1
00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:02,640
Speaker 1: The state of California has a new law known as

2
00:00:02,680 --> 00:00:06,880
Speaker 1: Assembly Bill. Under the new law, the Medical Board of

3
00:00:06,920 --> 00:00:12,400
Speaker 1: California could discipline physicians who disseminate information about COVID that's

4
00:00:12,440 --> 00:00:17,520
Speaker 1: not in line with the quote unquote contemporary scientific consensus. Basically,

5
00:00:17,520 --> 00:00:20,479
Speaker 1: in a nutshell, what this means is the Medical Board

6
00:00:20,480 --> 00:00:25,440
Speaker 1: of California wants to muzzle doctors. If you question the authority,

7
00:00:25,480 --> 00:00:29,400
Speaker 1: if you question the consensus, you could lose your license. Now,

8
00:00:29,680 --> 00:00:32,640
Speaker 1: we've all been paying attention during COVID and we've seen

9
00:00:32,720 --> 00:00:36,680
Speaker 1: how the consensus has been wrong about everything. The consensus

10
00:00:36,720 --> 00:00:39,320
Speaker 1: has been wrong about masks, the consensus has been wrong

11
00:00:39,360 --> 00:00:43,640
Speaker 1: about lockdowns, the consensus has been wrong about vaccines. Essentially,

12
00:00:43,680 --> 00:00:48,080
Speaker 1: this is just government censorship, the silencing of dissidents, and

13
00:00:48,280 --> 00:00:52,080
Speaker 1: isn't the point of science to question the broader narrative,

14
00:00:52,280 --> 00:00:55,280
Speaker 1: to question the consensus. We're going to talk to one

15
00:00:55,360 --> 00:00:58,160
Speaker 1: doctor who is part of a small group who's suing

16
00:00:58,520 --> 00:01:02,760
Speaker 1: the state. Now so far they've successful. California judge issued

17
00:01:02,960 --> 00:01:06,560
Speaker 1: a preliminary injunction against the law, so their case will

18
00:01:06,560 --> 00:01:10,080
Speaker 1: continue to proceed. That doctor's name is Dr Aaron Karyat.

19
00:01:10,360 --> 00:01:13,880
Speaker 1: He graduated from the University of Order Dame in philosophy

20
00:01:13,880 --> 00:01:17,440
Speaker 1: and pre medical sciences. He earned his medical degree from

21
00:01:17,440 --> 00:01:22,240
Speaker 1: Georgetown University and he completed his residency training in psychiatry

22
00:01:22,280 --> 00:01:25,840
Speaker 1: at the University of California, Irvine. He he taught there

23
00:01:25,880 --> 00:01:29,360
Speaker 1: for many many years, something like fifteen years before getting

24
00:01:29,400 --> 00:01:33,679
Speaker 1: fired for speaking out against the quote unquote consensus, for

25
00:01:33,800 --> 00:01:37,759
Speaker 1: not getting vaccinated, for questioning the authority, and now he's

26
00:01:37,840 --> 00:01:41,000
Speaker 1: leading the charge on this lawsuit as well. So we're

27
00:01:41,000 --> 00:01:44,400
Speaker 1: going to talk to Dr Aaron Karyati about why he's suing,

28
00:01:44,760 --> 00:01:48,240
Speaker 1: what it means, and where this lawsuit is heading. He's next,

29
00:01:53,040 --> 00:01:57,000
Speaker 1: Dr Aaron Karyati. I appreciate you coming on the show, sir,

30
00:01:57,720 --> 00:01:59,880
Speaker 1: thank you for making the time. Oh. Absolutely, it's great

31
00:01:59,880 --> 00:02:01,840
Speaker 1: to be with you. Losing. So, you're one of the

32
00:02:01,880 --> 00:02:05,560
Speaker 1: five physicians who have filed a lawsuit against the state

33
00:02:05,600 --> 00:02:10,560
Speaker 1: of California over a new law assembly built. What exactly

34
00:02:10,720 --> 00:02:14,120
Speaker 1: does this law do? This law, which was introduced in

35
00:02:14,200 --> 00:02:19,040
Speaker 1: the California state legislature last year, passed by the state legislatures,

36
00:02:19,040 --> 00:02:23,800
Speaker 1: signed by the governor, is more or less a gag

37
00:02:23,919 --> 00:02:29,880
Speaker 1: order on physicians. It specifies that a that a physician

38
00:02:30,840 --> 00:02:35,560
Speaker 1: who contradicts what the law calls the quote unquote current

39
00:02:35,560 --> 00:02:39,639
Speaker 1: scientific consensus, which is never defined in the law. Very

40
00:02:39,680 --> 00:02:45,080
Speaker 1: difficult thing to define legally. Any doctor who contradicts this

41
00:02:45,520 --> 00:02:50,560
Speaker 1: supposed consensus on things related to COVID may have hiss

42
00:02:50,680 --> 00:02:54,680
Speaker 1: or medical license subject to disciplinary action by the medcal Board.

43
00:02:54,800 --> 00:02:58,440
Speaker 1: So especially the law empowers the medical board to discipline

44
00:02:58,440 --> 00:03:04,840
Speaker 1: physicians in California who contradict the really the preferred public

45
00:03:04,880 --> 00:03:09,080
Speaker 1: health narrative on COVID. And I say that it's a

46
00:03:09,120 --> 00:03:12,560
Speaker 1: gag order on physicians for a couple of reasons. One

47
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:16,920
Speaker 1: is it tries to control the speech that doctors engage

48
00:03:16,960 --> 00:03:21,800
Speaker 1: in with their patients in the privacy of the consulting room.

49
00:03:21,840 --> 00:03:24,840
Speaker 1: And they shouldn't be a political issue. That should not

50
00:03:24,880 --> 00:03:29,120
Speaker 1: be a sort of left right liberal conservative debate. And

51
00:03:29,160 --> 00:03:32,200
Speaker 1: the reason for that is I explained when I testified

52
00:03:32,240 --> 00:03:35,400
Speaker 1: against this bill at the California State said it is

53
00:03:35,440 --> 00:03:40,800
Speaker 1: that I don't know anyone in California left right, progressive

54
00:03:41,160 --> 00:03:45,160
Speaker 1: conservative who wants to go to their doctor and ask

55
00:03:45,240 --> 00:03:49,440
Speaker 1: our doctor a question about COVID treatment or COVID intervention

56
00:03:50,200 --> 00:03:54,240
Speaker 1: and not have their doctor give them the doctor's honest opinion.

57
00:03:55,240 --> 00:03:58,600
Speaker 1: Right nobody wants their doctor reading from a government approved

58
00:03:58,840 --> 00:04:02,720
Speaker 1: script written by the California Department of Public Health. Otherwise

59
00:04:02,760 --> 00:04:05,080
Speaker 1: you would just go on the government's website and read

60
00:04:05,120 --> 00:04:07,960
Speaker 1: what the government wanted you to know about COVID. The

61
00:04:07,960 --> 00:04:11,800
Speaker 1: reason you ask your physicians you want your physicians opinion. Now,

62
00:04:12,480 --> 00:04:15,840
Speaker 1: you may decline to follow the physicians recommendation, you may

63
00:04:15,840 --> 00:04:19,640
Speaker 1: be skeptical of the physicians judgment, go seek a second

64
00:04:19,640 --> 00:04:23,359
Speaker 1: opinion whatever. As a patient, obviously you're free in that

65
00:04:23,440 --> 00:04:27,039
Speaker 1: regard as well. But I don't know anyone who doesn't

66
00:04:27,080 --> 00:04:30,120
Speaker 1: want to hear what their doctor actually thinks. And so

67
00:04:30,160 --> 00:04:32,719
Speaker 1: as soon as you intervene in that and try to

68
00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:37,880
Speaker 1: control with physicians, say the patients, you've undermined the trust

69
00:04:38,040 --> 00:04:42,240
Speaker 1: that's necessary for the doctor patient relationship to work in

70
00:04:42,279 --> 00:04:46,159
Speaker 1: the first place. And ultimately this this is a problem

71
00:04:46,200 --> 00:04:51,800
Speaker 1: for physicians who may be unjustly disciplined or unjustly constrained

72
00:04:51,880 --> 00:04:55,880
Speaker 1: from practicing medicine according to their best judgment. But more importantly,

73
00:04:56,440 --> 00:04:59,560
Speaker 1: at least it's harmful to patients who need to be

74
00:04:59,600 --> 00:05:02,800
Speaker 1: able to trust that what their physician is telling them

75
00:05:04,080 --> 00:05:07,640
Speaker 1: is actually in the in accord with the doctor's own

76
00:05:08,480 --> 00:05:13,720
Speaker 1: clinical judgment and the doctor's own personalized and individualized recommendation

77
00:05:14,480 --> 00:05:19,400
Speaker 1: for the patients. So this is a very serious, um

78
00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:28,080
Speaker 1: and egregious sort of insertion of the government into the

79
00:05:28,120 --> 00:05:30,640
Speaker 1: private realm of the doctor patient relationship where the government

80
00:05:30,720 --> 00:05:33,880
Speaker 1: does not belong. But it's also harmful to the practice

81
00:05:33,920 --> 00:05:38,000
Speaker 1: of medicine as a whole that is sort of institutional level,

82
00:05:39,240 --> 00:05:42,720
Speaker 1: because it's going to undermine the trust that patients in

83
00:05:42,760 --> 00:05:47,240
Speaker 1: general have of medical professionals if they think that, you know,

84
00:05:47,360 --> 00:05:53,320
Speaker 1: the medical professionals are constrained by laws like this. Um.

85
00:05:53,600 --> 00:05:56,440
Speaker 1: I think one of one of the reasons that the

86
00:05:56,480 --> 00:05:59,479
Speaker 1: law is vague and its definitions. This is one of

87
00:05:59,480 --> 00:06:03,680
Speaker 1: the constantitutional problems with the law that we're challenging. Is

88
00:06:04,279 --> 00:06:08,520
Speaker 1: even if the medical board only takes disciplinary action against

89
00:06:08,560 --> 00:06:11,040
Speaker 1: one or two physicians, or maybe it never, it never

90
00:06:11,080 --> 00:06:15,760
Speaker 1: applies to this law to specific cases. Nevertheless, the law

91
00:06:15,839 --> 00:06:19,200
Speaker 1: is going to have a chilling effect on this speech

92
00:06:19,240 --> 00:06:24,280
Speaker 1: of physicians right because precisely because it's difficult to know

93
00:06:24,400 --> 00:06:28,560
Speaker 1: whether or not whatever I'm saying may run a foul

94
00:06:28,640 --> 00:06:31,320
Speaker 1: of the law, or may run a foul of the

95
00:06:31,320 --> 00:06:34,719
Speaker 1: medical boards interpretational law. I'm just not going to say anything,

96
00:06:35,760 --> 00:06:38,880
Speaker 1: or I'm just going to air on the side of

97
00:06:39,080 --> 00:06:43,480
Speaker 1: only uh, you know, saying what has been approved again

98
00:06:43,520 --> 00:06:48,600
Speaker 1: by some government agency or some public health bureaucrat because

99
00:06:49,240 --> 00:06:53,840
Speaker 1: the potential consequences for me as a physician or so severe. Right,

100
00:06:53,880 --> 00:06:55,640
Speaker 1: it's I mean, it's one thing to lose your job,

101
00:06:56,560 --> 00:06:58,600
Speaker 1: it's another thing to lose your license, which is your

102
00:06:58,680 --> 00:07:02,320
Speaker 1: ability to practice medicine at all. When did science become

103
00:07:02,320 --> 00:07:05,599
Speaker 1: about the consensus? Isn't the whole point of science to

104
00:07:05,640 --> 00:07:08,640
Speaker 1: be able to challenge the consensus? You get new data,

105
00:07:08,720 --> 00:07:11,520
Speaker 1: you do new research, you come up with different you know,

106
00:07:11,560 --> 00:07:13,920
Speaker 1: a set of facts. So when has it ever been

107
00:07:13,920 --> 00:07:18,040
Speaker 1: about the consensus to begin with? Precisely right, it's never

108
00:07:18,120 --> 00:07:22,440
Speaker 1: been about the consensus. In fact, the the idea of

109
00:07:23,720 --> 00:07:30,840
Speaker 1: that the science capital key capitals, delivers ready made conclusions

110
00:07:30,920 --> 00:07:35,040
Speaker 1: that are unassailable and can never be challenged. This is

111
00:07:35,080 --> 00:07:39,120
Speaker 1: a this is a totally mistaken view of science. Sciences

112
00:07:39,480 --> 00:07:42,240
Speaker 1: is a method or it's a set of methods, or

113
00:07:42,320 --> 00:07:45,640
Speaker 1: trying to answer really difficult, really complicated questions about the

114
00:07:45,720 --> 00:07:48,880
Speaker 1: natural world, about the workings of the human body, about

115
00:07:48,880 --> 00:07:57,240
Speaker 1: a rapidly evolving virus, whatever, and science advances precisely by hypothesis,

116
00:07:57,240 --> 00:08:01,720
Speaker 1: by conjecture, by the gay aring of evidence, by refutation,

117
00:08:01,800 --> 00:08:06,720
Speaker 1: by argumentation. If you take a group of credible scientists

118
00:08:06,800 --> 00:08:10,120
Speaker 1: that that actually practice science, you put them in a

119
00:08:10,200 --> 00:08:13,440
Speaker 1: room together, they're going to argue endlessly. I mean, that's

120
00:08:13,440 --> 00:08:17,000
Speaker 1: what scientists do. That they're going to debate about, you know,

121
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:19,720
Speaker 1: the nuances of this or that study, or that, you know,

122
00:08:19,800 --> 00:08:22,920
Speaker 1: the upshot of the research as a whole, or you know,

123
00:08:23,120 --> 00:08:27,280
Speaker 1: this theory versus that theory of viral evolution or of

124
00:08:28,080 --> 00:08:31,040
Speaker 1: treatment of a respiratory illness. That's a good thing, and

125
00:08:31,080 --> 00:08:37,840
Speaker 1: that's precisely how science advances. So if you actually understand

126
00:08:37,880 --> 00:08:43,480
Speaker 1: how medical science works, it's very clear immediately that science

127
00:08:43,520 --> 00:08:48,080
Speaker 1: and censorship are totally incompatible. So that that's precisely another

128
00:08:48,200 --> 00:08:50,360
Speaker 1: problem with the laws, not just what it does to

129
00:08:50,400 --> 00:08:53,880
Speaker 1: the doctor patient relationship in a consulting room, but what

130
00:08:53,960 --> 00:08:57,520
Speaker 1: it does to the advance of medical science. Trying to

131
00:08:57,600 --> 00:09:01,200
Speaker 1: fix a any conclusion that any given point of time

132
00:09:01,960 --> 00:09:07,120
Speaker 1: as the final truth and it cannot be challenged and

133
00:09:07,240 --> 00:09:12,199
Speaker 1: it's you know, it's unassailable. That will guarantee that you're

134
00:09:12,200 --> 00:09:17,600
Speaker 1: going to bring the scientific enterprise to a grinding halt um.

135
00:09:17,720 --> 00:09:24,160
Speaker 1: So it's it's clearly a misguided law and unjust law

136
00:09:24,800 --> 00:09:30,080
Speaker 1: in terms of suppressing the physicians free speech rights uh

137
00:09:30,080 --> 00:09:33,600
Speaker 1: and the patient's rights to receive certain forms of information,

138
00:09:33,640 --> 00:09:36,400
Speaker 1: which is another key aspect of free speech. But it

139
00:09:36,480 --> 00:09:43,280
Speaker 1: will also have this downstream consequence of halting the progress

140
00:09:43,360 --> 00:09:47,640
Speaker 1: of medical science and of you know, chasing out of

141
00:09:47,640 --> 00:09:50,920
Speaker 1: the state good physician scientists who are on the front

142
00:09:51,000 --> 00:09:56,600
Speaker 1: lines asking good questions, um, exploring novel treatments, trying to

143
00:09:56,679 --> 00:10:01,920
Speaker 1: improve treatment protocols. Doctors like that precisely the kind of

144
00:10:01,960 --> 00:10:05,400
Speaker 1: doctors that tend to advance the field. They're they're not

145
00:10:05,400 --> 00:10:08,680
Speaker 1: going to want to practice medicine in California. They're gonna

146
00:10:08,880 --> 00:10:12,160
Speaker 1: they're gonna jump ship. And you know, the physician shortage

147
00:10:12,240 --> 00:10:14,840
Speaker 1: shortage that we already have in this state is only

148
00:10:14,880 --> 00:10:17,560
Speaker 1: going to get worse, and in fact, it will be

149
00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:20,520
Speaker 1: some of the some of the best, most forward thinking,

150
00:10:21,440 --> 00:10:24,680
Speaker 1: most most creative or innovative physicians that will be the

151
00:10:24,720 --> 00:10:27,360
Speaker 1: first to leave well. And it's also what's scary about

152
00:10:27,400 --> 00:10:30,520
Speaker 1: this is, you know, if thunder the interpretation of the

153
00:10:30,520 --> 00:10:35,319
Speaker 1: Medical Board of California, we've seen how the CDC has

154
00:10:35,360 --> 00:10:39,559
Speaker 1: gotten things wrong how the you know FDC, how all

155
00:10:39,600 --> 00:10:43,840
Speaker 1: these are CDC rather f d A, How all these

156
00:10:43,840 --> 00:10:49,960
Speaker 1: public health organizations have gotten things wrong consistently throughout COVID.

157
00:10:50,040 --> 00:10:53,800
Speaker 1: So then you have the people who are essentially setting

158
00:10:53,800 --> 00:10:57,640
Speaker 1: the precedent setting you know what the consensus is that

159
00:10:57,720 --> 00:11:01,560
Speaker 1: have been wrong throughout all of It's exactly right about

160
00:11:01,559 --> 00:11:06,000
Speaker 1: our public health agencies. And by comparison, I mean at

161
00:11:06,040 --> 00:11:09,480
Speaker 1: least the public health agencies are populated by people with

162
00:11:10,200 --> 00:11:14,839
Speaker 1: pH d s and people with supposedly some level of expertise. Um.

163
00:11:15,679 --> 00:11:17,959
Speaker 1: There may be a bunch of incompetent pH d s,

164
00:11:18,040 --> 00:11:21,959
Speaker 1: or they may have become politicized or weaponized in various ways.

165
00:11:21,960 --> 00:11:25,040
Speaker 1: But if you look at the Medical Board, UM, less

166
00:11:25,040 --> 00:11:28,280
Speaker 1: than half of the members of the Medical Board are physicians.

167
00:11:29,800 --> 00:11:35,319
Speaker 1: Most of the non physicians are lawyers. The the chair

168
00:11:35,360 --> 00:11:40,400
Speaker 1: of the Medical Board is a professional life coach, um,

169
00:11:40,440 --> 00:11:44,880
Speaker 1: you know, not someone that is competent at judging the

170
00:11:44,960 --> 00:11:50,160
Speaker 1: current state of science on any given medical question. And

171
00:11:51,280 --> 00:11:53,920
Speaker 1: the members of the Medical Board are directly appointed by

172
00:11:53,960 --> 00:11:58,400
Speaker 1: the governor. So this is a This is an entity

173
00:11:58,440 --> 00:12:02,320
Speaker 1: that can very easily and I would argue, has become

174
00:12:02,960 --> 00:12:09,360
Speaker 1: weaponized and politicized. UM and tasked with doing things that

175
00:12:09,440 --> 00:12:13,679
Speaker 1: the Medical Board was never set up to do. The

176
00:12:13,679 --> 00:12:18,600
Speaker 1: Medical Board was set up to, you know, basically get

177
00:12:18,679 --> 00:12:24,160
Speaker 1: rid of physician cracks and quacks and cranks who are

178
00:12:24,520 --> 00:12:31,480
Speaker 1: clearly doing engaged in unethical, fraudulent, harmful behavior, you know,

179
00:12:31,520 --> 00:12:35,400
Speaker 1: abusing the doctor patient relationship in various ways, or defrauding

180
00:12:35,400 --> 00:12:39,360
Speaker 1: the insurance companies this sort of thing. Um, you know,

181
00:12:39,960 --> 00:12:43,760
Speaker 1: what to do about those doctors who received multiple complaints

182
00:12:43,800 --> 00:12:50,440
Speaker 1: from from patients about clearly substandard care, clearly unethical or

183
00:12:50,559 --> 00:12:54,120
Speaker 1: illegal practices. That's that's what the Medical Board was set

184
00:12:54,200 --> 00:12:57,800
Speaker 1: up for. The Medical Board is should never be empowered

185
00:12:57,840 --> 00:13:04,960
Speaker 1: to a judy adjudicate complicated scientific questions. Um, they don't

186
00:13:04,960 --> 00:13:08,480
Speaker 1: possess the competence to do that. And they will be

187
00:13:08,679 --> 00:13:12,440
Speaker 1: operating under pressure from the state, which sets them up

188
00:13:12,480 --> 00:13:15,960
Speaker 1: and empowers them to do the state's bidding and to

189
00:13:16,080 --> 00:13:20,480
Speaker 1: become the long arm of a kind of state censorship regime.

190
00:13:20,520 --> 00:13:26,320
Speaker 1: And that's a that's very very dangerous for UH, an

191
00:13:26,360 --> 00:13:31,080
Speaker 1: agency that had, you know, had really modest task of

192
00:13:32,120 --> 00:13:36,400
Speaker 1: you know, monitoring the most egregious violations that you know,

193
00:13:36,760 --> 00:13:39,960
Speaker 1: a few bad apples within the profession which are always

194
00:13:39,960 --> 00:13:42,679
Speaker 1: going to have you know, are are engaged in and

195
00:13:43,559 --> 00:13:47,080
Speaker 1: you know now they're being asked to take sides in

196
00:13:47,440 --> 00:13:53,640
Speaker 1: complicated debates about you know, a novel virus, and you know,

197
00:13:53,760 --> 00:13:57,520
Speaker 1: the the idea that they would they would do any

198
00:13:57,640 --> 00:14:02,840
Speaker 1: better than our public health agencies have done. Um is

199
00:14:04,080 --> 00:14:08,640
Speaker 1: you know it's very far fetched. You obviously you've eloquently

200
00:14:08,720 --> 00:14:11,720
Speaker 1: laid out the justification against this law. I wholeheartedly agree

201
00:14:11,760 --> 00:14:15,480
Speaker 1: with you. Quick commercial break more with Dr Aaron Karyat

202
00:14:19,040 --> 00:14:21,880
Speaker 1: why did you decide that, you know what, I'm stepping up,

203
00:14:21,920 --> 00:14:23,800
Speaker 1: I'm going to be a part of this lawsuit. I've

204
00:14:23,800 --> 00:14:27,280
Speaker 1: got to do more here. Number One, I thought that

205
00:14:27,360 --> 00:14:30,680
Speaker 1: I could be among the physicians that was targeted by

206
00:14:30,720 --> 00:14:33,600
Speaker 1: such a law. So if I wanted to continue to

207
00:14:33,720 --> 00:14:37,480
Speaker 1: live and practice medicine in California, I ought to do

208
00:14:37,600 --> 00:14:43,640
Speaker 1: something about this uma. From from early on in the pandemic,

209
00:14:43,840 --> 00:14:48,440
Speaker 1: I was one of the doctors that would publicly challenge

210
00:14:49,400 --> 00:14:55,720
Speaker 1: the current scientific consensus, and very often I was. I

211
00:14:55,800 --> 00:14:59,840
Speaker 1: was smeared or punished simply for being six months nine

212
00:15:00,640 --> 00:15:03,480
Speaker 1: ahead of the curve and for seeing what was coming

213
00:15:03,480 --> 00:15:08,080
Speaker 1: down the pike before it was widely acknowledged by the public.

214
00:15:08,120 --> 00:15:14,120
Speaker 1: Health agencies or by the profession as a whole. And so,

215
00:15:14,520 --> 00:15:17,920
Speaker 1: you know, I could imagine that once a lot like

216
00:15:18,000 --> 00:15:23,560
Speaker 1: this was in place, that you know, it may they

217
00:15:23,560 --> 00:15:27,600
Speaker 1: have a chilling effect on my own ability to continue

218
00:15:27,600 --> 00:15:33,120
Speaker 1: to comment on public health policy related to COVID. So

219
00:15:33,440 --> 00:15:36,840
Speaker 1: my own personal story. I was at the University of California,

220
00:15:36,840 --> 00:15:41,160
Speaker 1: Irvine for fifteen years, where I was a full professor

221
00:15:41,160 --> 00:15:44,120
Speaker 1: in the School of Medicine and directed the medical ethics

222
00:15:44,200 --> 00:15:51,800
Speaker 1: program there. And when the university institute of their vaccine mandate,

223
00:15:52,920 --> 00:15:55,400
Speaker 1: I had already published a piece in the Wall Street

224
00:15:55,440 --> 00:15:58,760
Speaker 1: Journal arguing that the university of a university of actually

225
00:15:58,760 --> 00:16:02,760
Speaker 1: mandates were unethical. They violated the principle of informed consent,

226
00:16:03,760 --> 00:16:08,800
Speaker 1: enshrined first into Nuremberg Code and then throughout twentieth century

227
00:16:09,560 --> 00:16:14,240
Speaker 1: medical ethics and federal law. And so I challenged the

228
00:16:14,360 --> 00:16:17,640
Speaker 1: vaccine mandate in federal court, and the university fired me

229
00:16:17,680 --> 00:16:21,000
Speaker 1: as a consequence of that. About a year after I

230
00:16:21,040 --> 00:16:25,800
Speaker 1: was fired, the CDC finally came around and publicly acknowledged

231
00:16:25,840 --> 00:16:28,040
Speaker 1: the central argument that I was making in that case,

232
00:16:28,120 --> 00:16:32,520
Speaker 1: which was that, uh, you know, we shouldn't be discriminated

233
00:16:33,160 --> 00:16:37,640
Speaker 1: between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. CDC gave two reasons,

234
00:16:37,720 --> 00:16:42,680
Speaker 1: which were first articulated in my lawsuit a year prior.

235
00:16:43,240 --> 00:16:47,800
Speaker 1: Number one, natural immunity after infection, which I had, was

236
00:16:48,280 --> 00:16:52,800
Speaker 1: at least as robust, indeed more robust than the vaccine

237
00:16:52,840 --> 00:16:58,880
Speaker 1: induced community. And number two, um, the vaccines did not

238
00:16:59,040 --> 00:17:04,960
Speaker 1: stop in fact and and transmission um. And both of

239
00:17:04,960 --> 00:17:08,600
Speaker 1: these facts were known if you were paying close attention

240
00:17:08,640 --> 00:17:16,320
Speaker 1: to the research literature. We're known when I was trying

241
00:17:16,320 --> 00:17:18,919
Speaker 1: to make this case publicly end in the federal courts,

242
00:17:19,640 --> 00:17:23,240
Speaker 1: But it took the CDC a year to publicly acknowledge them.

243
00:17:23,400 --> 00:17:28,920
Speaker 1: Didn't happen until So, I mean, that's just one example

244
00:17:28,960 --> 00:17:33,480
Speaker 1: I could I could name others, other examples where I

245
00:17:33,760 --> 00:17:38,359
Speaker 1: and other quote unquote dissident physicians who are challenging the

246
00:17:40,160 --> 00:17:44,480
Speaker 1: COVID narrative that was being pushed were censored or silenced,

247
00:17:45,640 --> 00:17:51,960
Speaker 1: were punished simply for articulating things that that you know,

248
00:17:52,000 --> 00:17:57,040
Speaker 1: a year later, six months later, we're widely acknowledged by

249
00:17:57,080 --> 00:18:01,000
Speaker 1: everyone to be true. So that that's just that's isn't

250
00:18:01,359 --> 00:18:04,159
Speaker 1: you know? My own personal story which you could be

251
00:18:04,480 --> 00:18:09,080
Speaker 1: repeated many many times over by other doctors and nurses

252
00:18:09,160 --> 00:18:16,000
Speaker 1: and citizens. Just paying close attention is a good illustration

253
00:18:16,000 --> 00:18:18,160
Speaker 1: of precisely what we talked about a few minutes ago

254
00:18:18,440 --> 00:18:23,439
Speaker 1: with how science proceeds. You you challenge science advance is

255
00:18:23,480 --> 00:18:27,399
Speaker 1: precisely when it when a consensus, when what everyone thinks

256
00:18:27,440 --> 00:18:32,159
Speaker 1: they know is challenged, and then uh, you know, subjected

257
00:18:32,160 --> 00:18:38,119
Speaker 1: to critical scrutiny and um and subjected to further investigation

258
00:18:38,280 --> 00:18:42,680
Speaker 1: and the gathering of evidence and so forth. UM. And

259
00:18:42,720 --> 00:18:49,200
Speaker 1: so you know, the law like this is in my view,

260
00:18:49,240 --> 00:18:53,760
Speaker 1: essentially a power grab, right because it's if there if

261
00:18:53,760 --> 00:18:57,479
Speaker 1: there are public health officials or if there are medical

262
00:18:57,520 --> 00:19:04,600
Speaker 1: institutions who simply don't like the or supposed authority questioned, um,

263
00:19:04,680 --> 00:19:07,080
Speaker 1: and that if they declare something to be the case,

264
00:19:07,440 --> 00:19:10,840
Speaker 1: and you know, mandate that everyone fall in line, that

265
00:19:11,040 --> 00:19:15,439
Speaker 1: people should just shut up and listen. Um. Well, you

266
00:19:15,480 --> 00:19:19,840
Speaker 1: know these are people that um, that may realize, look,

267
00:19:19,920 --> 00:19:23,440
Speaker 1: my my arguments may not succeed on their own merits.

268
00:19:23,480 --> 00:19:27,440
Speaker 1: They may not succeed if they're subjected to scientific scrutiny.

269
00:19:27,480 --> 00:19:30,080
Speaker 1: And you know, for a real doctor, real scientist, that's okay,

270
00:19:30,119 --> 00:19:33,199
Speaker 1: you welcome that. You know, I'm open to revising my

271
00:19:33,240 --> 00:19:36,360
Speaker 1: opinion in the face of new evidence. There's nothing wrong

272
00:19:36,400 --> 00:19:39,040
Speaker 1: with that. In fact, that's a good thing. But for

273
00:19:39,080 --> 00:19:41,800
Speaker 1: people who will who will never publicly admit that they

274
00:19:41,800 --> 00:19:48,119
Speaker 1: may have been wrong. Uh, the censorship option, or to

275
00:19:48,160 --> 00:19:52,280
Speaker 1: punish my adversaries option seems like a you know, a

276
00:19:52,359 --> 00:19:55,919
Speaker 1: good way, maybe a shortcut, to maintain their power and

277
00:19:56,000 --> 00:20:00,960
Speaker 1: maintain their stance of a kind of authority that can't

278
00:20:01,000 --> 00:20:05,040
Speaker 1: be questioned. And this, you know, this is this is uh,

279
00:20:05,680 --> 00:20:08,439
Speaker 1: you know, this starts to smell of a of a

280
00:20:08,560 --> 00:20:13,560
Speaker 1: kind of Orwellian sort of totalitarian flavor to it. I

281
00:20:13,600 --> 00:20:15,480
Speaker 1: faced this and in the media a little bit because

282
00:20:15,520 --> 00:20:18,159
Speaker 1: I was very outspoken about not getting the vaccine. But

283
00:20:18,440 --> 00:20:22,360
Speaker 1: I can't imagine someone like you, who you know, as

284
00:20:22,400 --> 00:20:26,159
Speaker 1: you you talked about you were at the University of California,

285
00:20:26,200 --> 00:20:29,480
Speaker 1: Irvine for for fifteen years. My understanding is that the

286
00:20:29,520 --> 00:20:31,919
Speaker 1: school Medicine deans had asked you at one point to

287
00:20:32,040 --> 00:20:36,800
Speaker 1: give the white coat ceremony keynote addressed incoming medical students.

288
00:20:37,240 --> 00:20:39,280
Speaker 1: They told you that you're the best lecture in the

289
00:20:39,280 --> 00:20:41,720
Speaker 1: medical school. You're leaned on heavily for a variety of

290
00:20:41,800 --> 00:20:46,239
Speaker 1: leadership roles at the school. So how crazy, because I

291
00:20:46,240 --> 00:20:48,920
Speaker 1: can't imagine experiencing what I did in the media, which

292
00:20:48,960 --> 00:20:50,840
Speaker 1: isn't even close to to what you went through. And

293
00:20:50,840 --> 00:20:54,320
Speaker 1: then also being a medical professional that you are, how

294
00:20:54,400 --> 00:20:58,439
Speaker 1: wild has this been to see probably people that you know,

295
00:20:58,480 --> 00:21:01,840
Speaker 1: you previously respected, you, you thought were critical thinkers, to

296
00:21:02,000 --> 00:21:07,400
Speaker 1: just turn into you know, like these programmed bots almost yeah,

297
00:21:07,520 --> 00:21:14,480
Speaker 1: programmed bots and informants, uh, you know, on their colleagues.

298
00:21:15,000 --> 00:21:22,119
Speaker 1: It was surreal. It was demoralizing. Medicine at its best

299
00:21:22,200 --> 00:21:27,800
Speaker 1: has a tradition of self scrutiny and internal criticism can

300
00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:31,680
Speaker 1: try to make ourselves better. There's a there's a tradition

301
00:21:31,680 --> 00:21:35,080
Speaker 1: in academic medicine. We call it the eminem conference Morbidity

302
00:21:35,080 --> 00:21:37,879
Speaker 1: and Mortality conference. It's, you know, I take a case

303
00:21:38,040 --> 00:21:40,760
Speaker 1: that I've treated where maybe the outcome wasn't as good

304
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:42,320
Speaker 1: as I would have hoped for, maybe there was a

305
00:21:42,320 --> 00:21:44,480
Speaker 1: bad outcome in the case the patient diet or something

306
00:21:44,520 --> 00:21:48,520
Speaker 1: like that, and I present the case in detail to

307
00:21:48,800 --> 00:21:51,439
Speaker 1: my colleagues. You know, I stand up in front of

308
00:21:51,480 --> 00:21:55,520
Speaker 1: the other doctors in my department and they then are

309
00:21:55,600 --> 00:21:58,959
Speaker 1: permitted to play Monday morning quarterback and second, guess, you know,

310
00:21:59,000 --> 00:22:00,960
Speaker 1: everything I did well, Maybe the case would have gone

311
00:22:00,960 --> 00:22:02,520
Speaker 1: better if you did this or maybe you could have

312
00:22:02,560 --> 00:22:05,119
Speaker 1: spotted that earlier, Maybe you should have run this test.

313
00:22:05,600 --> 00:22:08,959
Speaker 1: It's hard to subject yourself to that kind of critical scrutiny,

314
00:22:09,200 --> 00:22:12,119
Speaker 1: especially you know, from people who have the benefit of hindsight,

315
00:22:12,240 --> 00:22:17,359
Speaker 1: which is usually but doctors do that. We do that willingly, because,

316
00:22:17,680 --> 00:22:21,919
Speaker 1: you know, because we had a huge responsibility, because we

317
00:22:21,960 --> 00:22:24,480
Speaker 1: want to get better, and ultimately, you know, for the

318
00:22:24,480 --> 00:22:26,720
Speaker 1: sake of our patients, so that you know, if we've

319
00:22:26,760 --> 00:22:30,200
Speaker 1: made mistakes or done things that are suboptimal, we can

320
00:22:30,440 --> 00:22:33,280
Speaker 1: we can try to avoid that in the future. All

321
00:22:33,320 --> 00:22:36,800
Speaker 1: of that seemed to come to a grinding hall when

322
00:22:36,840 --> 00:22:40,720
Speaker 1: it came to COVID. There was none of that um

323
00:22:40,800 --> 00:22:43,280
Speaker 1: There was none of that self scrutiny and sort of

324
00:22:44,280 --> 00:22:48,760
Speaker 1: internal critique. There was none of the back and forth

325
00:22:49,880 --> 00:22:53,639
Speaker 1: parsing out of data and arguing about data that that

326
00:22:53,800 --> 00:22:57,720
Speaker 1: again is a central feature of academic medicine at its best.

327
00:22:57,800 --> 00:23:01,119
Speaker 1: Another monthly conference we have his journal club. You just

328
00:23:01,160 --> 00:23:02,879
Speaker 1: take one article and you've parted it out, and you

329
00:23:02,920 --> 00:23:05,159
Speaker 1: talk about the strengths and weaknesses and the methods, and

330
00:23:05,600 --> 00:23:08,439
Speaker 1: you know, just just one study can be subjected to

331
00:23:08,600 --> 00:23:13,840
Speaker 1: a lot of debate because science is complicated. But suddenly

332
00:23:13,920 --> 00:23:18,879
Speaker 1: COVID comes out, and there are these sort of anointed

333
00:23:19,040 --> 00:23:23,920
Speaker 1: public health talking heads on TV that we are supposed

334
00:23:23,920 --> 00:23:29,159
Speaker 1: to take as infallible. And never mind that Anthony Fauci,

335
00:23:29,520 --> 00:23:33,320
Speaker 1: for example, is probably not treated a patient since he

336
00:23:33,359 --> 00:23:36,760
Speaker 1: was in residency many many decades ago. He has not

337
00:23:36,960 --> 00:23:42,960
Speaker 1: run an experiment at the bench for many decades. Um.

338
00:23:43,000 --> 00:23:46,560
Speaker 1: You know, he's an administrator, he's a bureaucrat. But if

339
00:23:46,560 --> 00:23:51,320
Speaker 1: you were to challenge his public health recommendations, who were

340
00:23:51,320 --> 00:23:57,439
Speaker 1: immediately accused of killing Grandma or being selfish or you know,

341
00:23:57,520 --> 00:24:01,400
Speaker 1: putting the economy ahead of saving the times or whatever.

342
00:24:02,440 --> 00:24:07,320
Speaker 1: So in a climate of fear, we were suddenly subjected

343
00:24:07,440 --> 00:24:13,840
Speaker 1: to a situation in which everyone was afraid to say

344
00:24:13,840 --> 00:24:19,320
Speaker 1: what they actually thought. Um. Everyone was afraid even internally

345
00:24:19,960 --> 00:24:27,040
Speaker 1: to ask critical questions. UM. And it was it was

346
00:24:27,119 --> 00:24:32,520
Speaker 1: shocking to me to see how quickly medicine fell in

347
00:24:32,640 --> 00:24:39,440
Speaker 1: line with that UM, and how even when some doctors

348
00:24:39,480 --> 00:24:44,880
Speaker 1: started asking questions and started to once again I think

349
00:24:44,960 --> 00:24:48,600
Speaker 1: more critically, many of them did not feel empowered to

350
00:24:48,600 --> 00:24:51,199
Speaker 1: speak out publicly out of fear of losing their jobs.

351
00:24:51,240 --> 00:24:55,400
Speaker 1: So I had many doctors reaching out to me privately saying, hey,

352
00:24:55,480 --> 00:24:57,919
Speaker 1: love what you're doing. Thanks for speaking out. You know,

353
00:24:58,320 --> 00:25:01,640
Speaker 1: sorry you got sacked by the unit versity. But keep

354
00:25:01,640 --> 00:25:05,320
Speaker 1: doing what you're doing, you know, cheerleading. Um. Because I

355
00:25:05,359 --> 00:25:08,360
Speaker 1: feel like I can't I feel like I can't speak out,

356
00:25:08,440 --> 00:25:10,640
Speaker 1: or I can't ask questions, or all suffer the same

357
00:25:10,640 --> 00:25:13,640
Speaker 1: thing that you suffer. Then you know, I understand that.

358
00:25:14,720 --> 00:25:20,280
Speaker 1: I understand that it's kind of self protective um um

359
00:25:20,400 --> 00:25:24,280
Speaker 1: uh strategy to try to maintain your career or your job.

360
00:25:25,080 --> 00:25:28,280
Speaker 1: Those consequences are very real, and you know, doctors have

361
00:25:28,400 --> 00:25:32,280
Speaker 1: responsibilities to their family and so forth. But nevertheless, you know,

362
00:25:32,320 --> 00:25:35,359
Speaker 1: at a certain point, uh, you know, I think any

363
00:25:35,400 --> 00:25:38,600
Speaker 1: professional has to draw a line in the sand and say,

364
00:25:38,800 --> 00:25:40,960
Speaker 1: you know, as a position, if I'm if I'm doing

365
00:25:41,000 --> 00:25:43,760
Speaker 1: things that I think are harmful to patients, then you know,

366
00:25:44,000 --> 00:25:46,160
Speaker 1: then I have to speak up, even if it's going

367
00:25:46,200 --> 00:25:49,040
Speaker 1: to cost me as a journalist, if if I feel

368
00:25:49,040 --> 00:25:54,639
Speaker 1: like I'm just parenting lives that I'm being told to repeat. Um,

369
00:25:54,680 --> 00:25:56,760
Speaker 1: you know, for the state of my own integrity, even

370
00:25:56,800 --> 00:25:59,840
Speaker 1: if I may lose my position at the at the media,

371
00:26:00,640 --> 00:26:02,439
Speaker 1: I have to speak out. I have to do something.

372
00:26:02,640 --> 00:26:06,480
Speaker 1: I think all professionals should ask themselves. You know, where

373
00:26:06,560 --> 00:26:09,879
Speaker 1: is my line? If you don't have one, you should

374
00:26:09,960 --> 00:26:14,000
Speaker 1: probably ask yourself, you know, why you're doing what you're doing,

375
00:26:14,119 --> 00:26:17,080
Speaker 1: and you know what, uh, what is it all about

376
00:26:17,119 --> 00:26:23,880
Speaker 1: for you? Professionally? Quick commercial breaks? Stay with us? Having

377
00:26:23,920 --> 00:26:26,000
Speaker 1: these conversations with my parents and they're like, well, you

378
00:26:26,040 --> 00:26:27,879
Speaker 1: could get fired, you know, have you thought about that?

379
00:26:27,920 --> 00:26:30,080
Speaker 1: And I'm like, I just you know, I gotta do

380
00:26:30,160 --> 00:26:32,280
Speaker 1: it and just see, you know, like pray to God.

381
00:26:32,320 --> 00:26:34,800
Speaker 1: I don't. But you know, it's it's this is wrong,

382
00:26:34,840 --> 00:26:37,800
Speaker 1: And what's the point of me in this role doing

383
00:26:37,840 --> 00:26:40,119
Speaker 1: this job. If I don't speak out and I don't

384
00:26:40,520 --> 00:26:43,280
Speaker 1: have conviction, you know, and I'm not rooted anything, then

385
00:26:43,320 --> 00:26:45,880
Speaker 1: why why am I? I don't deserve this job? Then,

386
00:26:46,119 --> 00:26:48,399
Speaker 1: you know, to your to your point, uh, you know,

387
00:26:48,760 --> 00:26:54,040
Speaker 1: a California judge issued a preliminary injunction against this law.

388
00:26:55,119 --> 00:26:57,879
Speaker 1: Where do you think this case is heading? You know,

389
00:26:57,920 --> 00:27:00,960
Speaker 1: what's the timeline? What should people look for as this

390
00:27:01,240 --> 00:27:05,040
Speaker 1: moves forward? So the preliminary injunction is essentially the court

391
00:27:05,280 --> 00:27:09,480
Speaker 1: saying that we are going to halt the implementation and

392
00:27:09,560 --> 00:27:13,040
Speaker 1: application of the law while the case is being heard.

393
00:27:13,200 --> 00:27:17,080
Speaker 1: So the law went into effect January one, Unfortunately, we

394
00:27:17,080 --> 00:27:20,960
Speaker 1: couldn't get our hearing scheduled before January one, but we

395
00:27:21,080 --> 00:27:23,800
Speaker 1: managed a couple of weeks into January to get that

396
00:27:24,400 --> 00:27:27,119
Speaker 1: hearing for the preliminary injunction and the court granted it.

397
00:27:27,200 --> 00:27:29,960
Speaker 1: So the law went into effect for a few weeks. Um.

398
00:27:29,960 --> 00:27:33,880
Speaker 1: It was never applied to my knowledge, to any specific cases. Uh.

399
00:27:33,920 --> 00:27:37,600
Speaker 1: And now the law is is on hold until the

400
00:27:37,600 --> 00:27:40,720
Speaker 1: court makes a final ruling. That's a very very good

401
00:27:40,800 --> 00:27:44,200
Speaker 1: first step for a couple of reasons. Number one, there

402
00:27:44,240 --> 00:27:48,360
Speaker 1: were other physicians in California that high lawsuits to challenge

403
00:27:48,400 --> 00:27:51,560
Speaker 1: this lawn federal court on constitutional grounds similar to what

404
00:27:51,600 --> 00:27:56,160
Speaker 1: we did, and the court found that those physicians did

405
00:27:56,160 --> 00:28:01,160
Speaker 1: not have legal standing to challenge the law or is technicalities.

406
00:28:01,240 --> 00:28:06,359
Speaker 1: And you know, uh, reasons why the court did that. Um,

407
00:28:06,960 --> 00:28:09,399
Speaker 1: I don't think those reasons were justified, but we certainly

408
00:28:09,400 --> 00:28:12,600
Speaker 1: were worried that this judge might do the same thing.

409
00:28:12,880 --> 00:28:16,000
Speaker 1: So we got past that hurdle. The judge in the

410
00:28:16,320 --> 00:28:20,920
Speaker 1: preliminary injunction ruling found that all five of us physician

411
00:28:21,000 --> 00:28:24,840
Speaker 1: plaintiffs did have standing to challenge the law, even if

412
00:28:25,400 --> 00:28:29,080
Speaker 1: in our clinical practice we were not necessarily treating patients

413
00:28:29,160 --> 00:28:34,720
Speaker 1: with COVID directly, we were engaged in other conversations related

414
00:28:34,760 --> 00:28:39,200
Speaker 1: to COVID in my own case as a psychiatrist, for example, UM,

415
00:28:39,360 --> 00:28:42,000
Speaker 1: I sometimes have to deal with the issue of masks

416
00:28:42,640 --> 00:28:47,640
Speaker 1: with people that have anxiety disorders. Masks can actually increase

417
00:28:47,720 --> 00:28:52,080
Speaker 1: their anxiety. UM. If someone is subjected to panic attacks,

418
00:28:52,600 --> 00:28:56,480
Speaker 1: did the rebreathing of the air with a mask can

419
00:28:56,560 --> 00:29:01,080
Speaker 1: sometimes trigger panic symptoms. So, even though I'm not an

420
00:29:01,080 --> 00:29:05,240
Speaker 1: infectious disease specialist, I am sometimes giving advice on COVID

421
00:29:05,280 --> 00:29:08,960
Speaker 1: related matters. And the court recognized that, so that was good.

422
00:29:09,000 --> 00:29:12,520
Speaker 1: That's a big hurdle. The second really important aspect of

423
00:29:12,560 --> 00:29:15,960
Speaker 1: this preliminary injunction is that for a court to grant this,

424
00:29:16,960 --> 00:29:20,880
Speaker 1: it's essentially the judge saying that, even before you go

425
00:29:20,960 --> 00:29:26,840
Speaker 1: to trial, the plaintiffs likelihood of prevailing, in other words,

426
00:29:26,880 --> 00:29:29,800
Speaker 1: that the likelihood that the court is going to declare

427
00:29:29,840 --> 00:29:34,600
Speaker 1: this law unconstitutional and strike it down is very plausible,

428
00:29:34,720 --> 00:29:39,240
Speaker 1: just on the basis of the written documentation that we've submitted,

429
00:29:39,280 --> 00:29:42,280
Speaker 1: in the written arguments that we've made in our complaint,

430
00:29:42,360 --> 00:29:46,680
Speaker 1: in our declaration so far, so not to get too

431
00:29:46,680 --> 00:29:51,120
Speaker 1: far ahead of ourselves, Lisa, UM, we still need to

432
00:29:51,160 --> 00:29:54,400
Speaker 1: win the case. But this is an indication from the

433
00:29:54,440 --> 00:29:57,560
Speaker 1: court that the judge thinks we have a good chance

434
00:29:58,120 --> 00:30:00,560
Speaker 1: of winning the case. So the next step is that

435
00:30:00,600 --> 00:30:03,680
Speaker 1: we go we go to trial, and you know, we

436
00:30:03,760 --> 00:30:07,720
Speaker 1: have the back and forth of the fact finding in

437
00:30:07,760 --> 00:30:13,400
Speaker 1: the legal arguments and the testimony given by the plaintiffs

438
00:30:13,440 --> 00:30:17,520
Speaker 1: if the court asked for that or requires that, and

439
00:30:17,560 --> 00:30:20,280
Speaker 1: then the judge is going to have to make a ruling.

440
00:30:20,960 --> 00:30:23,960
Speaker 1: We don't have the date yet set for that trial

441
00:30:24,080 --> 00:30:27,440
Speaker 1: to my knowledge, unless that happened today and I just

442
00:30:27,480 --> 00:30:33,280
Speaker 1: haven't been notified. But the judge acted fairly swiftly in

443
00:30:33,320 --> 00:30:36,840
Speaker 1: our case to issue the preliminary injunction, and I think

444
00:30:36,880 --> 00:30:39,320
Speaker 1: the court will move pretty quickly to the next phase.

445
00:30:39,400 --> 00:30:42,840
Speaker 1: So hopefully, hopefully we'll be able to get a ruling

446
00:30:42,920 --> 00:30:45,120
Speaker 1: sometime in the next month or two. But at least

447
00:30:45,120 --> 00:30:47,160
Speaker 1: in the meantime, we're not going to be subjected to

448
00:30:47,200 --> 00:30:52,400
Speaker 1: this bad law in California. I anticipate that will prevail,

449
00:30:53,240 --> 00:30:57,120
Speaker 1: but um, you know, I'm also aware that I don't

450
00:30:57,120 --> 00:31:02,440
Speaker 1: have the crystal ball. The two the two constitutional issues

451
00:31:02,520 --> 00:31:06,360
Speaker 1: at stake in our case. Number one, free speech of

452
00:31:06,480 --> 00:31:09,400
Speaker 1: physicians is the first Amendment right, but the other one,

453
00:31:09,480 --> 00:31:12,640
Speaker 1: and actually the one that the court paid more attention

454
00:31:12,720 --> 00:31:17,560
Speaker 1: to in its recent ruling, was we're arguing that our

455
00:31:18,280 --> 00:31:21,400
Speaker 1: rights are being violated under the equal protection clause of

456
00:31:21,400 --> 00:31:25,600
Speaker 1: the fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. One of the one

457
00:31:25,640 --> 00:31:31,040
Speaker 1: of the things that that that aspect of the Constitution

458
00:31:31,080 --> 00:31:34,800
Speaker 1: requires is that the law itself, any law that's passed,

459
00:31:34,840 --> 00:31:39,360
Speaker 1: be sufficiently clear in its wording, in its definitions, that

460
00:31:39,480 --> 00:31:42,080
Speaker 1: a citizen can know whether or not they're violating the

461
00:31:42,200 --> 00:31:47,920
Speaker 1: law right Otherwise you're you're subducted to an arbitrary law

462
00:31:48,000 --> 00:31:50,320
Speaker 1: of taking over your head and you're not sure you

463
00:31:50,360 --> 00:31:52,920
Speaker 1: know just what I'm doing right now constitute stealing or

464
00:31:52,960 --> 00:31:56,760
Speaker 1: fraud or whatever. Well, in this case, the judge said

465
00:31:57,080 --> 00:32:02,240
Speaker 1: that the wording of the law first of all grammatically unintelligible,

466
00:32:02,680 --> 00:32:08,000
Speaker 1: and second of all, the current scientific consensus was was

467
00:32:08,080 --> 00:32:12,240
Speaker 1: too vaguely defined in the law. Precisely, are concerned that

468
00:32:12,320 --> 00:32:14,479
Speaker 1: the law was going to have a chilling effect because

469
00:32:14,800 --> 00:32:18,560
Speaker 1: doctors didn't know if you know, a piece of advice

470
00:32:18,600 --> 00:32:21,360
Speaker 1: that they wanted to give would or would not get

471
00:32:21,400 --> 00:32:24,680
Speaker 1: them into trouble with the medical board. So we may

472
00:32:24,800 --> 00:32:31,120
Speaker 1: we may prevail on that issue alone. Aside from the

473
00:32:31,160 --> 00:32:35,960
Speaker 1: fact that this law also violates First Amendment free speech rights. Well,

474
00:32:36,080 --> 00:32:39,280
Speaker 1: Dr Aaron Katty, before we go, where can people help out?

475
00:32:39,400 --> 00:32:41,560
Speaker 1: Is our way for people to help out. So our

476
00:32:41,640 --> 00:32:45,280
Speaker 1: case is being supported by the New Civil Liberties Alliance.

477
00:32:45,840 --> 00:32:51,160
Speaker 1: Our lawyer there, Jennie Units, has been really excellent. So

478
00:32:51,280 --> 00:32:54,480
Speaker 1: if you want to contribute to the case itself, you can.

479
00:32:55,160 --> 00:32:56,920
Speaker 1: You can give some money to the n c l A.

480
00:32:57,320 --> 00:33:00,680
Speaker 1: If you want to follow the case, I post regularly

481
00:33:00,800 --> 00:33:03,640
Speaker 1: on it and on some other legal cases that I'm

482
00:33:03,680 --> 00:33:07,840
Speaker 1: involved in on free speech issues on my Substack newsletter,

483
00:33:08,040 --> 00:33:12,120
Speaker 1: So Aaron karyat dot substack dot com. You can follow

484
00:33:12,160 --> 00:33:16,200
Speaker 1: me on Twitter, and I've written about these issues as

485
00:33:16,240 --> 00:33:19,600
Speaker 1: well in a recent book I published called The New Abnormal.

486
00:33:19,760 --> 00:33:22,920
Speaker 1: That is a great title for where we are today

487
00:33:23,160 --> 00:33:26,320
Speaker 1: for a book. Dr Aaron Karyati, You're a hero in

488
00:33:26,400 --> 00:33:28,440
Speaker 1: my book. We really I think we're going to look

489
00:33:28,440 --> 00:33:31,640
Speaker 1: back and see folks like you as heroes and standing

490
00:33:31,720 --> 00:33:34,360
Speaker 1: up against this because it's one thing for media types

491
00:33:34,480 --> 00:33:36,360
Speaker 1: or anything else, it's another for people like you have

492
00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:39,400
Speaker 1: earned your degrees and uh, you know, have a different

493
00:33:39,480 --> 00:33:43,200
Speaker 1: level of credibility on these issues. So I appreciate what

494
00:33:43,240 --> 00:33:46,320
Speaker 1: you're doing, praying that you guys are successful in California,

495
00:33:46,520 --> 00:33:49,160
Speaker 1: and just thank you, thank you, thank you for standing

496
00:33:49,200 --> 00:33:53,520
Speaker 1: strong and for allowing voices like mine to to have

497
00:33:53,600 --> 00:33:56,880
Speaker 1: a microphone and to speak uh, and to standing by

498
00:33:56,880 --> 00:34:00,440
Speaker 1: your own convictions in this regard as well. Very much

499
00:34:00,480 --> 00:34:09,880
Speaker 1: admire that. Thanksly so. That was Dr Aaron Karotti obviously

500
00:34:09,960 --> 00:34:13,319
Speaker 1: leading the charge on this lawsuit in California. Good for him.

501
00:34:13,400 --> 00:34:17,319
Speaker 1: Really interesting conversation, Such a smart guy. Obviously. I sat

502
00:34:17,360 --> 00:34:19,759
Speaker 1: there and all during most of the conversation, just really

503
00:34:19,840 --> 00:34:21,840
Speaker 1: kind of taking in what he had to say. I

504
00:34:21,880 --> 00:34:24,440
Speaker 1: appreciate you guys for listening to the show every Monday

505
00:34:24,440 --> 00:34:26,479
Speaker 1: and Thursday, but you can listen throughout the week. Please

506
00:34:26,560 --> 00:34:29,440
Speaker 1: leave us review, We leave us a rating on Apple Podcast.

507
00:34:29,600 --> 00:34:32,360
Speaker 1: What make my producer John Cassio for putting the show together.

508
00:34:32,680 --> 00:34:33,480
Speaker 1: Until next time,