. And then they go on to describe the vesicle with the fluid in it, etc. And on the second or the farthest third day from the beginning, as many of the pox are not as yet broken and not full mature, those that are fullest of the yellow liqueur very much resemble what the genuine smallpox are on the fifth or sixth day.

And when that happens, they’re a larger space. Bottom line is, when you get right down to it, this is the same illness as what they call smallpox and what they call monkeypox and pumpkin pox and all the rest of them, it’s just a little bit less severe sometimes, sometimes it’s just as severe, sometimes it’s less severe. Which means he didn’t describe a new illness at all. He just said sometimes we see it not as severe and who knows why, and that is not a different or new illness. That is the point I wanted to make. Okay, the next one.

Well, you can still hear me, I think. So I just wanted to mention these, these are two articles that I happen to run into and the point here is to look at some of the claims that are being made. So here’s a study about arthroscopic surgery for degenerative knee and a systematic review and meta analysis of the benefits and harms. So I don’t know how many, if they say in here how many of these are done per year, but it’s one of the Most common surgeries done. So this is where the orthopedic doctors go in with their arthroscope to quote, clean out your knee and repair it.

And they do it for all kinds of knee pain and meniscus tears. And here’s some of the people that they’ve done it on. You can look here. And so what are the conclusions of this? The small inconsequential benefit seen from intervention that include arthroscopy for the degenerative knee is limited in time and absent at one or two week, two years after the surgery. Knee arthroscopy, that’s sticking the tube in and cleaning it up or sewing up the meniscus, et cetera, is associated with harms. Taken together, these findings do not support the practice of arthroscopic surgery for middle aged or older patients with knee pain, with or without signs of osteoarthritis or apparently from any other reason.

And so this is a review of one of the most common surgical procedures which shows that it’s basically of no benefit and lots of harm. And the next study I wanted to show is a different kettle of fish, which is how misleading some of the headlines that you see and some of the things that if you don’t really investigate, you could end up believing unless you actually find out what they did. So this is a FDA says Covid vaccinated at risk of sudden death for 15 years. Now I just want to point out that many people should say, well, I should applaud this because the FDA made an alarming admission revealing that people who receive the COVID MRNA vaccines are at risk of suffering a sudden and unexpected death for up to 15 years after they received their last injection.

So one would think, because I don’t think anybody should have gotten or should get any Covid MRNA vaccine or any other MRNA vaccine or any other, any type of vaccine. So that’s very clear. So why aren’t I jumping up and down? See, we caught them red handed. This Covid vaccinated people are at risk for sudden death for 15 years. Can you imagine that? Fifteen years after getting the shot, they still have a risk for sudden death. But the reason I looked at this and said I got to look at this study is because I am, I would say, adamant in saying that we cannot use bogus studies that claim even things on our side because ultimately they will be debunked and we will look stupid and flee foolish for publishing nonsense.

We can’t combat nonsense with other nonsense. So I said to myself when I read this. Wait a minute. Nobody has had a Covid shot 15 years ago. So how did they know that they’re at risk for sudden death for 15 years? And then I looked down and then I saw the research was conducted by Peter McCullough and somebody else, Nicholas. And then I knew I had to look here because this is a. What you call a high probability of being total nonsense. And again, even though one might say, but Tom, this is on our side, so why aren’t you applauding this? We cannot use our own nonsense to combat their nonsense.

And so what was the study? So here it is. And I couldn’t find the study because I don’t know if it’s published yet, but here’s the citation. You can look. Delayed fatal pulmonary hemorrhage following COVID 19 vaccination, case study, batch analysis and proposed autopsy checklist. So again, the claim is Covid MRNA shots increase the risk of sudden death for 15 years. So what did they actually do? They presented a healthy 47 year old Caucasian male that died unexpectedly from acute pulmonary hemorrhage 555 days after completing the Pfizer COVID 19 vaccination primary series. So in other words, one patient who died allegedly from a acute pulmonary hemorrhage, bleeding in his lungs, 555 days after receiving the vaccination.

Now again, whenever somebody says the clinic or wherever that they had a Covid shot, I always suspect that that may be the part of their problem. Or we do. It doesn’t prove that it is. But in this case, if you’re going to publish a paper. So what did they do? So a guy had a healthy medical history, no meds, rapidly deteriorated, experienced severe respiratory distress followed by cardiopulmonary arrest with evidence of profuse bleeding. Yeah, so the, so the guy died. And so they did an autopsy on them. And the findings revealed lung congestion without embolus. So there was no clot, normal heart size, some atherosclerosis, no heart attack.

So despite this, they said he died from hypertensive cardiovascular disease without really any evidence for that, without considering the recent pulmonary hemorrhage and unremarkable medical history. And so then they give a whole long list of things they fail to investigate, such as the spike protein, vaccine, RNA antibodies, et cetera, et cetera. So if anything, they said there’s no blood clot according to this autopsy. That doesn’t mean it’s true. But this is hardly evidence that 15 years after get getting these shots that you’re at risk for sudden death because this not even two years. So the headlines don’t actually have.

Are not corroborated by this study. And in fact, the autopsy results say there was no clot. That doesn’t necessarily mean there is. Wasn’t. I’m not saying that. But my point is this is not a study that can go, that can substantiate that claim. This is, I think, what you properly call fear pornography. And we should be just as skeptical of this as counterclaims because we cannot win this war based on poor science. We have to do things properly. And just because they sort of corroborate our position, if they’re, they should be called out just as much if they’re bad science from quote, our point of view as from theirs.

That’s my point. Okay, so let me get to some questions and hopefully you can hear me better now. I’ll probably hear about it if you can’t and maybe too far away from the mic. So the first question I won’t read it was from somebody who apparently was having some fertility issues. This was a male with findings of low sperm count and low sperm vitality, I think is the word that they use. And they found on a physical exam that they, that he had a varicoseal, which is essentially like a ballooning out or an out pouching of the veins in the scrotum.

It’s similar to varicose veins, which is an out pouching or ballooning out or a weakness of the wall of the veins in the leg. And I’ve heard this before and they’ve said that, well, we’re not sure about this, but it may be that the varicoseal is causing the low sperm vitality and the low ability of the sperm to result in a pregnancy. So what do I think about this? And is there anything to do about varicoseals? So the first thing is I’ve noticed this through the years. As a doctor. I’ve run into this situation before and there’s basically three conditions which are actually in some ways very similar.

And they are hemorrhoids, which is an out pouching, ballooning weakness of the wall of the bottom of the hemorrhoidal vein. In other words, the, it’s. The hemorrhoidal vein is like a U, shaped like a U tube. And so at the bottom is the anus, and that’s where the hemorrhoids happen. And so you get a ballooning out of the hemorrhoidal vein. And that’s called a hemorrhoid and you also get it in the leg, in the veins that carry the blood from the leg back back up to the heart, and that’s called a varicose vein. And then you also get it in the scrotum, and that’s the veins that carry the blood from the scrotum probably up to the liver.

And so that’s called a varicocele. Now, I don’t know any actually proof that varicoseals in themselves cause infertility of the male or dysfunctional sperm. But having seen this pattern a number of times, the pattern that I’m talking about is it was almost uncanny that people who suffer from one of those three varicose veins or hemorrhoids or varicose seals often suffered from all three. In other words, they had not isolated varicoseal or isolated varicose veins or isolated hemorrhoids. Although I’m not saying that never happens, because I’m sure it does. But often the people who had one of those had at least two.

And in almost every one that I saw, and maybe my population was skewed because that was just one person doing family medicine. And so I didn’t see a whole lot of these people, but an uncanny number had all three. And so that makes me think that it’s not an anatomical defect of the veins in the leg or the hemorrhoidal vein or the vein in the scrotum. It’s something to do with something like weakness of the walls and back pressure on the. The blood flow. So the blood isn’t flowing properly upwards, if you want to use that upwards towards the heart.

And so there’s a back pressure. And the back pressure, because of this congestion, puts pressure on the. The walls of the veins in those three lowest places, the, the legs, the scrotum and the anus. So the question then was, so where is the congestion occurring? And all three of them, interestingly, flow. The flow goes back up through the liver, not so much the varicose veins, but the hemorrhoidal vein and the varicoseal. The, the blood flow goes through the liver on its way back to the heart. And in many traditional medical schemes, like Chinese medicine, they talk about congestion in the liver.

And so there’s a poor blood flow through the liver which is causing back pressure. And that is combined with the weakness of the walls to balloon out the walls, resulting in hemorrhoids, varicoseals and varicose veins. So that was my essentially diagnosis. There was a congestion of the blood flow in the venous system. Now if that’s true, then the, then that’s what needs to be remediated. Not anything specific for, you know, like cutting out the veins in your leg or lasering them, or are cutting out the veins in your scrotum or cutting out the hemorrhoids, but to increase the blood flow and relieve the congestion in the liver.

So the congestion in the liver has a lot to do with diet and that’s like nourishing traditions, good fats and no processed foods and eating sauerkraut and healthy fats and all that. So that’s obvious. The next thing that I told people to do because venous blood flow is encouraged by movement, especially moving in spirals, is that I would get them to do very regular and active physical exercise, particularly barefoot, particularly on the earth, because that sends up a charge through your body which I think increases the blood flow up through your liver back to your heart.

And so if there’s less congestion and more flow, there won’t be the downward pressure and then you, the varicose seals, etc. Will go away. So that was the second thing. The third thing was this was what originally led me to investigate the plant called hibiscus and then eventually led me to our hibiscus extract. Because hibiscus seems to be an old medicine. You know, it’s, it’s made from the blood red flowers of the hibiscus plant, which already tells you it’s got to do with blood and making the blood more perfect in a sense, like the flower of the hibiscus plant.

And so it seems to have to do with strengthening the walls of the veins. But the most important one, and I got this from a company which I used, used to use a lot of, and still think there’s some good things there is standard process. And they sold an herbal extract or powder made from a plant called collinsonia root. And I think the other name for collinsonia root was stone root because it looks, it’s a plant that looks just like a stone and feels like a stone and has an eerily similar appearance to hemorrhoids. And so it was using this sort of principle of the doctrine of signatures.

It was used as a herbal treatment for liver congestion and the resultant out pouching that we call hemorrhoids. And I’ve used this with pretty much every person who ever came to me with hemorrhoids and varicose veins and varicose als. And there’s two forms. You can either use plain collinsonia root powder, which they have in Capsules, or even better with something called gastro fiber, which was a mix of collinsonia root and other. Other plants which seem to all have this V. Vein. Vein, sorry, vein tonic effect, as well as increasing blood flow through the liver. And most of the people I can tell you who use this, you know, pretty much on a daily basis for a long time, never had problem with hemorrhoids.

And their varicose veins often went down. And I don’t know so much about the varicoseals, but I think it’s worth a try and I would love to hear if it made them actually resolve, at least to a certain extent. And then an increase in the sperm viability. So basically it’s good diet, which sounds like you were doing movement, especially with bare feet in spiral motions, but even just walking on the grass or sand, regular movement, you don’t want venous movement, helps with venous blood flow. Then hibiscus and collinsonia root or gastrofiber. And let me know how it goes.

Okay. What causes atrial fibrillation and how should it be treated? Interestingly, and I’ve talked about atrial fibrillation fibrillation before, there’s basically two kinds of heart problems, if you want to make a categorization. One is a rhythm, rhythm problems that come from the nervous system, the nerves that innervate the heart. And the others are metabolic problems that come from the ability of the heart to generate energy. Now, you would think that atrial fibrillation is a rhythm problem because that’s what it means. It means the atrium is not contracting properly. But unlike many other rhythm problems like svt, there is no actual nerve involvement with atrial fibrillation, which is why the treatment for nerve problems of the heart, which is ablating the nerve or burning out the nerve, essentially doesn’t work for atrial fibrillation.

What happens in atrial fibrillation is there is an energy deficit in the heart. So the heart doesn’t. Isn’t able to generate the energy that it needs, so its electrical field is weak. Essentially the same etiology as heart attacks. And then it sends out distress signals and they come from different places in the atrium. And. And so the atrium can’t contract rhythmically. And then we call that atrial fibrillation. So the treatment is, has everything to do with restoring the metabolic integrity of the heart, which is essentially the exact same as the treatment for heart attacks and angina and congestive heart failure, which has to do with, of course, movement and of course, food, especially again, good fats and Very low, if any sugar.

In fact, no sugar, but, you know, it’s not a no carbohydrate diet, but, you know, base the basic diet movement strafanthus. I would use the beef heart extracts for this, which is a. Another way to. To nourish the energy generation of the heart. And I would be particularly cautious about EMF exposure and do whatever kind of EMF mitigation you can do in your house and devices and things like that. And the final thing to say about it is we’re in the midst of a sort of like an epidemic of atrial fibrillation, or I hate to use that word anymore, but more and more people when I started practice, you know, you’d never see anybody with AFIB or only occasionally.

By the end of it, it was every week there was more people with afib. And a lot of this has to do with statin drugs. So statin drugs, they interfere with the ability of your heart to generate energy. They say that’s through Coq 10. But we don’t want to get into that reductionist way of thinking that they basically interfere with your ability of your heart to generate energy. Therefore, they are often the thing that actually throws the patient into atrial fibrillation. That is the final straw that breaks their heart metabolism. Okay, Tom, I get your point of do vitamins exist? Let’s throw out the word altogether.

Now, if one uses the exact same process on many different foods to find a specific unnamed substance, it varies in quantity. What would you call this? That substance clearly exists. So the point I think that I would make here is what we call the isolation of a new substance in biochemistry. In other words, you take an extract of a heart or you take a blood test and you have some blood, and you’re trying to find out what’s in it. And I didn’t know this, and I don’t think hardly anybody did, does know this. But the way they say they found a.

Find a new substance, incent, essentially isolate a new substance. So let’s break that down a little bit. So we have blood or we have a piece of tissue, and we want to isolate a new product from that. And this question says, so what if we did the same thing, the same chemicals, the same reagents, the same buffers, the same centrifuging, the same filtering on every different samples from different substances or different foods, then we would get exactly the same thing. And so what they do to find, I. E. Isolate a new substance is change one of the reagents, which then changes the final product that they get.

And they call that the isolation of something different. Now, the first thing I would put say semantically is nobody isolated anything. They didn’t separate one thing from everything else. What they do is they did was they took a food or a tissue or blood and mixed it with a bunch of chemicals and got a reaction. No surprise that if you mix food or blood or tissue with chemicals, you get a precipitation and you get a chemical reaction. And then if you get. If you keep doing the exact same procedure, the same chemicals, same reagents, etc. You get the same thing.

That’s the isolation of that thing. What is it? I mean, we don’t. We don’t. You can name it and you can get a different chemical, but you don’t know that that thing was there in the blood or the plant or the tissue because you couldn’t isolate it from any of those things without mixing it with these chemicals and reagents. And so you don’t know if those chemicals and reagents created something which wasn’t there in the first place. That is my beef with this. And then what I didn’t know is that then you change the chemicals and you get something different.

And so now what you get is not vitamin a, it’s vitamin B1. And why did you get something different? Because you used a different extraction method. That’s not the isolation of B1 and showing it’s different from vitamin whatever. That’s using a different extraction method and showing you get a different result, which is obvious. So that’s my problem with this. So does the substance exist? The final chemical does, but that’s not the question. The question is, does it exist in the living being? And the answer to that is we frankly don’t know. And we should be honest enough and courageous enough to admit we don’t know.

And then again, honest enough to say we’re not going to make decisions on that. We’re going to eat this food because it has CoQ10 when we don’t know if there actually is CoQ10 in there or not. But what we do know is that if you eat beef heart, sometimes people’s heart seems to act better and not have as much fibrillation and you seem to be able to breathe better and your life seems to be better and we don’t know what part of it or the. Whether it was the whole thing. And I just want to encourage everybody, including myself, to get away from this reductionist thinking.

In parts, it’s the beef heart that did it, not the Coq 10. I guess that gets into the next question. Do the elements in the periodic table exist? These are tricky questions. So there’s clearly a difference between gold and silver. Those are two different elements. There’s, there’s a difference between gold and carbon. Interestingly, diamonds allegedly are pressurized carbon, I guess. And so what is that about? Aren’t these totally different substances? So in a way, I guess I would say yes. But I would also say that a more realistic way of looking at it is the, the so called elements on the periodic table are actually variations of the real element, which is the earth element.

Now the earth element seems to be subdivided into many different forms of the earth element. Now my guess is the, that the earth element is a specific form frequency, or a specific, you know, vibrational frequency, if you want to use that word. And maybe I’m making up a story here, but we can test the electromagnetic frequencies and when they get more dense, that seems to be when they congeal into what we call substance, physical substance. So physical substance is the densest, most congealed form of energy that we know of. And there are many different forms of these frequencies which then are essentially unlocked in the homeopathic method of creating medicine.

So you, you, you go backwards, you take congealed, dense frequency, which we call the substance gold, which is a different congealed, dense frequency than the substance we call silver. And then we can also go backwards by shaking it, diluting it, grinding it, swirling it around in water, etc. And we can then go back and extract the frequency from that. And that’s actually what heals. And that’s called homeopathy. And we can do that from plants and we can do it from animals and we can do it with elements or minerals or metals, anything that has the density of what we call the various forms of earth element.

So I would say that the elements are different congealed, dense frequencies. They’re all subdivisions or subsets of what we call the earth, Earth substance. And so there’s just the earth, which has many different variations. There’s a question about shedding from what you know. Any new insight? Not really. I am still skeptical of shedding because I don’t know what there is to shed. It’s not to say that humans and humans and animals and humans and plants and plants and plants and plants and animals don’t communicate with each other. They obviously do on many different levels, through sound and through speech and through just emotions and through feelings.

And so there’s many ways of communicating, but I don’t know of any specific. I don’t believe that the vaccines, like the COVID shots, make you make spike proteins which then go and poison somebody else. I don’t think that happens. I think there is probably, if. If there’s any truth to getting sick from being around somebody who’s vaccinated. It’s probably more just like everything else on an energetic basis. Okay, a lot of different tricky questions here in good questions, things to really make us all think. So here’s a question. What is the main commonality of those who don’t fall for the COVID brainwashing and can this be fostered in others? So let me just start by saying I don’t know the answer to this.

One of the things that I’ve often thought of and I’ve spoken a lot about is when I came to approach the question of is the heart a pump? Do blocked arteries cause heart attacks? Is there such a thing as a virus? Or has technically has the existence of a virus ever been proven the way that I started? And the first thing, I became very clear to myself even in my probably late teens and early twenties, that I would get nowhere if I sort of gamed the system and prejudiced the outcome. Or to put it another way, I don’t care whether the heart is a pump or not.

I can live with it either way. It makes no difference to me. So I was just going to follow whatever I could with logic and reasoning and the best understanding I could to make to come to a conclusion. And then I would base my actions and my whatever I was going to do about this based on that. Same with the virus question. If there’s a virus, fine. If there’s no evidence for a virus, fine. I had no skin in the game. I had no dog in that hunt. And I was going to live with whatever it is.

Now, one of the reasons why I think I was able to do that and why I came to the conclusion that nobody should ever receive any vaccine ever, was I didn’t have to go through the oh my God, I’ve spent the last 10 years giving a thousand children vaccines day after day. And that’s how I made my money. And if I don’t have that anymore, how am I going to live? And how am I going to keep my house going and how am I going to make the car payments or whatever, and what am I going to say about all those thousand children who I harmed, even though I didn’t mean them harm? I did it out of ignorance, but that’s supposedly my job to not be ignorant about what I’m giving people and to do no harm.

And I didn’t do my due diligence. I was basically incompetent and it’s very difficult for me to face up to that. And so I’m just going to not go down that road. So I didn’t have to go through that because as I’ve said, I probably gave three to five plain tetanus shots in my life and I publicly apologized to all three of those people who I can remember, I don’t even remember and nothing happened that I can, that I know of. But it still wasn’t a good thing to do. But I did it and I can live with that.

So I think when I think of. So what’s that about? It’s about something that I think is called shame. And I think having the experience of shame, which is a big part of how we all grew up, we live in a shame and blame and victim culture that we’re blamed for things that are often had nothing to do with us. We’re shamed into believing things that we otherwise would never believe. We’re humiliated and, and we learn that the way not to get kicked out of the tribe, the way to defend oneself, the way to maintain one’s integrity and sense of self is to avoid that kind of shame and blame at all costs.

So we go through our life unfortunately trying not to be shamed. And so we attack others and we don’t listen to things even though maybe something in us tells us they’re true or that what we’re thinking is just wonky thinking. It’s just illogical, irrational thinking. But that’s all we know. And when I think of some of these scientists, particularly in the so called health freedom movement and it’s all they can do to defend the virus narrative defenders, you know, the genetic narrative. It’s like their whole psychological, emotional reason for being is they have to not lose face with this.

And I would just say why? What’s going to happen? What’s going to happen is you probably will have to rearrange some things and maybe change the way you do things, but you will be so much more freer and unencumbered that your inner life, it will be worth it. So I don’t think I know how do you encourage this with others. But my strategy now, which I’ve said also many times, is I try not now I’m going to contradict what I’m here I am telling people what to do or what to think or but when I’m in conversation with somebody, I simply ask them questions because I want them to hear their own thinking process.

I want them to hear what they’re saying. It’s the same that I did with patients. I want them to hear the way they’re thinking, how they arrived at this conclusion, or to say out loud, I have no idea why anybody would think this is true. This is simply a belief system. And then you ask, so what does that belief system get for you? Or. Or what cost does having this belief system mean for you? And let them think about what it means and what it costs them. And if they can’t do that, then they’re certainly not going to, quote, change their mind.

That’s not your goal. Your goal is just to be with them, help them sort this out, in a sense, have an empathetic listening. You’re not going to judge them, you’re not going to shame them, no matter what. You just want to help them think through this in a logical, rational way. Unfortunately, you will often encounter anger and resistance and name calling, but none of that matters. It doesn’t matter to me at all anymore. I’ve had so much of that that people can say whatever they want. I just keep wanting to know how you came up with the fact that there’s a virus.

And if you don’t know, just say you don’t know and live with it. Say it’s a belief system, and then think about what that belief system does or doesn’t do for you. And hopefully, if there’s no shame and no blaming and. And no judgment, people will start to say some of the most important words that I think I know are, hey, wait a minute. And when somebody says that, you know, that they’ve started to think, and that’s a really good thing. Okay, so I think we’ve run out of time, and I didn’t get to that many questions, but they’re so interesting and a lot of good philosophical stuff to think about.

And again, just to remind everybody that our Instagram account was taken down, and we encourage and really hope that everybody signs up for our new Instagram account. We’ll put that in the show notes and in the chat. And thanks everybody for welcoming us at Confluence. We hear it was a great time and it was great to meet people for Asher. And thanks everybody for joining me, and I will see you next week.
[tr:tra].

See more of DrTomCowan on their Public Channel and the MPN DrTomCowan channel.