Speaker 1: Welcome back to Behind the Bastards, legally the only podcast
Speaker 1: on the internet, so I hope you all have no
Speaker 1: other choices. So I'm sure we've got We've got a
Speaker 1: big audience today of the entire world listening in um
Speaker 1: as I have used my congressional connections to ban all
Speaker 1: other podcasts, any other podcast. You're listening to our our
Speaker 1: illegal podcast now, which actually makes mine less cool. This
Speaker 1: is probably a bad call in any case. Uh, this
Speaker 1: is a show about bad people, but very worse people
Speaker 1: in all of history. And my guest today is Sharine
Speaker 1: Lana Unash. You're back. I'm back, that's my own home.
Speaker 1: How do you feel about me gaslighting my audience about
Speaker 1: the fact that there are no other podcasts in order
Speaker 1: to keep them keep them locked into my content stream.
Speaker 1: I'm I actually found it very entertaining and ingenious in
Speaker 1: a way that I wasn't expecting. I think making them
Speaker 1: believe this is the only source, you know, like you're
Speaker 1: making You're making yourself essential to them. You're you're there. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1: People talk a lot about like the downsides of gas lighting,
Speaker 1: but nobody talks about how good it can be for
Speaker 1: making money with a podcast. I mean the reality the
Speaker 1: inverse the inverses like, the reality is there's so much
Speaker 1: to be consumed, but you just constantly telling them there isn't.
Speaker 1: I think that's pretty smart, I will say, though, the
Speaker 1: word ingenious doesn't make that much sense to me. This
Speaker 1: is a side note completely just semantic. Uh. Thing I
Speaker 1: just realized is that genius is smart, but then ingenious
Speaker 1: should being not smart, just because of the way that
Speaker 1: prefix is usually used. But in this case it means
Speaker 1: even more smart, which is just my own. This is
Speaker 1: how my brain works now. I don't know how to
Speaker 1: have conversations. It's very I'm frustrated by ingenious and I'm
Speaker 1: frustrated by inflammable. And I know there's like a small
Speaker 1: quadra of of grammar obsessives who have will explain how
Speaker 1: it completely makes sense that both of those words mean
Speaker 1: what they mean. UM, I don't care. Um I disagree
Speaker 1: with grammar regular I regular. I regular disagree with grammar often,
Speaker 1: me too, me to um So. Sharine, you are the
Speaker 1: co host of the Ethnically Ambiguous podcast, and my friend
Speaker 1: and co worker, and um you know, and a really
Speaker 1: talented filmmaker and a talented filmmaker UM Award winning filmmaker.
Speaker 1: And there's really no other way to to just launch
Speaker 1: into this episode than by saying, how do you, um,
Speaker 1: how do you feel about orgasms? Oh, you're welcome for
Speaker 1: booking you on this. Um, now I know why Sophie
Speaker 1: told me I was coming in blind and now I
Speaker 1: was thinking about what I was getting myself into before
Speaker 1: I turned on my microphone, before I agree to jump
Speaker 1: on this call. This was not anywhere in the realm
Speaker 1: of my Okay, well, I think orgasms are great. Um yeah,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't know though personally if we really want to
Speaker 1: get intimate here right off. Hasn't been even three minutes
Speaker 1: of this podcast. I don't know. I've never had one,
Speaker 1: so wow. Okay, Well, um yeah, that actually is kind
Speaker 1: of on topic, Sharine, because um yeah, that's was I
Speaker 1: selected for this on purpose? Or is this this is
Speaker 1: this can't be a coincidence. Yeah, I just yeah, I
Speaker 1: thought we talk about grifters together, and our subject today
Speaker 1: is a grifter, so I thought you'd enjoy talking about him. Um,
Speaker 1: And I decided to open things with that incredibly inflammatory question. Um,
Speaker 1: because because it's my podcast and I'm a monster. Wait,
Speaker 1: is the question relevant? Yes, it's extremely relevant. Yeah, we're
Speaker 1: we're talking about it. I who goes by the nickname
Speaker 1: doctor orgasm Um cute. Yeah. Uh So it's probably not
Speaker 1: a surprise to anyone listening or to any of us
Speaker 1: that that men and women have have very different orgasm experiences.
Speaker 1: And this is rooted heavily and evolutionary biology. Um. And
Speaker 1: one of the things that illustrates this difference is the
Speaker 1: incredible density of studies and articles about studies, UM, all
Speaker 1: trying to unravel what's often described as like the mystery
Speaker 1: of the of the vaginal orgasm um. It's seen. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: and it's I mean, this is really funny to be Okay,
Speaker 1: I need to like be candid here. Sure, during this
Speaker 1: whole quarantine thing, like like the the me not having
Speaker 1: me not experiencing this feeling that everyone else seems to
Speaker 1: like relation has been this like thorn in my side
Speaker 1: for like most of my adult life, and I think
Speaker 1: this this whole entire quarantine time has I've been doing
Speaker 1: a lot of research on this to be honest about
Speaker 1: like why someone would have more trouble than others, Like
Speaker 1: what it means to actually let go and like experience
Speaker 1: and receive pleasure like I have a lot of difficulty
Speaker 1: receiving good things, including like just like even just like
Speaker 1: feeling nice. And I've been this is this is actually
Speaker 1: hilarious that we're talking about this because I've been like
Speaker 1: genuinely like studying like like the ways to make myself
Speaker 1: feel okay enough to experience this thing that has always
Speaker 1: been this like this inside joke that everyone else understood.
Speaker 1: And I also think women talking about this pressure, they
Speaker 1: don't talk about it enough. Like I don't think the
Speaker 1: society at large talks about women trying to overcome this
Speaker 1: pressure if they're not like already in the know of
Speaker 1: how to utilize or or like receive pleasure. And so anyways,
Speaker 1: I feel like I've done my homework, even without meaning
Speaker 1: to I had. I did not know this about you
Speaker 1: going into the episode. Um, but that's actually gonna be
Speaker 1: helpful in terms of trying to like parse this out
Speaker 1: because this is a more confusing episode. It's not impossible
Speaker 1: this is a medical grifter um who claims to be
Speaker 1: able to cure women's who haven't who have trouble or
Speaker 1: an inability to have orgasms, And for a number of reasons,
Speaker 1: I'm fairly certain he's a grifter. Um, but you can
Speaker 1: find some people, some women who say that he helped them,
Speaker 1: and it's a very complicated story. And it's more complicated
Speaker 1: due to the fact that, like we as I'm sure
Speaker 1: like your research has suggested, we don't really have a
Speaker 1: great we don't really have a great scientific lockdown on
Speaker 1: the vaginal orgasm, right like it's it's it's Um, there's
Speaker 1: a lot that's kind of up in the air about
Speaker 1: it from a research standpoint. I mean, everyone's just so different.
Speaker 1: I think that's pot boils down to there's no like
Speaker 1: there's no just like I don't know to put to
Speaker 1: be crude, there's no like pump that you just like
Speaker 1: go at until something comes out of. It's not like
Speaker 1: I don't know, Yeah, men literally have a button that
Speaker 1: you can press. Yeah, exactly exactly. It's it's not for
Speaker 1: men or it's not for you know, people with people
Speaker 1: with uh, what's the most appropriate term to use? Wing
Speaker 1: dang doodles. Um, The wind dang doodle orgasm is a
Speaker 1: pretty simple thing, right, Um. Yeah, it's it's straightforward as
Speaker 1: self explanator. But I think, like, uh, I don't want
Speaker 1: to get sorry, I keep taking over this conversation. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: I mean you're that that's why you're here. Please take it,
Speaker 1: take it over. Like so when you're a boy, when
Speaker 1: you're like a prepubescent boy, like it's it's understood that
Speaker 1: you're going to be going through changes, that you're going
Speaker 1: to be going through puberty, and that means like exploring
Speaker 1: your body like a wet dream for a guy is
Speaker 1: a pretty standard point of puberty. For girls, you're never
Speaker 1: encouraged or even told to explore yourself, and that makes
Speaker 1: you feel even not even on purpose, but it makes
Speaker 1: you feel a lot of shame about your body. And
Speaker 1: I was raised pretty sheltered and I didn't I remember
Speaker 1: really disliking my I was disgusted by my my genitals,
Speaker 1: like I didn't understand them. I didn't under like I
Speaker 1: there was a good portion of time before I like
Speaker 1: embrace my sexuality. And I'm still like overcoming those things
Speaker 1: now because of how you're raised as a girl just
Speaker 1: to like shut it down and to protect yourself and
Speaker 1: to not be a sexual being because that invites unwanted attention.
Speaker 1: And so I think being raised like that and never
Speaker 1: like being encouraged to explore yourself, it leads to adult
Speaker 1: women needing to figure it out even after they've already
Speaker 1: had sex for the first time or the second time
Speaker 1: or the thirtieth time or whatever. So um, yeah sorry, no, no, no, no, yeah.
Speaker 1: And it's it's one of the other things that it
Speaker 1: does is because there's so little conversation about this, and
Speaker 1: especially so little conversation that's like had an uh a
Speaker 1: kind of I don't know, um structured way like our
Speaker 1: our our educational system doesn't build this in and most
Speaker 1: parents feel too awkward to really talk about it. And
Speaker 1: so because a lot of women don't ever get to
Speaker 1: have these conversations and grow up like with this thing
Speaker 1: of like I I don't know how to experience this,
Speaker 1: I don't know how to like get like like this
Speaker 1: this kind of mystery about their own bodies. Whenever there
Speaker 1: is a black hole of knowledge like that, it provides
Speaker 1: an incredible opportunity to grifters. Um. It's the same reason
Speaker 1: why when you have a huge virus hit, right, like
Speaker 1: all these people start cropping up and and are able
Speaker 1: to make claims like oh, we know how I know
Speaker 1: how to cure this, I know how to treat this
Speaker 1: is because like this weird mysterious thing that people don't
Speaker 1: understand is a problem, and there's kind of a vacuum
Speaker 1: of official information and there's a lot of there's actually
Speaker 1: like a pretty decent sized industry of grifters who just
Speaker 1: target women who are aren't able to orgasm or or
Speaker 1: don't orgasm is often as they want to. Like that's
Speaker 1: a big Like even when I was in India, there
Speaker 1: were huge like tantric sex uh institutes, and like if
Speaker 1: you spent enough time in the towns where they were located,
Speaker 1: you would start hearing stories about the men who ran them,
Speaker 1: and they were like almost I'm not gonna say tantric
Speaker 1: sex is bad, but all of these all of these
Speaker 1: guys were basically cult leaders, right like like that's this um,
Speaker 1: it's just this this thing that happens um And yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's so unfortunate, and it makes me so enraged because
Speaker 1: I understand that like like like this desperation to just
Speaker 1: feel something that you're you're led to believe is like
Speaker 1: a very human, primal thing, and you feel you feel
Speaker 1: almost broken that you can't experience it, like coming from
Speaker 1: my experience, like I maybe I was just maybe it
Speaker 1: was it's like too late, or like maybe I wasn't
Speaker 1: raised correctly or maybe I know it's it's why can't
Speaker 1: my body do this? And so you become an adult
Speaker 1: and you become so desperate to figure out how to
Speaker 1: do these things. I can I can see someone getting
Speaker 1: misled just because desperation will lead you to do that.
Speaker 1: And and it's it's this really um intimate and brutal
Speaker 1: thing to experience in with yourself. To to have that
Speaker 1: being taken advantage of is so criminal in my opinion,
Speaker 1: because it's just I'm just mad. Yeah, you'll get you'll
Speaker 1: get time on the show. So, but before we get
Speaker 1: into this specific orgasm grifter, I do want to talk
Speaker 1: I wanted to go over a little bit of like
Speaker 1: orgasm research, um so just to kind of talk about
Speaker 1: like what's out there right now, which will help explain
Speaker 1: some things that are going to come into the story
Speaker 1: later on. So again, there's not a lot that's like
Speaker 1: ironed out known for sure about the vaginal orgasm. Some
Speaker 1: researchers suggests that that they play a psychological role in reproducttion. Obviously,
Speaker 1: like there's no question about the role of the male
Speaker 1: orgasm and reproduction, but there is a question for um, yeah,
Speaker 1: the vaginal orgasm and the like. Uh. So the researchers
Speaker 1: who suggest a psychological rules say that basically, because these
Speaker 1: orgasms feel good, it makes people with vaginas want to
Speaker 1: have more sex, which leads to more babies. And this
Speaker 1: is like pretty logical, right. You can at least you
Speaker 1: can see a through line there. Um. Yeah, so uh.
Speaker 1: One thing that these folks will point out is that
Speaker 1: solitary animals such as cats, have what's called male induced ovulation. Uh.
Speaker 1: And that's where an egg is only released uh from
Speaker 1: the ovary during sex. Um. And there is evidence that
Speaker 1: cats orgasm in case you were curious, we know they
Speaker 1: release prolactin, which is a hormone that human ladies get
Speaker 1: flooded with when they orgasm and when they ovulate. Sixteen
Speaker 1: study I found suggested that the hormone release with the
Speaker 1: orgasm is probably an evolutionary holdover from when our ancestors
Speaker 1: moved from induced opulation and like cats, to the spontaneous
Speaker 1: ovulation that that we currently enjoy. Um. Enjoy might be
Speaker 1: the wrong word there, but like, yeah, so that's that's
Speaker 1: one theory. Um. And this study suggested that once ovulation
Speaker 1: once like in our evolutionary timeline. When ovulation stopped depending
Speaker 1: on like a man or you know, a penist getting
Speaker 1: in there. Uh, the clitterest moved from inside the vaginal
Speaker 1: canal to its current position. Um. And one piece of
Speaker 1: good news from all of this is that the clitterest,
Speaker 1: evolutionarily speaking, is not going to go away anytime soon. Um.
Speaker 1: The penis evolves from the same part of the embryo.
Speaker 1: So as long as uh, there are wing dang doodles,
Speaker 1: there will be clitter e. So that's good news. If
Speaker 1: anyone was worried about losing those in a couple of
Speaker 1: thousand years sciences, yeah, yeah, I was concerned. It also
Speaker 1: means that men are going to keep their nipples. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I was worried. Yeah. Well no they are not. They
Speaker 1: absolutely are not a lot of uses for male nipples. Um.
Speaker 1: You can hang stuff off them, that's mostly yeah. So
Speaker 1: uh yeah, I think that's that's good background to get
Speaker 1: because the medical grifter we're talking about today, UM is
Speaker 1: a doctor who claims to be able to vastly increase
Speaker 1: the likelihood and quality of women's orgasms, and he does
Speaker 1: this by injecting their own blood back into their labia. UMU. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is probably nonsense, although it is not definitively nonsense,
Speaker 1: because the exact kind of treatment this guy is using
Speaker 1: is still something that's that's being studied. Um. But this
Speaker 1: is a case where there it's possible there's some validity
Speaker 1: to what he's doing medically, but the doctor himself is
Speaker 1: absolutely a piece of ship and a grifter. Um. And
Speaker 1: the fact that he has a huge populic Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: more I'm intrigued. Yeah, this is a This is an
Speaker 1: interesting one. So the fact that this doctor has a
Speaker 1: sizeable population of interested customers is doing large part to
Speaker 1: the fact that, as we kind of lead this episode
Speaker 1: talking about vaginal and cluatoral orgasm are actually pretty rare.
Speaker 1: People with penises report orgasms about of the time and
Speaker 1: heterosexual encounters, while people with vaginas report orgasms only about
Speaker 1: fifty percent of the time. Um. The reasons for this
Speaker 1: are hotly debated, but they actually kind of seem pretty
Speaker 1: obvious to me based on just the data. So, for
Speaker 1: one thing, age, education, and income all increase the likelihood
Speaker 1: of orgasm um for people with vaginas. Yeah. And this
Speaker 1: suggests that knowledge and particularly kind of knowledge of one's
Speaker 1: self and one's biology increases your odds as a vagina
Speaker 1: have r of having an orgasm. Uh yeah, yeah yeah. Um.
Speaker 1: Only about of people with vaginas orgasm from casual sex,
Speaker 1: while seventy orgasm and committed relationships. And to me this
Speaker 1: suggests the same thing, which is that orgasms are at
Speaker 1: least somewhat a project of knowledge, and having a partner
Speaker 1: who knows your bits increases your chance of having an orgasm.
Speaker 1: And and I will say I didn't like say the
Speaker 1: word masturbation earlier when I was talking about like exploring
Speaker 1: your body or anything, but I do think the fact
Speaker 1: that we don't talk about women masturbating and like we're
Speaker 1: not really like they're I mean, like now they're like
Speaker 1: we're being more progressive. There's a certain section of like
Speaker 1: youth that's like really all about talking about it. But
Speaker 1: when I was growing up, I didn't masturbate. Like I
Speaker 1: didn't know how. I didn't know. I still low key
Speaker 1: don't really know how. So because it's just I'm not
Speaker 1: I'm still trying to understand like like how to receive pleasure.
Speaker 1: I'm so bad at receiving anything that alone like a
Speaker 1: compliment or like like how much is to receive a
Speaker 1: fucking orgasm for myself. Um. But I think our obsession
Speaker 1: with only talking about male pleasure and male masturbation leads
Speaker 1: women to never understand like they don't have the knowledge
Speaker 1: about how to feel good sexually because they're not encouraged
Speaker 1: to it, and there there's just so much shame around it. Um.
Speaker 1: And even like I remember watching porn when I was
Speaker 1: like a teenager purely as like studying it, like I
Speaker 1: just wanted to understand what it, like, what people were
Speaker 1: up to, Like what was this thing I was missing?
Speaker 1: And every time they would show like a woman masturbating,
Speaker 1: it was this like just crude, like just like it
Speaker 1: was just so it wasn't good enough, Like it didn't
Speaker 1: it didn't work, you know what. I don't know if
Speaker 1: that makes sense. It's just it made seem too easy. Um.
Speaker 1: And uh, sorry, I keep getting distracted. I'm just no, no, no,
Speaker 1: I mean bringing up a lot of ship Robert yeah,
Speaker 1: ship Yeah. I mean, And you're not You're you're very
Speaker 1: far from alone in that, because, like you know, the
Speaker 1: data suggests like this is a hugely common problem. Um.
Speaker 1: Just in general, people who have vaginas not orgasm ng
Speaker 1: as often as they would prefer. UM is very common
Speaker 1: and there are actually quite a lot of women who
Speaker 1: have what's called female orgasmic disorder UM. And that's exactly
Speaker 1: what it's sounds like. It's an inability UM to orgasm. Uh.
Speaker 1: And it is also incredibly treatable. Sex therapy is successful
Speaker 1: of the time. UM Yeah, yeah, yeah, that is a
Speaker 1: thing that exists. There's treatment options in the data suggests
Speaker 1: that they are very there. They are very often effective. Um.
Speaker 1: But those numbers still leave a lot of unsatisfied people
Speaker 1: with vaginas out there. Uh. And unluckily for them, doctor
Speaker 1: Charles Reynolds is around to take their money. Charles Reynolds
Speaker 1: is the inventor of the O shot, a controversial therapy
Speaker 1: meant to correct a lack of vaginal orgasms. Dr Reynolds
Speaker 1: has been branded doctor Orgasm by some and he's a
Speaker 1: big old piece of ship. Now, if you've not heard
Speaker 1: about his O shot, you may have heard about his
Speaker 1: other groundbreaking medical treatments, the vampire facial. This is the
Speaker 1: guy who did the vampire facial. Yeah yeah, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: the same guy the vampire breast. Anything. But like coming
Speaker 1: from a guy, I'm already wary of anyone that's like
Speaker 1: I can give this, I can give women more orgasms,
Speaker 1: Like what did a woman know the most intimately how
Speaker 1: to do that? Like I'm already like I'm intrigued only
Speaker 1: because like I'm so fascinated by the subject. But I
Speaker 1: think just by default that that information, that claim coming
Speaker 1: from a guy is already kind of like lose his
Speaker 1: credibility for me because he will never understand one a
Speaker 1: vagina is capable of you know what I mean, But
Speaker 1: I don't know. Yeah, you won't, you won't change your
Speaker 1: opinion on that over the course of this episode. Can't Wait.
Speaker 1: So in addition to the vampire facial and the vampire
Speaker 1: breast lift, Dr Reynolds is the inventor of the pre shot,
Speaker 1: which is a needle that you shoot into your dick
Speaker 1: to make your dick the orgasm better. UM. So he's
Speaker 1: he's he has picked, he's picked a path for himself. UM.
Speaker 1: And his path is his path is sucking people's blood
Speaker 1: and then shooting it back into pieces of them to
Speaker 1: gain kind of unclear medical benefits Like that's this the
Speaker 1: guy's thing, um, and the specific medical treatment that he
Speaker 1: is involved in, and that all really um, all of
Speaker 1: his His his treatments are one second, the specific medical
Speaker 1: treatment that he focuses on that kind of all of
Speaker 1: these different things are a type of is called platement
Speaker 1: rich plasma plasma injection or PRP injections or PRP therapy. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a mostly when it comes to like skin rejuvenation
Speaker 1: and yes, increasing cell turnover and all that stuff. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's not. I don't think it's like I think there's
Speaker 1: still as far as I know, like the very still
Speaker 1: out as far as very much. Yeah, we'll talk about that.
Speaker 1: It's certainly grown more popular over the years. UM And
Speaker 1: and for folks who don't know you're familiar with I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess a lot of people have are somewhat familiar
Speaker 1: with this. But the basic idea is that a patient's
Speaker 1: blood is drawn out and then put through a centrifuge,
Speaker 1: and the centrifuge concentrates all of the platelets, which are
Speaker 1: the blood cells that are largely responsible for the fact
Speaker 1: that your blood has healing functions. UM. Those platelets are
Speaker 1: then sucked back up and then injected into damaged or
Speaker 1: diseased body tissue in order to stimulate healing. UM And obviously,
Speaker 1: it makes sense that people would try this as a therapy, right,
Speaker 1: Like the there's logic to like, oh yeah, I can
Speaker 1: see how if you concentrate like the heally parts of
Speaker 1: the blood and then shoot it into wounded Yeah, maybe
Speaker 1: that'll work. It's it certainly falls under the list of
Speaker 1: medical treatments. I was like, yeah, it was worth a shot.
Speaker 1: People should have given it a yeah, well we'll give
Speaker 1: it a go. Yeah. But it got really popular just
Speaker 1: with like celebrities and stuff like, not like wounded or
Speaker 1: damaged skin. It was just like to increase or too.
Speaker 1: It was like marketed as like a you a youthful
Speaker 1: like fountain of thing exactly. And it started. The very
Speaker 1: first PRP therapies were in sports medicine UM and largely
Speaker 1: kind of as a way for professional athletes and the
Speaker 1: like to more rapidly heal from rotator cuff injuries and
Speaker 1: sort of similar you know, wounds, the kind of stuff
Speaker 1: that like, you know a lot of times like you
Speaker 1: pull an ankle, you fuck your rotator cuff up, you
Speaker 1: funk up a knee, and like it kind of stays
Speaker 1: a little bit fucked up forever. And so this was
Speaker 1: kind of they were trying to figure out how to
Speaker 1: deal with that, right, Like, maybe we can accelerate the
Speaker 1: body's healing so you can actually get this ship fixed. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and there are there are some professional athletes and stuff
Speaker 1: who swear by this treatment. The actual scientific data on
Speaker 1: how well it works is very muddled. I found a
Speaker 1: systematic review in the Cochrane Library that analyzed nineteen studies
Speaker 1: on PRP therapies, and when they did a bias analysis,
Speaker 1: only three of these studies were judged to be at
Speaker 1: low risk of bias because obviously a lot of people
Speaker 1: with financial interests in PRP therapy working fund studies into
Speaker 1: whether or not PRP therapy works. Um. But even when
Speaker 1: they kind of excluded the biased studies, the existent studies
Speaker 1: didn't show evidence of any significant effect from PRP therapy.
Speaker 1: There is some evidence that it might help reduce pain,
Speaker 1: but that's really about all we can say conclude sibly.
Speaker 1: There's a decent amount of evidence that it can help
Speaker 1: reduce pain when you're healing from an injury. UM in
Speaker 1: certain circumstances. There's really not nothing hard to support the
Speaker 1: claims that it accelerates healing UM, which doesn't mean that
Speaker 1: it doesn't because this is still pretty new, but like
Speaker 1: the the jury is definitely still out and of course
Speaker 1: there's there is no clinical I want to get this
Speaker 1: right out of the way. There's zero clinical evidence that
Speaker 1: it helps with work as ms that like like not
Speaker 1: not a drop. That is just a wild yeah progression
Speaker 1: of like yeah, like where else can I put blood? Yeah,
Speaker 1: people are someone's blood Jesus man. Yeah, and it put
Speaker 1: One of the things he's kind of taking advantage of
Speaker 1: is that, surprisingly enough, like labial tissue, you can actually
Speaker 1: do this kind of stuff and it doesn't really hurt,
Speaker 1: um because the place that he injects it into there's
Speaker 1: actually not a lot of like you don't have a
Speaker 1: ton of of you don't know, like all of that
Speaker 1: area isn't super sensitive, Like there's actually parts that aren't
Speaker 1: because like it's meant to tear apart during childbirth and stuff. Um,
Speaker 1: the way you word it that was very great. Yeah
Speaker 1: that's not nice. Yeah, sorry, but it's like this is
Speaker 1: where we all came from, Like we all I could
Speaker 1: I could see how someone can rationalize this because when
Speaker 1: you are when you're orgasming, when you're supposed to receive pleasure,
Speaker 1: like all the blood is supposed to rush there so
Speaker 1: that I could kind of rationalize this, this this concept
Speaker 1: of like, well, if you're having trouble, then I'll just
Speaker 1: put blood where they're you're supposed to have blood, and
Speaker 1: then and then everything is solved. But it's not something yeah,
Speaker 1: like all of the best bullshit medicine. There's a level
Speaker 1: to which it makes kind of intuitive sense where you're like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: this I can if you explain the idea of the
Speaker 1: treatment to someone, just a random person on the street,
Speaker 1: I think most people be like, Okay, yeah, I can
Speaker 1: see how that might work. Like it's not inherently nonsense,
Speaker 1: you know, the data suggests that it is, but it's
Speaker 1: the the idea itself. It does kind of fall under
Speaker 1: the yeah, probably it was worth trying, right, you know?
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh. You know what won't inject your own
Speaker 1: blood back into your genitalia. The products and services that
Speaker 1: support this podcast have never done that, unless we are
Speaker 1: running an ad for for the O Shot, in which
Speaker 1: case please don't get that until you finished listening to
Speaker 1: the podcast. We're back. Uh Okay, who were so? Speaking
Speaker 1: of journeys? Before I start talking about how the O
Speaker 1: shot came to be, I want to talk a little
Speaker 1: bit about the clinical background of its inventor, one Dr
Speaker 1: Charles Runnolds, a k A. Doctor Orgasm. Now. I became
Speaker 1: aware of Dear Charles through the writing of one doctor
Speaker 1: Jin Gunter, an O B G y N and an
Speaker 1: author of a book called The Vagina Bible. She is
Speaker 1: professionally angry at scammers who push nonsense medicine on the
Speaker 1: vaginas of the world, and she is not a fan
Speaker 1: of Dr Reynolds. I love her already. Yeah, yeah, she's
Speaker 1: she She seems to know what she's talking about. Um
Speaker 1: I she certainly has the professional qualifications to to be
Speaker 1: talking about this subject. Absolutely. I just love an angry woman,
Speaker 1: you know. I just love an angry woman, That's all
Speaker 1: it is. Yeah, she's really angry, and I low key
Speaker 1: not even low key because like a third of my
Speaker 1: content is based on it. One of my very favorite
Speaker 1: genres of things on the Internet is like furious doctors
Speaker 1: writing about like medical scammers. I just I love that ship. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Um so, as Dr jin Gunter points out, um, doctor Reynolds,
Speaker 1: the the doctor Orgasm is an internal medicine doctor and
Speaker 1: internal medicine doctors, uh, their training does not focus very
Speaker 1: much on the vagina. During his medical school, Charles Reynolds
Speaker 1: likely spent a pretty minimal amount of time studying gynecology. Uh.
Speaker 1: He may have done a few months of residency at
Speaker 1: a gynecological clinic, but that would have been the most
Speaker 1: So if this orgasm doctor doesn't have a background in gynecology,
Speaker 1: what's his background in? Well. On his own website, Dr
Speaker 1: Renalds says that his first love was medical research, and
Speaker 1: he lists his chief medical hero as doctor Verne Enforceman.
Speaker 1: In nineteen nine, Enforceman performed the very first heart catheterization
Speaker 1: on his own heart. Uh, and he this vern Enforcement
Speaker 1: is a legitimate medical badass. Reynolds writes that this guy
Speaker 1: quote tied the nurse down and cast his own heart,
Speaker 1: then walked up three flights of stairs in order to
Speaker 1: photograph it, and this is largely accurate, although the truth
Speaker 1: is that the nurse agreed to let Dr Forceman tie
Speaker 1: her up because he needed clean instruments and she had
Speaker 1: access to them, and he might die doing this and
Speaker 1: he didn't want it to get in troubles. It was
Speaker 1: kind of like they were kind of doing this so
Speaker 1: that if he died doing this, she wouldn't get blamed
Speaker 1: for it. Um, that's why he tied her up. But yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a cool story. It's actually like a really awesome medicals. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Enforceman had this theory about how you could have catheterize
Speaker 1: a heart, and he had been denied attend permission to
Speaker 1: attempt it because it was seen as too dangerous. So
Speaker 1: he decided he had to work it out do it
Speaker 1: on himself, and he worked at a deal with the
Speaker 1: nurse so that they could do this and not endanger
Speaker 1: her life and career. Um. Why Dr Runold's idolizes Dr
Speaker 1: Forceman will become clear presently. For right now, it's important
Speaker 1: for people to know that Forceman spent a lot of
Speaker 1: his life reviled by the medical community for his irresponsible
Speaker 1: self experimentation. He was only recognized as a genius after
Speaker 1: World War Two, when he finally received the Nobel Prize. Dr.
Speaker 1: Forceman spent most of his life as a humble, grunt
Speaker 1: level medical practitioner. He was a German military doctor in
Speaker 1: World War Two, so he worked with like the Nazi army,
Speaker 1: but he was like treating wounded people. Um, which is
Speaker 1: I guess the least objectionable job you could have. Uh,
Speaker 1: in Nazi Germany. Um. And then he was like a
Speaker 1: town doctor. Like he was like a small town like
Speaker 1: family physician for years and years and years. Um. And
Speaker 1: after he won the Nobel Prize, he was actually offered
Speaker 1: a fancy job running a German cardiovascular institute. Uh. And
Speaker 1: he turned this down because he felt like he didn't
Speaker 1: know enough to do the job well. Like he he
Speaker 1: was like he was a very humble man. In other words.
Speaker 1: Um So Dr renalds idolizes this man. And there's a
Speaker 1: lot to idolize in Dr Forceman Nazi service aside, just
Speaker 1: like it's it's it's a cool medical story. Um. And
Speaker 1: when Reynolds first got his m D, his desire was
Speaker 1: to be a medical researcher. Now, I don't have a
Speaker 1: tremendous amount of detail about Dr Reynolds's early life, and
Speaker 1: most of what we do have comes from an article
Speaker 1: in The Guardian that will not bad is largely just
Speaker 1: repeating what Renald says about his own early life. Uh.
Speaker 1: He says that as a teenager he endured horrific cystic acne. Um.
Speaker 1: This is not what most of us was described as
Speaker 1: bad acne. I'm sure we all have a bad acne story.
Speaker 1: He was one of those people whose, like, whole face
Speaker 1: was just this oozing, painful mass of sores. Um. He
Speaker 1: claims it was. Yeah, and I had there was at
Speaker 1: least one kid at my school who had this kind
Speaker 1: of acne. And it did. It did seem like a nightmare. Um,
Speaker 1: it's brutal. Yeah. Reynolds claims that his acne was so
Speaker 1: bad that he forgot what his own nose looked like. Um.
Speaker 1: And yeah, there's not many worse ailments you could have
Speaker 1: as a teenager. This was obviously disastrous for young Charles's
Speaker 1: personal life. He recalls praying to God, if you could
Speaker 1: make me attractive, I will find something good to do
Speaker 1: with it. Um. And luckily for him, a miracle cure
Speaker 1: soon did arrive. Dermatologists treated his skin with X rays,
Speaker 1: which cured the cystic acne, but left him with a
Speaker 1: lifetime of melanomas, which have required constant treatment in order
Speaker 1: to stop from turning cancerous as an adult. Dr Reynolds
Speaker 1: now claims that his childhood battle with cystic acne gave
Speaker 1: him enormous compassion for people suffering from incurable conditions. The
Speaker 1: pain of what I have called the hidden population. Uh. Now,
Speaker 1: if this story is true, it's certainly easy to see
Speaker 1: how it could have sparked his youthful desire to embark
Speaker 1: on a career is a medical researcher, and that's exactly
Speaker 1: what he did, but unfortunately he was not good at it.
Speaker 1: In two thousands, or he got approval to conduct the
Speaker 1: study on the efficacy of a new smallpox vaccine formulation.
Speaker 1: He got approval to do this, but he did not
Speaker 1: get approval to conduct the study on homeless people. However,
Speaker 1: Oh my god, yeah we're getting God, Oh my god,
Speaker 1: what a piece of trash. Yeah, yeah, he's not great, Like, okay,
Speaker 1: I could have sympathy. I was just thinking, like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I have a I have the emotional depth to to
Speaker 1: understand empathy and to sympathize with someone that is that
Speaker 1: that has really bad acne and is going through a
Speaker 1: hard time self confidence or whatever. That does not give
Speaker 1: you a fucking green light to Oh my god, what
Speaker 1: a fucking piece of ship. Yeah he's a real piece
Speaker 1: of ship. This study is is bad, Like, oh boy, howdy?
Speaker 1: Um so he Uh. Basically, it's expensive to recruit subjects
Speaker 1: for a vaccine study and it's hard. Um, but tricking
Speaker 1: hoboes into letting you test drugs on their bodies is easy. Um,
Speaker 1: and that's kind of just what he did. Uh. And
Speaker 1: he did he did get approval to conduct the study
Speaker 1: on people from a homeless shelter after he had already
Speaker 1: started testing them. Um. Yeah, so he filled her forgiveness remation. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And there's a lot of other shadiness. So he filled
Speaker 1: his sample, grew up with men and women from a
Speaker 1: local New Orleans homeless shelter. I think twenty two of them. Uh. And,
Speaker 1: as the FDA later wrote, quote, you enrolled twenty one
Speaker 1: indigent persons from a multi service center for the homeless
Speaker 1: into either study. Uh. Only after enrolling eight of these subjects,
Speaker 1: you received approval from the Institutional Review Board IRB to
Speaker 1: enroll vulnerable subjects as described below. Regardless of the irby's
Speaker 1: decision to reprove the enrollment of vulnerable populations, persons utilizing
Speaker 1: the Multi Service Center for the homeless were unsuitable for
Speaker 1: consideration for these studies for many reasons, including, but not
Speaker 1: limited to the following. These individuals weren't suitable because they
Speaker 1: were economically and or educationally disadvantaged. Some subjects could not
Speaker 1: understand or follow the protocol requirements. For example, subjects in
Speaker 1: IT list, a couple of subjects did not understand how
Speaker 1: to measure his her temperature in order to complete his
Speaker 1: her daily diary, as they reported body temperatures raising from
Speaker 1: ranging from eighty four degrees fahrenheit to So one reason
Speaker 1: why this was bad is because like these people had
Speaker 1: to keep data on themselves in order for the study
Speaker 1: to make be have any value, and they just weren't
Speaker 1: competent to They didn't have the kind of education to
Speaker 1: do that. Um the FDA has complaint continues. One requirement
Speaker 1: for doctors doing these sorts of studies is that they
Speaker 1: complete a vaccine risk Assessment questionnaire at least six times
Speaker 1: during the study. The questionnaire asks about the health and
Speaker 1: medication use of people to study subject lives with. This
Speaker 1: is obviously a project for homeless folks who live in
Speaker 1: a center because their household contacts include every person including
Speaker 1: staff and volunteers at that center. UM. So this is
Speaker 1: a huge problem because again, if you're testing medicine on
Speaker 1: people to see if it works, you have to know
Speaker 1: what other medications they're taking. You want to limit and
Speaker 1: control for that, and have no fucking idea what people
Speaker 1: at a homeless center, many of whom are addicted to
Speaker 1: drugs themselves, are actually taking and you don't know what
Speaker 1: they had the option to take. You just can't. It's
Speaker 1: a bad group to use for a study like this. Um, Like,
Speaker 1: there's the moral problem of of these of going of
Speaker 1: conducting a study in these folks because a lot of
Speaker 1: them have mental illnesses that mean that they can't really
Speaker 1: provide informed consent um. And then there's also the fact that,
Speaker 1: like you can't get good data out of these people
Speaker 1: because like you can't control free of the things you
Speaker 1: need to in a stay. There's a whole lot of
Speaker 1: reasons this was the worst way to conduct to study. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's there's no upside. The upside is that it's cheap
Speaker 1: and it it's easy if you don't care about actually
Speaker 1: performing a good study. Um. But that that that like
Speaker 1: kind of the gates his entire like ethos that he's
Speaker 1: like self proclaimed right, like it just yeah, yeah, it
Speaker 1: sure does. So there were a lot more problems too,
Speaker 1: Like we're not even done with this ship. Dr Rerunnold's
Speaker 1: got his his institution research board to approve him to
Speaker 1: have an impartial witness observed the informed consent discussion that
Speaker 1: he got while recruiting these homeless people to act as
Speaker 1: guinea pigs. So that was how he got He got
Speaker 1: permission after the study started to use homeless people as
Speaker 1: test subjects, and the way he did this was by
Speaker 1: promising to have an impartial witness who can make sure
Speaker 1: that these people were providing informed consent um And obviously
Speaker 1: the purpose of this was to avoid a ghoulish situation
Speaker 1: where mentally iller drug addled individuals were tested with experimental
Speaker 1: medications in exchange for money without understanding that they'd agreed
Speaker 1: to be tested tested with experimental medications in exchange for money.
Speaker 1: That would be a horrible thing. Um, So thank god
Speaker 1: he had an impartial witness, right, Wow, thank god, you're
Speaker 1: glad he had an impartial witness, right, motherfucker. But he
Speaker 1: had acne. He had really bad acne though, so he's
Speaker 1: allowed to do this. Oh my god, I hate him.
Speaker 1: I hate him. You want to hear who was impartial
Speaker 1: witness was? Yeah, another homeless person that he was testing
Speaker 1: drugs are. Oh my god, he's such a piece of ship.
Speaker 1: Like pure evidence. This is pure evidence of him repeatedly
Speaker 1: taking advantage of those who are vulnerable. Like whether it's
Speaker 1: women that can't orgasm or people that like have no
Speaker 1: other choice, you're still taking advantage of people that are vulnerable.
Speaker 1: And like that's like on a one grift? What a
Speaker 1: one come on? Yeah, and it gets worse, Like this
Speaker 1: is honestly one of the worst scientific studies I've ever
Speaker 1: heard of anyone conducting. So obviously, people who are conducting
Speaker 1: proper medical studies are supposed to do a lot of
Speaker 1: research to understand the pre existing conditions of members of
Speaker 1: the study, So like you look at how their bodies
Speaker 1: doing before you start putting meds on them. This is
Speaker 1: to avoid endangering people and to ensure that like the
Speaker 1: folks conducting the study learning as much as possible about,
Speaker 1: you know, how certain medications affect people with different health conditions.
Speaker 1: So obviously are all of Dr Reynolds's patients underwent e
Speaker 1: k G s and blood and urine samples. But Charles
Speaker 1: just didn't tell his i RB about any of the
Speaker 1: adverse health conditions that he revealed in this process. Um,
Speaker 1: so a bunch of people were found with heart problems,
Speaker 1: he just didn't say anything about it. Uh And in fact,
Speaker 1: one of his subjects after being medicated, was hospitalized for
Speaker 1: chest pain. And he also didn't tell the IRB about that,
Speaker 1: um for more than two weeks. Um, so that's all
Speaker 1: really bad. Um, it's it's horrible, Like this is one
Speaker 1: of the worst. Like if you're if you're a science person,
Speaker 1: read read the the FDA's complaint about this study because
Speaker 1: it's shocking how bad it is. The gist of how
Speaker 1: is he still allowed to practice medicine after this? Like
Speaker 1: that's what well, that's what we're bill are for. Oh
Speaker 1: my god, he was yeah, so um yeah. The gist
Speaker 1: of all this is that Dr Reynolds used homeless folks
Speaker 1: as test subjects and took the actions to obscure the
Speaker 1: fact that many of them didn't understand what was being
Speaker 1: done to them. He covered up their illnesses, all of
Speaker 1: this horrible stuff. In two thousand eight, the f d
Speaker 1: A investigated him for this and initiated disqualification proceeds against him,
Speaker 1: and he was disqualified from working as a clinical investigator
Speaker 1: in two thousand nine as a result of this investigation.
Speaker 1: UM Dr Jim Gunter explains what that means. Quote, getting
Speaker 1: disqualified by the FDA means a clinical investigator has repeatedly
Speaker 1: or deliberately failed to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, or
Speaker 1: the clinical investigator has repeatedly or deliberately submitted false information
Speaker 1: to the sponsor or, if applicable to the f d
Speaker 1: A in any required report. A disqualified clinical investigator is
Speaker 1: not eligible to conduct any clinical investigation that supports an
Speaker 1: application for a research or for marketing permit for products
Speaker 1: regulated by the FDA. So he gets banned from being
Speaker 1: a medical researcher basically because he's so wildly irresponsible at
Speaker 1: it um. Yeah, and obviously because he's a subject of
Speaker 1: this show, so we know what happens. We know what happens.
Speaker 1: He gets famous for the vampire fasial like he didn't
Speaker 1: have a he didn't he didn't have a come up
Speaker 1: and you know what I mean, This is not the
Speaker 1: come up as show. This is enraging. This is not
Speaker 1: the come up as show. Although if we were to
Speaker 1: really dig into it, we could come up with a
Speaker 1: good since this is an orgasm and based episode, a
Speaker 1: good come joke based on the word come up. And
Speaker 1: but I'm going to leave that to the listener to
Speaker 1: put together in your own head. You know, what. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I didn't think of that when I said it out loud,
Speaker 1: but it's pretty there. You know, take it, take it
Speaker 1: for yourself, makes the joke your own, you know. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is a d I O Y. The comedy in
Speaker 1: this podcast is very often d I Y. It's the
Speaker 1: only podcast out there, so take what you can get. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we're like the IKEA of jokes about bad orgasm doctors. UM.
Speaker 1: Not a lot of money in being that. I don't
Speaker 1: know why we took this path anyway. Uh yeah. Obviously
Speaker 1: being at the subject of this podcast, Dr Reynolds did
Speaker 1: not learn it, goddamn think from his failures or from
Speaker 1: his punishment. After he gets banned from conducting medical research
Speaker 1: because of his how horrifically irresponds sable UM, he gets
Speaker 1: fined in two thousands, also in two thousand nine, five
Speaker 1: thousand dollars by the State Board of Medical Examiners of
Speaker 1: Alabama for the misuse of hormone replacement therapy after he
Speaker 1: massively overdosed two women with testosterone UM. Yeah. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: he defends his actions by saying that the hormone doses
Speaker 1: helped his patients um, just as he defends his actions
Speaker 1: with the vaccine trial by saying that he didn't know
Speaker 1: the subjects were homeless. Um. Yeah, he's he's just a liar. Um.
Speaker 1: Now Yeah. Dr Reynolds again, when he gets talked about
Speaker 1: his misuse of hormone replacement therapy because he overdosed women
Speaker 1: with distosterone, UM, he will say that like it helped
Speaker 1: his patients. And I wanted to know, like what he
Speaker 1: meant by that, And eventually I was able to find
Speaker 1: a video posted to his website, which is called the
Speaker 1: Cellular Medicine Association, titled who is Charles Reynolds? Um. The
Speaker 1: association is run by him, and he made this whole video.
Speaker 1: He doesn't acknowledge that he was fined for doing this,
Speaker 1: but he does talk about how he started doing testosterone
Speaker 1: therapy for women. UM. And he again doesn't acknowledge that
Speaker 1: he hurt people doing this, but he does say that, uh,
Speaker 1: it gave them such high libidos that their husbands couldn't
Speaker 1: keep up. Uh and so he started injecting their husbands
Speaker 1: with testosterone. UM. And I can't tell you if that
Speaker 1: happened or not, UM, but I can tell you that
Speaker 1: doesn't sound like good medicine. I'm not a doctor, but Um,
Speaker 1: that seems like a bad medical call. Uh so yeah.
Speaker 1: Renalds says that in two thousand and ten he started
Speaker 1: hearing about PRP therapy, which was then again mostly the
Speaker 1: province of like sports medicine, although gynecologists had started using
Speaker 1: the technique to inject platelets around the urethra of women
Speaker 1: who experienced urinaryan continents. And it does seem to help
Speaker 1: with that. Um, there's some some I don't know if
Speaker 1: there's hard studies, but I know a lot of people
Speaker 1: say it helps with that, and I haven't seen any
Speaker 1: reason to believe it doesn't. UM. But I'm gonna let
Speaker 1: Dr Reynolds himself explain what happened next. This is this
Speaker 1: is Dr Charles Reynolds explaining what happens after he realized
Speaker 1: that uh PRP therapy UM was was was being used
Speaker 1: on people's faces. Back in two thousand and ten, someone
Speaker 1: brought to me the centrifuge that had been used by
Speaker 1: the orthopedic surgeons to prepare play ridge plasma for the
Speaker 1: knees and by the dentists and wound care wound healing.
Speaker 1: Excuse me, so, and the person bringing the centrifuge says,
Speaker 1: this has been FDA approved for preparing plasma play towards plasma,
Speaker 1: and if you use it, of course it's blood. The
Speaker 1: blood's not FDA approved blood. The FDA doesn't approve your hair,
Speaker 1: your urine, or your saliva or your blood, but they
Speaker 1: have to approve the device that makes the plastma to
Speaker 1: go back into your body. So he says, this has
Speaker 1: been FDA airproof to prepare plasma to go back into
Speaker 1: the body, and it's been shown two calls, new tissue growth,
Speaker 1: new blood flow, new volume, and there's never been a
Speaker 1: granuloma or serious infection or serious side effect from play
Speaker 1: ridge plasma. You should try it in the face. So
Speaker 1: I thought, oh, this is wonderful because if this works
Speaker 1: in the face, I mean instantly, because I was tuned
Speaker 1: into the sexual problems, I thought, if this works in
Speaker 1: the face and does all those things, then this should
Speaker 1: help the genitalia. So he's like, yeah, I saw that
Speaker 1: this worked in the face, and I was like, well,
Speaker 1: if this helps people's faces, then it clearly it helps
Speaker 1: their genitals. Which nobody says that about anything, Like I'm
Speaker 1: not like, well, because my straight razor helps me get
Speaker 1: a nice shave, I should clearly shave my dick with
Speaker 1: a straight razor. You don't, my god, Like what a
Speaker 1: line of thought that makes so much sense, just to
Speaker 1: jump from face to dick. Contact help my eyes, they
Speaker 1: must help my paenis. But like I will say, um,
Speaker 1: I didn't know what he looked like before watching that,
Speaker 1: and I am like a little bit more than needed
Speaker 1: to be upset, Like I I'm more upset than I
Speaker 1: wanted to be. That the fact that he's not unattractive,
Speaker 1: Like he's conventionally attractive, and it's proven that people trust
Speaker 1: people that are attractive, like someone if someone is is
Speaker 1: good looking, if they're tall, if they're built, if they're
Speaker 1: if they have a charming way of speaking. He has
Speaker 1: a deep voice, he has like a tick, a southern
Speaker 1: what's that word, like twang or whatever to his like
Speaker 1: like he he had like a drawl, like like he
Speaker 1: is presenting himself as an alpha, and you're going to
Speaker 1: trust that if you're vulnerable, like like even if he
Speaker 1: was like that just makes me so I wish he wasn't.
Speaker 1: I just but like it makes sense. The fact that
Speaker 1: he's gone away with it makes sense a little bit
Speaker 1: more than did before. Now in my brain, you know,
Speaker 1: what you're saying is exactly why I think we should
Speaker 1: just mandate disfiguring facial surgery for all American citizens. Um.
Speaker 1: And you know who's here to help with mandatory disfiguring
Speaker 1: surgery is our sponsors at Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, who
Speaker 1: have developed a brand new knife missile that is just
Speaker 1: gonna guarantee nobody gets trusted on the basis of their
Speaker 1: attractiveness ever again. So please support Lockheed Martin in its
Speaker 1: quest to disfigure all of us. Ye enjoy these other products.
Speaker 1: So we're back again. I know a lot of doctors
Speaker 1: actually listen to this podcast. We have a lot of
Speaker 1: doctor fans, and I'm interested in their takes on the
Speaker 1: clip that we just played as a layment. It seems
Speaker 1: like competent medical researchers don't say if this works on
Speaker 1: the face, it must be good for helping people. Fuck,
Speaker 1: But I'm not an m D, so I'll leave that
Speaker 1: to y'all. My sister is a doctor, and I know
Speaker 1: she would shed all over this. Like I it seems
Speaker 1: like a reach. I mean, like I want to bring
Speaker 1: this up really quick, Like, do you know, I don't
Speaker 1: know if the movie contagion had a huge up surge recently. Uh,
Speaker 1: I don't want to. I guess this is like a spoiler,
Speaker 1: but it's been around long enough then who cares. At
Speaker 1: the end of the movie, like the cure comes about
Speaker 1: because the lead researcher like injects herself with the medicine
Speaker 1: or like or with the vaccine. And my sister as
Speaker 1: a doctor, and I'm sure many doctors that watched this
Speaker 1: movie like it's I know it's a movie, but it's
Speaker 1: like kind of the same idea of like what this
Speaker 1: person Dr Reynolds was like inspired by. It's like using
Speaker 1: yourself as a martyr and using yourself as like this
Speaker 1: hero to save the day. And and realistically that is bullshit,
Speaker 1: Like that is it's a cool story, but it's not
Speaker 1: a medically or or factually sound and it's really dangerous.
Speaker 1: Like one medical professional would do that and he was like,
Speaker 1: I don't know, Okay. The troubling part is that there
Speaker 1: have been a couple of really groundbreaking medical professionals who
Speaker 1: advance medical science because they were willing to dangerously experiment
Speaker 1: on themselves. And it's it's kind of threading a needle
Speaker 1: that's maybe too fine. For most people to want to
Speaker 1: thread to say that, like, yes, people who were willing
Speaker 1: to do that have advanced the frontiers of knowledge before,
Speaker 1: and also to say, but it's still a bad idea
Speaker 1: and we should have moved past that. Like right in
Speaker 1: nineteen fucking twenty nine, some doctor who can't get approval
Speaker 1: is like, well, fuck it, I'm just gonna try to
Speaker 1: stint my own fucking heart. And it works, and it's
Speaker 1: good that it did. Um, but also that was like
Speaker 1: a century ago and we should not have to do
Speaker 1: that anymore. Yeah, I mean, I totally agree with you.
Speaker 1: I totally agree that, Like there are some cases where
Speaker 1: it's really been like groundbreaking and progress medicine. But I
Speaker 1: think the fact that this doctor like was is caught
Speaker 1: up in that particular narrative. It's a kind of telling
Speaker 1: of the kind of doctor he was even trying to be,
Speaker 1: Like he's more consumed with the story, He's not really
Speaker 1: consumed with the medicine. You've hit on an incredibly important
Speaker 1: point that he's consumed with the story, and the story
Speaker 1: gets wilder from here on out. So strap in sharene
Speaker 1: It's gonna be fun. Yeah. So, as that video goes on,
Speaker 1: Dr Reynolds goes on to say that he read a
Speaker 1: lot of papers. I think he says thousands, and I
Speaker 1: don't think there are thousands which showed that PRP treatments
Speaker 1: were effective in reducing signs of aging on the face,
Speaker 1: which again, yeah, the evidence and also the evidence is
Speaker 1: not overwhelming on that um. And so as a result
Speaker 1: of reading a lot of papers, he decided to start
Speaker 1: experimenting on himself with PRP facial treatments before he started
Speaker 1: shooting stuff into other people's genitalia. Now, since he was
Speaker 1: legally barred from conducting clinical trials, he just drumped right
Speaker 1: into experimenting on people with his own PRP facial treatments. Uh.
Speaker 1: Dr Reynolds began marketing them under the trademark name Vampire
Speaker 1: Facelift UM, and I sorry, I got it wrong early.
Speaker 1: I said he's responsible for the vampire facial. His trademark
Speaker 1: name is the Vampire Face Lift. And you will see
Speaker 1: when people advertise that they do vampire facials, they're actually
Speaker 1: tech like legally ripping him off, um because his is
Speaker 1: the vampire facelift. Yeah, I don't care, but it's from
Speaker 1: a legal standpoint, it's important. He had acne he did
Speaker 1: have acne. Now in this video, he claims that coming
Speaker 1: up with he decided he had to trademark this thing
Speaker 1: before there was really any hard evidence that it worked, because, uh,
Speaker 1: that's this would be important for him being able to
Speaker 1: responsibly treat people. See if he just called his PRP
Speaker 1: for his story and for his finances, if he just
Speaker 1: called He says that if he just called this like
Speaker 1: PRP facial by the names other people were using, vampire
Speaker 1: therapy was a common name, then any bullshit doctor could
Speaker 1: claim to be providing his therapy. And what if they
Speaker 1: accidentally hurt someone? So he claims that he had to
Speaker 1: trade market so that he could avoid people getting hurt. Um, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that nonsense, But I think that's nonsense. Vampire Facelift is
Speaker 1: a good media ready name, and trademarking it allowed him
Speaker 1: to license his treatment to other doctors and make passive
Speaker 1: income from thousands of practitioners that he trains, often in
Speaker 1: online courses, who basically act as franchise ease. Uh. Interestingly enough,
Speaker 1: Charles denies uh that anything he does is that what
Speaker 1: he does is anything like franchising. So he says that
Speaker 1: like this is not franchising. What I'm doing, and in
Speaker 1: the same breath that he claims it's not like franchising,
Speaker 1: he compares the name vampire Facelift to the trademark golden
Speaker 1: arches of McDonald's, which is amazing. Yeah, he's it's pretty
Speaker 1: That whole video is pretty fun to listen to. So
Speaker 1: Charles insists the whole reason that he did this was
Speaker 1: to ensure a consistent standard of care and insist that
Speaker 1: everyone abide by the same stringent practices he does, and
Speaker 1: spoilers someone advertising a knockoff vampire facial like a year ago,
Speaker 1: got two people infected with hiv um and they weren't
Speaker 1: people that runld That trade had rain so he was like, well, look,
Speaker 1: this is what I'm saying, Like, these people are using
Speaker 1: a knockoff and they got folks sick. But it's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: they got folks to buy their treatment by using the
Speaker 1: name that was as close as possible to the one
Speaker 1: you use. Um. Yeah. Anyway, So for the next couple
Speaker 1: of years, Dr Runnelds made a name for himself and
Speaker 1: a new fortune as the inventor of the vampire Facelift.
Speaker 1: His dream of injecting people's blood back into their own
Speaker 1: vagina as though had to lay dormant for a while
Speaker 1: as he grappled with fame and expanded his clinic. But then,
Speaker 1: as Dr Rynolds tells it, one day, fate in the
Speaker 1: form of his girlfriend forced his hand. Oh buddy, we
Speaker 1: are heading in for one of the most irresponsible stories
Speaker 1: of a medical experimentation I I can conceive of, and
Speaker 1: it is a fun one. So as Dr Rynolds tells
Speaker 1: this story, uh yeah, there's a number of different versions
Speaker 1: of the story that he's he's given. I prefer the
Speaker 1: one written up by a journalist from The Guardian who
Speaker 1: interviewed Runnels, and I'm going to read that now. Quote
Speaker 1: Charles Rynolds. Lover's surprised him at his office, demanding that
Speaker 1: he inject blood into her clitteress as a Valentine's Day present.
Speaker 1: She hiked up her dress, hopped onto the exam table,
Speaker 1: and motioned for Rynolds to put on his head lamp.
Speaker 1: She explained that she'd been watching him inject his own
Speaker 1: penis with blood for about a year, and that while
Speaker 1: his bigger and stronger erections had been fun, she'd grown
Speaker 1: tired of the one sided sexual enhancement. It was her turn,
Speaker 1: so Runolds bowed between her legs, numbed her clitter us
Speaker 1: with an ice cube, and shot her up. I don't
Speaker 1: know how graphic you can be with this thing, he
Speaker 1: said over the phone, pausing mid story to ask me
Speaker 1: about the Guardians policy and discussing orgasms. But the next
Speaker 1: afternoon she came to see me, and her orgasms came
Speaker 1: more quickly, very strong ejaculatory orgasms. The passion, the thunder,
Speaker 1: the sound she was making, he sighed at the memory.
Speaker 1: That's when I thought I should try this on my patients.
Speaker 1: And I know the fucking the doctors listening to this
Speaker 1: have their fucking jaws on the floor right now. Oh
Speaker 1: my fucking god. Yeah, that is a story, another chapter
Speaker 1: in this story. I hate him also like if this
Speaker 1: umh no, no, no, no, no, no, no, yeah, I
Speaker 1: just thought I should, Yeah, I should try this on
Speaker 1: my patients. It's amazing. So I'm not a doctor. Saw you.
Speaker 1: I saw you injecting your penis this whole time, and
Speaker 1: I was give me some of that good blood. So um,
Speaker 1: I'm not a doctor, but the American Medical Association is
Speaker 1: a doctor, and it seems to me and to Dr
Speaker 1: Jim Gunter, from whom I found This pointed out that
Speaker 1: this whole story is a very clear violation of the
Speaker 1: Code of Medical Ethics, which states, quote, romantic or sexual
Speaker 1: interactions between physicians and patients that occur concurrently with the
Speaker 1: patient physician relationship are unethical. Such interactions detract from the
Speaker 1: goals of the patient physician relationship and may exploit the
Speaker 1: vulnerability of the patient, compromise the physician's ability to make
Speaker 1: objective judgments about the patient's healthcare, and ultimately be trimental
Speaker 1: to the patient's well being, which shouldn't need to be said,
Speaker 1: but is written up there. Uh and this seems like
Speaker 1: a clear violation of that to me. Um, I love that.
Speaker 1: He added that she was like, grab your head lamb.
Speaker 1: Like that's just like a clear like the keys making
Speaker 1: this up. No, girlfriend is like, oh my god, grab
Speaker 1: your needle and your head lamp Like no, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: something else. So Dr Rynolds tells the story to reporters
Speaker 1: as if it is a charming anecdote. Um, And the
Speaker 1: reason why he thinks this is charming is very much
Speaker 1: rooted in his idolization of Dr Forceman, the guy you
Speaker 1: did that hard surgery, and himself. So yeah, enforcement experimenting
Speaker 1: on himself. He was exiled from mainstream medicine for his boldness,
Speaker 1: but he was eventually recognized as a medical pioneer and
Speaker 1: a genius. Um Reynolds wants so badly to identify himself
Speaker 1: with Forceman that he includes this line in the who
Speaker 1: is section of his website quote, I actually pulled up
Speaker 1: Dr Forceman story on Wikipedia and read it for a
Speaker 1: few minutes to get psyched out before I injected my
Speaker 1: own penis with p RP, which I did twice before
Speaker 1: I injected any other person's penis or clitterers slash vagina. Now,
Speaker 1: some people might equipal with the fact that he's equating
Speaker 1: himself and his orgasm medicine experiments with a doctor struggling
Speaker 1: to cope with a way to save heart disease patients.
Speaker 1: But I actually think that sexual health is incredibly important,
Speaker 1: so I'm not going to like ding him on that.
Speaker 1: What I will ding him for is the fact that
Speaker 1: doctor Reynolds clearly never cared about anything but rushing to
Speaker 1: patent his treatment so he could ring the most possible
Speaker 1: money out of it. Dr Forceman, on the other hand,
Speaker 1: spent decades as either a small town doctor or a
Speaker 1: frontline military doctor. He turned down impressive jobs and titles
Speaker 1: when they were offered to him because they he felt
Speaker 1: they exceeded his depth of confidence. Um, he was a
Speaker 1: pretty humble guy. Whatever else you want to say about him, Um,
Speaker 1: and his innovations contributed to medical science. None of those
Speaker 1: things can be said about Dr Ronalds, although I am
Speaker 1: glad he moved from on from experimenting on homeless people
Speaker 1: to experimenting on his own dick, I guess that's a
Speaker 1: step forward. I mean, yeah, it's it's it's the step
Speaker 1: I prefer. I would prefer injecting himself and injecting innocent people,
Speaker 1: that is, homeless people. But his his claim that like,
Speaker 1: first of all, two times, if you're only to like
Speaker 1: be like I injected myself twice before anyone else, first
Speaker 1: of all, if you want to be serious, twice is
Speaker 1: not enough. And also, like this just brings me back
Speaker 1: to my point of him being so consumed with the
Speaker 1: story and versus the medicine, like he wants to be
Speaker 1: a pioneer so desperately that that's all he that's all
Speaker 1: it is, And he's clearly the way he describes the
Speaker 1: story tells you that like he'd made his mind up
Speaker 1: about what this was because like a real scientist doing
Speaker 1: if they did this to themselves, might not like, Okay,
Speaker 1: well it feels like my orgasms are better. But is
Speaker 1: it possible that I'm just into medical kink, like like
Speaker 1: maybe this is just what like and it's not a
Speaker 1: groundbreaking medical treatment. Perhaps other research should be done. Um. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but also you should never have That's a really good point.
Speaker 1: You should never go into anything being like I'm going
Speaker 1: to be a pioneer because of this, Like that's the
Speaker 1: whole research and testing Like yeah, but obviously cites he read,
Speaker 1: he read his Wikipedia pages, cite himself up, are you shipping? Like, yeah, yours?
Speaker 1: All of this is horrible. Yeah, Now, Dr Charlie he
Speaker 1: puts it out himself. Yeah he does because he doesn't.
Speaker 1: He thinks this is fine and he's never really faced
Speaker 1: consequences for it. So clearly it is sollusion because he's
Speaker 1: attracted goddam so. Dr Charles Reynolds names another hero on
Speaker 1: his website, Barry Marshall. Dr Barry Marshall and Marshall is
Speaker 1: another doctor with a very cool story. In the early
Speaker 1: nineteen eighties, Barry Marshall became convinced that peptic ulcers and
Speaker 1: gastric cancer were both caused by a specific sort of bacterium.
Speaker 1: Conventional medical wisdom at the time was that ulcers were
Speaker 1: caused by stress or certain foods. Marshall was ridiculed ridiculed
Speaker 1: at first for his hypothesis and has been quoted as
Speaker 1: saying everyone was against me, but I knew I was right.
Speaker 1: And Dr Marshall eventually proved his hypothesis by drinking a
Speaker 1: culture filled with ulcer causing bacteria and giving himself an ulcer.
Speaker 1: His work revolution suctionize the treatment of ulcers and the
Speaker 1: prevention of gastric cancer. He was awarded a Nobel Prize
Speaker 1: for his enormous achievement um and you can see why
Speaker 1: Dr Reynolds likes this guy. Renald's writes about Dr Marshall quote,
Speaker 1: he gave up gaining acceptance in Australia and then came
Speaker 1: to the US, and only after the popular press started
Speaker 1: talking about it the physicians start reading his research. He
Speaker 1: gave himself an ulcer by drinking the bacteria. Dr Marshall
Speaker 1: and his acceptance of the prize, quoted Daniel Borstein, the
Speaker 1: greatest obstacle to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the
Speaker 1: illusion of knowledge. Now, some of what ronalds says here
Speaker 1: is true. Doctor Marshall did in fact give himself an ulcer,
Speaker 1: but there's actually a lot of debate about whether or
Speaker 1: not the medical community was wrong to be as skeptical
Speaker 1: about his ideas as they were. Doctor Reynolds claims that
Speaker 1: the skepticism was only because cutting out ulcers was big
Speaker 1: business and other doctors had no financial interest in alternative treatments,
Speaker 1: and this claim is undercut by the fact that Barry
Speaker 1: Marshall received funding from a major medical institution to spend
Speaker 1: a whole year conducting his research. He did test it
Speaker 1: on himself eventually, but he was given funding to do
Speaker 1: the studies that he was doing. So the idea that like,
Speaker 1: he did face resistance people who didn't think that what
Speaker 1: he was suggesting was reasonable. But also there was an
Speaker 1: institution willing to let him conduct these studies in a
Speaker 1: controlled and and scientific way. Um, So it's not like
Speaker 1: he was completely alone, like an institution was like, yeah,
Speaker 1: there's enough merit to your case that, like, here's some funding,
Speaker 1: figure it out. Um. You can argue that doctors were
Speaker 1: more skeptical than they should have been. But Dr Marshall
Speaker 1: didn't just give himself an ulcer and say, see, I've
Speaker 1: solved the problem. He had a research partner, he had
Speaker 1: lab assistance, He worked at an institution. When he proved
Speaker 1: his hypothesis, more test tests were conducted, and more research
Speaker 1: was done until an effective treatment was devised. This is
Speaker 1: how medical science is supposed to work. By contrast, Dr
Speaker 1: Reynolds did not do go from shooting his own dick
Speaker 1: or his girlfriend's labia full of blood to conducting double
Speaker 1: blind clinical trials. Um this would be difficult because he's
Speaker 1: been banned from doing that sort of work due due
Speaker 1: to his shame a criminal conduct, borderline criminal conduct. Instead,
Speaker 1: he left right to not just he left right to
Speaker 1: selling the O shot. So like the they didn't do,
Speaker 1: he didn't do what Marshall did. He just starts marketing
Speaker 1: this thing. After he decides it's effective. That should be
Speaker 1: a fucking crime. That should be a fucking crime. Seems
Speaker 1: like it ought to, but it's not. And he started
Speaker 1: selling and conducting training sessions so other doctors could could
Speaker 1: sell the O shot too. As of this moment, he's
Speaker 1: trained at least five hundred medical practitioners and more than
Speaker 1: twenty women have had the UH the O shot UH
Speaker 1: done on them. Runnalds estimates that it has an eighty
Speaker 1: five percent success rate, based mainly off of how he feels,
Speaker 1: because again, no conclusive clinical trials have been done on
Speaker 1: this treatment. He does have like one or two small
Speaker 1: batch studies about its efficacy at treating other things that
Speaker 1: he cites as evidence that the O shot works. However,
Speaker 1: as Dr jin Gunter notes about one of the studies,
Speaker 1: the only study of vaginal injections listed on Dr Reynolds's
Speaker 1: website is in is the Journal of Women's Health Care
Speaker 1: and open access journal from o Mix Publishing Group, which
Speaker 1: has been listed as a potentially predatory journal. Now there's
Speaker 1: no universally agreed upon definition of a predatory journal, but
Speaker 1: most of them are basically self publishing platforms for scientists.
Speaker 1: They allow you to publish a study for a fee,
Speaker 1: and they provide no editing or peer review process because
Speaker 1: a lot of them don't actually care about putting out
Speaker 1: good information. Some of these just like ship posting yourself yourself.
Speaker 1: It's like medium for scientists. Yeah, exactly, I was just
Speaker 1: thinking about uh. Gunter continues quote regardless of the journal.
Speaker 1: It is a stretch to call this paper a study.
Speaker 1: It's a case series of eleven women with a variety
Speaker 1: of sexual complaints raging from disperunia UH to orgasmic disorder
Speaker 1: the sexual dysfunction experienced by a woman with disperunia. Never
Speaker 1: mind that there are a multitude of very different conditions
Speaker 1: that can cause disperunia, so it really shouldn't be a
Speaker 1: single diagnosis in the study cannot be compared with the
Speaker 1: sexual dysfunction of a woman with an arousal disorder. The
Speaker 1: results of the eleven women six reported some kind of improvement,
Speaker 1: but honestly the statistics are of no value given the
Speaker 1: small samples eyes and the fact that there are four
Speaker 1: very different diagnoses lumped together. I also can't tell if
Speaker 1: it was retrospective or perspective. The two women who had
Speaker 1: minimal procedure pro procedure dysfunction reported extreme arousal for one
Speaker 1: to two weeks afterwards. This is the only bad effect
Speaker 1: noted in the twelve to sixteen week follow up. The
Speaker 1: paper is a very short follow up, but Dr Reynolds's
Speaker 1: website claims the oh shot last at least eighteen months,
Speaker 1: but up to three years for some women. So there's
Speaker 1: just nothing really to back him up. Um, he has
Speaker 1: paid to have enough of something that looks enough like
Speaker 1: a study performed that he can claim that he's gotten
Speaker 1: medical backing and no more because a real study might
Speaker 1: reveal But this doesn't work very well, so that's good.
Speaker 1: That just makes me so mad. And I'm realizing now,
Speaker 1: I'm realizing now that I didn't really have to divulge
Speaker 1: or like or like a broadcast that I'm like struggled
Speaker 1: with this thing because I don't know why. I just
Speaker 1: felt the needs just like be so candid. I just
Speaker 1: have no absolutely no filter. But I will say, think
Speaker 1: about this stuff is so important because if someone had
Speaker 1: talked about it the way I'm talking about it when
Speaker 1: I was younger, I wouldn't have felt like such a
Speaker 1: fucking freak and I wouldn't have felt like such a
Speaker 1: like a just like like I wouldn't have not felt
Speaker 1: human in my inability to feel this very human thing.
Speaker 1: And so I like was thinking that maybe like I
Speaker 1: shouldn't have said it, but now I'm like doubling down
Speaker 1: and I'm just the the reality that I'm even having
Speaker 1: that thought, Like if women are continually afraid to even
Speaker 1: breach the subject or or or broach the subject, rather
Speaker 1: encourages people like this fucking just disgusting human being taking
Speaker 1: advantage of women that are so desperate to feel something
Speaker 1: and just like understand what receiving pleasure is like. And
Speaker 1: like I can do all my homework, I can like
Speaker 1: like like practice all these things, I can buy toys
Speaker 1: or whatever, but I am going to be I'm going
Speaker 1: to know my body better than any fucking hack ever will,
Speaker 1: And like women should be encouraged to really do that
Speaker 1: more so than I don't know, I'm just I'm just
Speaker 1: getting heated. I'm getting this is a frustrating story. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a very frustrating story. Um because like yeah, like
Speaker 1: all grifters, he's praying on a real vulnerability, Like this
Speaker 1: is a thing that like like like like women who
Speaker 1: you know are are struggling with the thing that you've
Speaker 1: been very open about struggling with. That's a painful vulnerability.
Speaker 1: And he knows that it means he can fleece them
Speaker 1: for a shipload of money. Um yeah, and it's that's
Speaker 1: obviously has and he's meant He's become a very wealthy
Speaker 1: from it. Yeah, Yeah, exactly, like that's that's that's that's
Speaker 1: just infuriating. Yeah, it gets infuriating her. Dr Gunter has
Speaker 1: done a lot of like looking into this guy's like
Speaker 1: like digital presence. She notes that in the paper that
Speaker 1: he had published that's purporting to be a real study
Speaker 1: about this stuff, he listed his address as medical school,
Speaker 1: Comma Birmingham, Comma Alabama, Comma USA. This is not a
Speaker 1: medical school. Yeah, he just stuck medical school on his
Speaker 1: address because he knows that no one looking to get
Speaker 1: this treatment will check any further. Um, yeah, it's awesome,
Speaker 1: now do yeah. Yeah. And in Dr Gunter's opinion, the
Speaker 1: most unsettling thing about kind of the lack of information
Speaker 1: about the efficacy of the O shot is that there
Speaker 1: are no animal studies to show how the vaginal epithelium
Speaker 1: might respond to p RP. Quote. The bulk of the
Speaker 1: published studies involved wounds and tendons muscles, not healthy vaginal tissue.
Speaker 1: This is a very important point because it is possible
Speaker 1: that PRP could increase the growth of blood vessels into
Speaker 1: vaginal tissues, and we don't know if that is good
Speaker 1: or bad. If a woman has human pamplona virus in
Speaker 1: her vagina and gets a p RP injection that could
Speaker 1: cause the HPV to spread or make it more likely
Speaker 1: to develop into cancer. Could it cause scarring? Could it
Speaker 1: lead to unregular lated growth of nerve endings and cause pain?
Speaker 1: Could it trigger trigger autoimmune conditions of the vagina revolva?
Speaker 1: She's pointing out, we just don't know, and this is
Speaker 1: why you don't start injecting performing a treatment in tens
Speaker 1: of thousands of women when we don't know any of
Speaker 1: this stuff, like you research it for you, Like there's
Speaker 1: a case you never jump to human trial. You never
Speaker 1: do that. There there is a case for hastening human
Speaker 1: trials in the event of, say a horrific plague spreading
Speaker 1: over the land, and you really need to get a
Speaker 1: vaccine out fastest. There's a cost benefit analysis that can
Speaker 1: be done, and things can be accelerated. But this is
Speaker 1: not an immediate life or death issue, like orgasms are important,
Speaker 1: but we can take the time to make sure this
Speaker 1: isn't going to cause horrible damage to the people getting
Speaker 1: the shot, Like right, this isn't like a vaccine for
Speaker 1: a death plague. You know, we have the time and
Speaker 1: energy being given to it to make it so we
Speaker 1: can do it right, Like, this is a serious issue,
Speaker 1: but it's not. It's just for a for a medical standpoint,
Speaker 1: you never like it's it's just it's very frustrating. It's
Speaker 1: very frustrating. So after all this, we've established, you know
Speaker 1: how reckless this guy is and how unproven his treatment is.
Speaker 1: And the question that follows, naturally is why do you
Speaker 1: keep people keep buying it? And the answer for that
Speaker 1: is is really fucking sad. And it ties into the
Speaker 1: stuff we're talking about at the top of this episode.
Speaker 1: A lot of women are a lot of people with
Speaker 1: vaginas can't organize or orgasm reliably, and the best treatment
Speaker 1: for this seems to be a combination of therapy and
Speaker 1: having a committed partner who cares about your understanding or
Speaker 1: cares about understanding your body. Um, you can't prescribe that right,
Speaker 1: like to a certain extent, you can't. You can't like
Speaker 1: no doctor can like write that on a sheet and
Speaker 1: hand it out to you. Um. Falling in love, or
Speaker 1: at least falling in like enough to have regular sex
Speaker 1: is not easy. Um. And so Dr Runnelds offers an
Speaker 1: easy answer, an injectable answer to what is really a
Speaker 1: very complicated question. And this helps explain the demand for
Speaker 1: dr orgasms services, but it doesn't explain why so many
Speaker 1: women do swear by his work. And for that explanation,
Speaker 1: we're going to have to turn back to that article
Speaker 1: in The Guardian by Kathleen Hale. The opening paragraphs of
Speaker 1: this article about Runnals are filled with more red flags
Speaker 1: than a Communist Party rally. And I'm gonna quote here Runnalds.
Speaker 1: His office isn't like anything. Isn't anything like the sterile
Speaker 1: exam rooms most women associate with gynecological exams. It's intimate,
Speaker 1: personal and cozy because in addition to treating thousands of
Speaker 1: patients there over the years, he also lives there. There's
Speaker 1: a small entry way. The small entry way opens up
Speaker 1: to a living room dominated by jim equipment. In the bathroom,
Speaker 1: I found a functioning shower and shelves filled with employees toiletries.
Speaker 1: The only examination table was separated from the kitchen by
Speaker 1: a curtain. Pamela, Julian Vivianne. The three women on Renalds
Speaker 1: is four person staff greeted me with open arms in
Speaker 1: order to better understand what they promoted. Pamela and Vivian
Speaker 1: told me they both had O shots administered by Runnels. Mark,
Speaker 1: the sole male employee, opted for the male version a
Speaker 1: P shot. If you're like me, that stuff gives you
Speaker 1: some flashbacks to to Dr John Brown, like you know,
Speaker 1: the guy we talked about who did horrific surgeries from
Speaker 1: his own home on on trans people. UM. It's generally
Speaker 1: not considered ideal for a doctor to perform operations in
Speaker 1: his own home, but it's also not impossible for such
Speaker 1: a situation to be sterile, and I have not heard
Speaker 1: any allegations that Dr Reynolds is set up violates any
Speaker 1: health codes. UM. The part where all of his employees
Speaker 1: used the medicine that he makes is real culty in
Speaker 1: a bit of a flag though UM and the cult
Speaker 1: vibes don't decline. As the article goes on, quote, as
Speaker 1: we awaited for the arrival of my first interview subject,
Speaker 1: Lacy Reynolds suggested that I might want to try the
Speaker 1: O shot for myself. You'll love it, Vivian said. She
Speaker 1: told me that doctors regularly flew in from all over
Speaker 1: the world to be trained in the procedure, and that
Speaker 1: initially they reacted to offers of free O shots, just
Speaker 1: as I had, with a mix of embarrassment and surprise,
Speaker 1: but by the end she said everyone wanted one. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's kind of I can kind of understand, like if
Speaker 1: you go to a dentist or orthodontist, you want everyone
Speaker 1: there to have straight teeth, right, like you want everyone
Speaker 1: there to have had braces or whatever. But this is
Speaker 1: completely be different, Like it's not the same thing. And
Speaker 1: I do think I think the fact that it's in
Speaker 1: a house and not in a more sterile place, I
Speaker 1: think that lends to getting these women to trust him,
Speaker 1: like it's more intimate, and it's more it is you're, you're, you're,
Speaker 1: you're praying on them in very emotional mental ways that
Speaker 1: they don't even realize it's you're you're making them feel
Speaker 1: like they're yeah, that that that they're safe, but they're not.
Speaker 1: And it feels like the kind of classes he does
Speaker 1: with the doctors, the in person ones at least, are
Speaker 1: kind of like that too. Um. There's a line in
Speaker 1: here where Reynolds laughs quote recalling how the last class
Speaker 1: had run until three in the morning just to accommodate demand,
Speaker 1: and he says it's like a Baptist revival. Except you're
Speaker 1: injecting each other's genitals. I know that's sucking wild Yeah now, hay.
Speaker 1: This Guardian All article by Kathleen Hale also notes that
Speaker 1: the location for Renalds is off this, which is fair Hope.
Speaker 1: Alabama is in the middle of the Bible Belt, and
Speaker 1: it's a place where vibrators are illegal due to the
Speaker 1: state's anti obscenity laws. Um. Where I grew up in
Speaker 1: Texas was like that too. They had to market them
Speaker 1: as cake toppers, like as like decorations for like cakes
Speaker 1: for bachelorette parties and stuff, even though yeah, yeah, because
Speaker 1: it's illegal to sell a vibrator because Texas hates hates women. Um, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's crazy. I had no idea. Yeah. And and the
Speaker 1: data here is imperfect. Um, but there is a decent
Speaker 1: amount of data that suggests that highly religious women, and
Speaker 1: particularly like religiously orthodox type women, are more likely to
Speaker 1: suffer from orgasmic disorders than secular women. Um. And the
Speaker 1: women hail in views, I can. I can tell you why.
Speaker 1: I can. Obviously, Like you're grown your you grow up
Speaker 1: with shame around your body, and that shame has this you.
Speaker 1: You have this inability to really let go and experience pleasure.
Speaker 1: Like obviously that makes sense, but he's like pretty much
Speaker 1: taking advantage of that, Like he's capitalizing on this group
Speaker 1: of women having the issue that he is pretending to
Speaker 1: know how to solve. Yes, And it makes sense that
Speaker 1: this guy who otherwise you would expect a doctor like
Speaker 1: this to be like in Los Angeles. I think he
Speaker 1: picked his location. I think he decided to stay in
Speaker 1: Alabama for a reason, and it's that he's very good
Speaker 1: at manipulating this particular kind of of person, very like
Speaker 1: religious conservative ladies who have orgasmic disorders, and he's good
Speaker 1: at making them trust him. Um. Yeah, yeah Hale's article. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so it's um. The women that Hale interviews for that
Speaker 1: article described themselves overwhelmingly as um very empathetic, Bible believing
Speaker 1: Christians like the women who have gotten this shot, and
Speaker 1: an outsized number of them are unfortunately victims of raper
Speaker 1: sexual assault. UM quote. Lacy and athletic, forty year old
Speaker 1: businesswoman told no one when she was raped for the
Speaker 1: first time at age thirteen, but soon her father noticed
Speaker 1: something different about her and started calling her horror and
Speaker 1: a lesbian. Physical abuse followed when Lacey's next rapist. Her
Speaker 1: husband found himself unable to climax unless Lacey was in
Speaker 1: excruciating pain. He raped her throughout their tenure relationship. UM.
Speaker 1: So yeah, and the damage from this left her, at
Speaker 1: twenty nine years old with um incontinence uh and scarring UM.
Speaker 1: She went the bed uh and she was just kind
Speaker 1: of unable to orgasm. UM. Doctors responded to her condition
Speaker 1: concerns by suggesting she used lube with her partners and
Speaker 1: undergo psychotherapy. UM. And by age thirty, Lacey never expected
Speaker 1: to experience sexual pleasure again. UM. She tried using a
Speaker 1: back massager to stimulate herself, but it left a callous
Speaker 1: on her clitteress. UM. So she just didn't know how to. Yeah,
Speaker 1: she's just a victim of of of unbelievable abuse, UM
Speaker 1: who did not know how to like like like like
Speaker 1: who was maybe getting some psych psychological counseling, but because
Speaker 1: of where she lived and sort of like the the
Speaker 1: culture she was in, was not able to really talk
Speaker 1: about sex with anyone and never had that conversation, never
Speaker 1: had a conversation about how to masturbate. And then she
Speaker 1: meets Dr Reynolds UM and they meet at a bank
Speaker 1: and she learns what he does, and she confides in
Speaker 1: him that she can't orgasm, and he tells her that
Speaker 1: he knows something that might help, and I get the feeling.
Speaker 1: She says that he gave her the O shot and
Speaker 1: she immediately felt alive down there. You get the feeling though,
Speaker 1: that also they're having just conversations about sex and maybe
Speaker 1: she's never gotten to have that. He's giving her an
Speaker 1: intimacy she's never known. And I don't want to I
Speaker 1: don't want to discredit any of what these women have
Speaker 1: felt or no, no, no, but there is a level
Speaker 1: of placebo that goes into this, like you, it's leading
Speaker 1: up to it, just like the connection with with the
Speaker 1: with the women, the this promise of of like just
Speaker 1: like everyone telling them it's going to work, the staff
Speaker 1: and everything like, there's going to be a certain amount
Speaker 1: of placebo that just by default is there because it's
Speaker 1: so high and and the data we have makes it
Speaker 1: very clear that having healthy conversations about your your genitalia
Speaker 1: and about sex with people who care about you, or
Speaker 1: at least seem to care about you really helps with
Speaker 1: an orgasmic disorder. That's a super important part of treating
Speaker 1: it and there's again this is part of why, like
Speaker 1: why you need an actual study on something like this,
Speaker 1: because there's no separation for like the conversations they're having
Speaker 1: in like the intimacy of the encounter and the shot,
Speaker 1: Like none of that's being separated. There's no way to
Speaker 1: know what the shot is doing, if actually anything, because
Speaker 1: a whole lot is wrapped up in all of these
Speaker 1: women's stories with Dr Reynolds and that's but that just
Speaker 1: helps in Yeah, it does help him it, but it
Speaker 1: does not necessarily help these women. It doesn't help us
Speaker 1: to know if this thing actually works. Um. Yeah, which
Speaker 1: is why skeptics like Dr jin Gunter will point out
Speaker 1: that anecdotal data is not the same as scientific data.
Speaker 1: And she points that out, pointed that out to Kathleen
Speaker 1: Hale and the Guardian article because Hale talked to Dr
Speaker 1: Gunter um and Hale understood that, but also had a
Speaker 1: lot of trouble writing off these women's experiences. Um. She
Speaker 1: was clearly convinced to it a read by their embrace
Speaker 1: of the O shot. And it's very convincing when you
Speaker 1: have a lot of people say this thing helped me. Um.
Speaker 1: She did ask Renalds, though, why he tended to gravitate
Speaker 1: towards trauma victims, and his answer was interesting. He responded, quote,
Speaker 1: I don't really know why I'm surrounded by people who
Speaker 1: have pain. I do absolutely make a conscious effort to
Speaker 1: find them. I think my real usefulness evolves out of
Speaker 1: It's not even compassion, it's more like obsession, which is yeah,
Speaker 1: more of an honest answer, Yeah, it should be right,
Speaker 1: what the yeah? And that is that's there is a
Speaker 1: reason why cult leaders gravitate towards abuse victims, as do grifters.
Speaker 1: Um Because in general, our society doesn't a ship job
Speaker 1: of taking care of these people. Um. And it's a
Speaker 1: natural human need to respond to people who reach out
Speaker 1: and show compassion for you in times of lonely darkness.
Speaker 1: And I think this explains part of Dr Reynolds's success UM.
Speaker 1: And another part of it is explained by what's called
Speaker 1: placebo theater, which is very well documented fact that receiving
Speaker 1: any kind of treatment in a clinical medical setting, especially
Speaker 1: if it's expensive, will increase a patient's belief that the
Speaker 1: treatment will work and actually increase the efficacy of the treatment.
Speaker 1: This is a placebo effect thing, and it doesn't help
Speaker 1: a lot when you're treating metastatic cancer. But a lot
Speaker 1: of orgasm. Orgasm is mental, right, Like, that's where the
Speaker 1: block comes up for a lot of people. And it's
Speaker 1: not unheard of four placebos to be effective enough to
Speaker 1: sixty percent of cases for these sorts of situations, because again,
Speaker 1: you don't actually have to physically affect, you just have
Speaker 1: to make them believe, like, and if they believe it
Speaker 1: will work. This is primarily a mental block. That's all
Speaker 1: it is. I mean not all it is. There's more.
Speaker 1: That's a lot of it. Yeah, a big part of
Speaker 1: the research that I've been doing personally, like it's it's
Speaker 1: a they talk a lot about letting go and ways
Speaker 1: to make your mind, Yeah, like let go essentially of everything.
Speaker 1: That's like, because there's this pressure around even achieving the
Speaker 1: word achieving an orgasm is like so I think counterintuitive
Speaker 1: because it makes it seem like you're reaching for something constantly,
Speaker 1: and if you're having sex with a partner, at least
Speaker 1: in my experience, I always felt like I'm never going
Speaker 1: to give them what they want because I can't do
Speaker 1: this thing that I'm supposed to be doing. And so
Speaker 1: then I then I get really into like giving rather
Speaker 1: than receiving. And I get a lot of pleasure out
Speaker 1: of that. But then it kind of like when you're
Speaker 1: really grappling with this idea of um, yeah, the fact
Speaker 1: that it's all mental. It's all mental, because if you're
Speaker 1: too consumed with I'm I can't do this thing, or
Speaker 1: or if you're even thinking like I have to let go,
Speaker 1: I have to like go, that's not letting go. And
Speaker 1: so I can only imagine like all these elements that
Speaker 1: allow women too for their minds, Like he's making them
Speaker 1: comfortable enough to believe that this is going to help
Speaker 1: them and that in and of itself makes them feel better.
Speaker 1: And and if that's all he was doing, I wouldn't
Speaker 1: have any problem with this guy. I mean I would
Speaker 1: because of the homeless people study, but like I would
Speaker 1: have a problem with this current business. Like if this
Speaker 1: guy would just like, hey, I'm a doctor in the
Speaker 1: Bible Belt and I help women who have problems orgasm,
Speaker 1: ng um, and a lot of women said he helped them,
Speaker 1: I'd be like, yeah, fine, great, but he's also injecting
Speaker 1: them with He's also performing a medical operation that we
Speaker 1: have no data on what kind of long term harm
Speaker 1: it might do. To them like, that's that's where the
Speaker 1: issue is, right, Um, that's yeah, And it's not just therapy,
Speaker 1: it's not talking, and you're physically doing something to a
Speaker 1: body he is not medically sound. And another impact comes
Speaker 1: from the fact that the O shot costs about hundred dollars,
Speaker 1: and controlled studies have shown that spending more money on
Speaker 1: a medical treatment can increase the placebo effect as well,
Speaker 1: and even Parkinson's patients have shown physical improvement in situations
Speaker 1: like this. So again, like a lot of this has
Speaker 1: nothing to fucking do with whatever he's injecting them with,
Speaker 1: and everything to do with the psychological atmosphere that this
Speaker 1: person sets up and his his his his operation. Now,
Speaker 1: the experts Kathleen Hale talked to mentioned all of this
Speaker 1: but quote as she but as she writes, quote as
Speaker 1: a layperson, I couldn't help but respect their authority, but
Speaker 1: as a human being was hard for me to discredit
Speaker 1: so many women's stories when they said the O shot worked,
Speaker 1: I believe them. So she got the shot herself and
Speaker 1: it didn't. It didn't do anything. And I think it's
Speaker 1: just because she didn't. She's never had she didn't have
Speaker 1: an issue, right, Like she had no problem having orgasms.
Speaker 1: She had the shot and she didn't notice anything, and
Speaker 1: that is what you would She didn't go into it
Speaker 1: with the trauma. She didn't go into it with a like,
Speaker 1: uh something to be fixed. Yeah, you know, like she
Speaker 1: wasn't searching for a like you know, I don't know
Speaker 1: that makes sense, and it's it's one of those things
Speaker 1: where like, at the end of the day, I have
Speaker 1: to admit that compared to our usual bastards, the harm
Speaker 1: this guy is currently perpetrating is minimal. Like, these women
Speaker 1: are out money, but there's not well, there's not evidency's
Speaker 1: helping them. There isn't evidence he's hurting them. Although it
Speaker 1: is possible that he's doing a lot of damage to them,
Speaker 1: we just don't know for a while because again, nobody's
Speaker 1: fucking looked into this. Um it's uh, I don't know.
Speaker 1: Like I hate this I because I think he's a
Speaker 1: bad person and he's taking advantage of people. Um. But
Speaker 1: I also I think the thing that I hate more
Speaker 1: than this guy is the fact that we have such
Speaker 1: a shitty system set up in our country for any
Speaker 1: kind of sexual health care, for informing people about their bodies,
Speaker 1: for giving women who are having this problem a place
Speaker 1: where they even know they can go to for help. Um,
Speaker 1: Like that's that system leads him for his success, Like
Speaker 1: that system made him successful. And I agree with you that,
Speaker 1: like in the grand scheme of things, he's not like
Speaker 1: a murderer, Like he's not like you've talked about shittier
Speaker 1: people on your show, for sure, But the institution at large,
Speaker 1: you're right, is what is contributing to his success. And
Speaker 1: that institution is so flawed and so broken, and it
Speaker 1: makes women believe that there's they are there, they that
Speaker 1: that they need to be fixed. And he's capitalizing on
Speaker 1: that in a huge way. And he's getting away with it.
Speaker 1: And he should have been banned from everything medical along
Speaker 1: as time ago, but he's still operating on a level
Speaker 1: that should be criminal up yep. And he's he's trying
Speaker 1: to get into coronavirus grift. It's a pretty minor one.
Speaker 1: He wants to like create a nationwide UH blood bank
Speaker 1: basically to take plasma rich blood from people that have
Speaker 1: had it, that might have antibodies and give it to
Speaker 1: other people. And like folks who aren't grifters are already
Speaker 1: doing basically this. He's just trying to create his own thing,
Speaker 1: and it doesn't look like it's work. I haven't seen
Speaker 1: it pick up a lot of steam because he's the
Speaker 1: blood guy. Yeah, so I I don't know. I like,
Speaker 1: as far as all of the grifters that I worry about,
Speaker 1: he's not super high on my list. Keep an eye
Speaker 1: on him because he might wind up with a grift
Speaker 1: that actually does harm a whole lot of people, where
Speaker 1: he might find out that his current grift is more
Speaker 1: harmful than we know. I just am so frustrated by
Speaker 1: the story. At the same time, like as with most
Speaker 1: of the grifters who are currently eating the decent and
Speaker 1: often kind of dumb people of this country alive. Um,
Speaker 1: the reason why they're able to do what they do
Speaker 1: is because are we don't take care of our people.
Speaker 1: There's no systems that that provide people with any option
Speaker 1: that they have a chance that they have that there
Speaker 1: is actually a reasonable, non exploited of way to deal
Speaker 1: with a problem like a sexual problem that they have.
Speaker 1: And so the first handsome, well spoken person who has
Speaker 1: what looked like convincing credentials and says he can cure you,
Speaker 1: you'll you'll just trust him if he has if he
Speaker 1: has a nice face. And there are so many ways
Speaker 1: we should have set up our society to to reduce
Speaker 1: the ability these people would have to um grift the vulnerable,
Speaker 1: but we have done none of that. And I guess
Speaker 1: that makes sense because this is America. Yeah, I I
Speaker 1: agree with all of that, and it's really terrible because
Speaker 1: it's so true. And I am I under I realized
Speaker 1: that most of your listeners Actually, no, I don't realize.
Speaker 1: I'm assuming that a lot of our listeners are men.
Speaker 1: But for the women out there that are listening to this,
Speaker 1: I if you, if you relate to anything I said,
Speaker 1: You're not alone. And I know this is like not
Speaker 1: supposed to be about my own ship, but I just
Speaker 1: I'm so angry that someone like this is getting away
Speaker 1: with something that I've struggled with, like my whole life,
Speaker 1: and like I'm I'm a sexual person like I and
Speaker 1: the fact that I have this one thing that's like
Speaker 1: been bugging me my whole life that especially in like
Speaker 1: today's world where everyone's really empowered and sexually uh just
Speaker 1: outspoken and everything. As someone who's also progressive, it makes
Speaker 1: me feel like I can't keep up, Like it makes
Speaker 1: me feel like I'm not. I can't really understand where
Speaker 1: everyone's coming from. And maybe it'll happen one day, maybe
Speaker 1: it won't. But just accepting that where you are right
Speaker 1: now is where you are is so much better than
Speaker 1: being I don't know, berating yourself or something that is
Speaker 1: not in your control, like you just I don't know.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to end this in like a poetic way,
Speaker 1: and it's not coming out the way I wanted to.
Speaker 1: There's just people feel I just don't want people to
Speaker 1: feel like this is a subject that we shouldn't talk
Speaker 1: about because I had hesitation admitting that I've never like
Speaker 1: that I have. I don't know this experience and I
Speaker 1: like I have my my sexual history is like a
Speaker 1: little bit confusing just because I don't know I am
Speaker 1: the way I am. But um but I think the
Speaker 1: fact that me even coming from someone who just shot
Speaker 1: all over this guy and would never do this thing,
Speaker 1: I can't deny that. There was a little, a little
Speaker 1: voice in my head. I was like, what if it
Speaker 1: does work? Like what if this is like like when
Speaker 1: we first started talking about it, and I was like, well,
Speaker 1: maybe this is the answer to all my problems and
Speaker 1: this is coming from someone I think I'm not. I
Speaker 1: think I'm like reasonably intelligent. So I don't know. I
Speaker 1: just think the depth of shame and trauma that we
Speaker 1: hold with ourselves is just not okay, and we just
Speaker 1: have to come at this whole thing with like love.
Speaker 1: And I haven't talked to human all day today, so
Speaker 1: I forget how conversations work. So please come me off
Speaker 1: at any time. You're great. I'm sweaty. I'm so sweaty
Speaker 1: talking about so. I don't know. I just thank thank
Speaker 1: you for having me on to talk about this. I
Speaker 1: just thank you for talking. I was supposed to say no,
Speaker 1: I mean, you're supposed to say, yeah, that's fine, Like
Speaker 1: it's it's important to talk about this. I guarantee there
Speaker 1: are people who will listen to this and have a
Speaker 1: version of the same experience you're having, and it will
Speaker 1: probably make them feel better to know that they're not
Speaker 1: alone in that, and that's a good thing. And if
Speaker 1: we're talking about things that reduce the ability of guys
Speaker 1: like this to grift people, it is being able to
Speaker 1: talk about this ship. So I'm glad that you felt
Speaker 1: comfortable talking about it to an intimate audience of me
Speaker 1: and Sophie and several hundred thousand strangers. Cool. Thanks, Robert.
Speaker 1: I am going to I will say right now, if
Speaker 1: any of the fucking dudes listening do creepy ship on Twitter?
Speaker 1: Do you after is, I will fucking tear your as
Speaker 1: a new one digit. Don't be a fucking gross about this. Okay,
Speaker 1: don't nobody nobody? Yeah, thank you, Robert. I appreciate that.
Speaker 1: I mean, like I just I go back to this
Speaker 1: idea that if someone was as open, if someone if
Speaker 1: if if it was the norm to be open about this,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't feel so weird as a kid or as
Speaker 1: a as a teen or whatever growing up kind of
Speaker 1: feeling like there was something wrong with me. And so
Speaker 1: I think we just have to keep encouraging these conversations.
Speaker 1: And it's the same institution that put this guy to
Speaker 1: be successful, that that same institution, the same societal fucking
Speaker 1: game is the same one that makes women like me
Speaker 1: feel like they need to be fixed. So um So yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, like I know, like putting myself out there
Speaker 1: is like just like by default get like weird replies
Speaker 1: to it or whatever, or just like it going to
Speaker 1: be an interesting week on Twitter for you. Yeah, also
Speaker 1: I'm like a little bit low key afrase. I'm like,
Speaker 1: because I was, like I was raised Muslim, My entire
Speaker 1: family's Muslim. We don't really talk about like you're not
Speaker 1: really raised to like talk about sex or uh. There's
Speaker 1: just a lot to unpack as far as like me
Speaker 1: talking about this goes like it's not just me as
Speaker 1: a woman in the society, it's also me and like
Speaker 1: my culture and like my family in particular, Like I
Speaker 1: just there's a lot to unpack for me here, and
Speaker 1: it's this is not like I'm using this as therapy,
Speaker 1: which I shouldn't do. Um, but I think even coming
Speaker 1: from like as an Arab woman, as a Syrian woman,
Speaker 1: that's even another group of people that I would like
Speaker 1: to encourage this conversation with, like with it, you know,
Speaker 1: because like if your children a child of immigrants, if
Speaker 1: you're you're not taught about these things is when you're
Speaker 1: growing up, it's just going to lead to more confusion
Speaker 1: and to lead to more questions and not that's not
Speaker 1: like a blanket statement, like there are plenty of people
Speaker 1: who are fine and thriving the way they are, but
Speaker 1: this is just from my own personal experience that um,
Speaker 1: I think that's why I'm so unfiltered and so candid
Speaker 1: is because I just needed someone to be this way
Speaker 1: when I was a kid, and I needed to say
Speaker 1: everything that was on their mind because that's that would
Speaker 1: would that would have made me feel less like an
Speaker 1: alien trying to study humanity watching porn, you know what
Speaker 1: I mean? Like, Yeah, I don't know. I mean I
Speaker 1: think the thing you're landing on is that when you
Speaker 1: realize you are kind of done dirty by your society
Speaker 1: and the adults around you when you were a kid
Speaker 1: because of like a failure that they that they had,
Speaker 1: you know, regardless of whether or not we consider them
Speaker 1: good people, like there was a there was a shortcoming
Speaker 1: in what we had available to us as a kid.
Speaker 1: When you realize that the best thing you can do
Speaker 1: is try to be that adult um maybe to someone else,
Speaker 1: so that they don't wind up with the same hole
Speaker 1: in their um, experience, their education, whatever, as as as
Speaker 1: they grow up. And that starts with like talking about
Speaker 1: the ship that you realize like, oh, I wish people
Speaker 1: had talked about this when I was a kid. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm constantly trying to be the person that I needed
Speaker 1: when I was a child. And when you're growing up,
Speaker 1: you don't see it as a societal failure. You see
Speaker 1: it as your own failure. And I think that's what's dangerous,
Speaker 1: especially when it comes to like woman's pleasure, is that
Speaker 1: you don't see it as a system failing you. You
Speaker 1: see as you failing yourself, and you fail like you're
Speaker 1: failing your own body, and you start to resent your
Speaker 1: body and like, why can't I do this? And then
Speaker 1: hopefully as we get older and become more aware of
Speaker 1: the society at large that makes us feel this way,
Speaker 1: then we can like combat those things and just become
Speaker 1: the people we were always meant to be, which is
Speaker 1: just ourselves. And that's my spiel. Thank you for coming
Speaker 1: to my ted talk. Uh. This is the only podcast
Speaker 1: on earth. Thank you for thank you for having me
Speaker 1: on the only podcast to make it in this pandemic.
Speaker 1: What an honor. I know the white list is so long.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, Just if you're looking for something to do
Speaker 1: during this time, I might recommend a book of poetry
Speaker 1: written by A. Sharne that is on Amazon called dime
Speaker 1: Piece It. Wow. Thank you so much, Sophie. Thank you.
Speaker 1: I'm currently working on my next one, so that is nice.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Also, since we're just another thing to do
Speaker 1: is just try masturbating. That's you know what. Now is
Speaker 1: the time. Now is the time to really just like
Speaker 1: try to figure it out when like you have so
Speaker 1: many hours in the day. You actually you have exactly
Speaker 1: twenty four that's that's that's a fact. But you have
Speaker 1: time to explore yourself if that's what you want to do.
Speaker 1: And I'm sure many of you already doing that. But
Speaker 1: this has been quite the journey for me. And doing
Speaker 1: your homework is it means a lot of things, you know,
Speaker 1: So just do your homework on your body, on yourself,
Speaker 1: on your mind, you know what. That's I've said my piece.
Speaker 1: Cool alright, Um well, I don't really know how else
Speaker 1: to in the episode other than um, think a lot
Speaker 1: about all this and uh go unfunded the world. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and masterbait funk yourself to unfunck the world. That's the
Speaker 1: only message I have. I co host a podcast on
Speaker 1: the Heart Media network Heart Radio Network. It's ethnically ambiguous.
Speaker 1: We talk to people that are um uh marginalized about
Speaker 1: their struggles in the world, and we also just talk
Speaker 1: about ourselves being children of immigrants. I am Sharine You
Speaker 1: can follow me at Shiro Hero s h e E
Speaker 1: r O h E r O on Instagram and on Twitter.
Speaker 1: It's Shiro Hero six six six. Thank you Sophie for
Speaker 1: plugging my book. I'm a filmmaker. I have some short
Speaker 1: films on my website. You can just my everything is
Speaker 1: like in my Twitter bio or some ship I don't
Speaker 1: know whatever, figure it out just google me. Um. But yeah,
Speaker 1: that's about it. I have another podcast called The Women's War. Yes,
Speaker 1: you check it out. It's upbeat. I also have nothing else.
Speaker 1: That is My whole life is these two podcasts. And
Speaker 1: I returned to avoid in between space and time when
Speaker 1: you are not listening to me, So please listen again regularly.
Speaker 1: And thanks for letting me ramble a little bit on this. Yeah, thanks,
Speaker 1: thanks for letting me just ramble and go. I know
Speaker 1: this is like a longer episode that I just I
Speaker 1: thought I got worked up. I think it's good that
Speaker 1: you did and that you said the things you said,
Speaker 1: So thank you for coming on and speaking candidly. And
Speaker 1: uh again, don't be weird about this. People, don't be
Speaker 1: fucking creepy. Okay, well fucking handle find whatever. I'll just
Speaker 1: meet you that is the episode Hi