Speaker 1: You're listening to The Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2: Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show, everybody. On this episode,
Speaker 2: we have doctor J. Batacharia with us. We're very excited
Speaker 2: to talk to him about well health policy as it
Speaker 2: relates to COVID and so much more. Batachari as a
Speaker 2: professor at Stanford University Medical School, teaching in the Department
Speaker 2: of Health Policy. He's a Research associate of the National
Speaker 2: Bureau of Economic Research, a founding fellow of the Academy
Speaker 2: of Science at Freedom at Hillsdale College, and co wrote
Speaker 2: the Great Barrington Declaration, a focused protection alternative through lockdowns.
Speaker 2: Doctor Botacharia honored to speak with you, sirs. As a
Speaker 2: very early, huge supporter, booster, adopter of the Great Barrington Declaration.
Speaker 2: I feel like I'm in the presence of Sanity Royalty.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your sanity Tuotebuck sheiate the support for it.
Speaker 3: Thank you for having me on.
Speaker 2: So just for everyone listening to this, if they, you know,
Speaker 2: subscribe to my show and they know what I'm gonna say,
Speaker 2: so you were right. So the Great brand Declaration was
Speaker 2: as correct more correct now, even if that's possible, than
Speaker 2: it was then because we played out the experiment on
Speaker 2: the other.
Speaker 1: Side of what what happened.
Speaker 2: Let me start with this because it's such a big
Speaker 2: topic and we don't you know, you've got people to
Speaker 2: save and young minds to mold and all that stuff.
Speaker 1: At Stanford.
Speaker 2: How is it that all the institutions of medicine seemed
Speaker 2: to get this entirely wrong and would not speak out
Speaker 2: at all in favor of some sanity on this.
Speaker 3: I mean, I think there was some element of policy
Speaker 3: hysteresis wish. I mean, like very early on the Chinese example,
Speaker 3: the January twenty twenty Chinese lockdown played an enormously important
Speaker 3: role in the minds of public health. The people, like
Speaker 3: the World Health Organization sent a delegation to China in
Speaker 3: February and it came back like they wrote this report saying, oh,
Speaker 3: what China did worked, and then everyone copied China, all
Speaker 3: the countries one by one, from Italy on. It was
Speaker 3: like Domino's falling with these lockdowns, And you know, how
Speaker 3: do you do something so dramatic, so devastating that already had.
Speaker 3: It's really hard if you're like at the top of
Speaker 3: some bureaucracy and some hierarchy, especially if you're a scientist,
Speaker 3: to admit that you've got it wrong. And so I
Speaker 3: think that that's that. Like by the time October twenty
Speaker 3: twenty rolled around, I mean, I saw very clearly the
Speaker 3: lockdowns had failed in October, in April, March, April twenty twenty,
Speaker 3: and that I'd already gotten already seen all of the
Speaker 3: devastating reports that were coming out of poor countries and
Speaker 3: even rich countries about what had happened to poor people
Speaker 3: during the lockdowns and so and I also saw that
Speaker 3: the lockdowns were coming back. And so what's happened? And
Speaker 3: I think since is it's a lot of people who
Speaker 3: should have known better, and maybe now they actually do
Speaker 3: know better, but they can't bring themselves to admit that
Speaker 3: they were wrong. Because they do, they sort of lose
Speaker 3: their status, lose their position, lose their power.
Speaker 2: Now, did you have docs coming to you, colleagues, people
Speaker 2: you know in the medical community who were saying to you, look,
Speaker 2: I know this is all crap like this the paper masks, really,
Speaker 2: the masks period aren't doing anything for anybody. The lockdowns
Speaker 2: were a disaster didn't stop the virus at all. And
Speaker 2: you know, the vaccines are nowhere near what they were
Speaker 2: promised to be. And I want to get your take
Speaker 2: on exactly how you'd grade the vaccines in a moment.
Speaker 2: But did you have people coming to you in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty one, twenty twenty two, I mean, I mean later
Speaker 2: on in the pandemic, or was the group think so
Speaker 2: strong that mds, even from Vario esteemed institutions like in
Speaker 2: Stanford University Medical School just couldn't see what was obvious.
Speaker 3: So in twenty twenty I'm pretty sure I was not
Speaker 3: a majority, My view was not the majority within Stanford,
Speaker 3: but it might have been a pretty prominent a much
Speaker 3: more prominent than people realized.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 3: So when we wrote the Great Brenton Declaration, almost immediately
Speaker 3: actually released it, tens of thousands of scientists signed on,
Speaker 3: very prominent scientists signed on, including a Nobel Prize winner
Speaker 3: here at Stanford. It was it was really clear that
Speaker 3: there was a pretty substantial portion of the scientific community
Speaker 3: that was very deeply unhappy with the lockdowns, that actually
Speaker 3: was not a consensus, the scientific consensus behind them, and
Speaker 3: that actually that there was a lot of people who
Speaker 3: thought what we were proposing, which is essentially lifting lockdowns
Speaker 3: and focused protection of vulnerable older people, was a better strategy.
Speaker 3: Was a strategy actually, just to be clear, that strategy
Speaker 3: we proposed the Great Brandon decoration. That's basically the old
Speaker 3: pandemic plan we followed for a century of respiratory virus pandemics.
Speaker 3: I was just cribbing off of people that are smarter
Speaker 3: than me for over the last entry. So it wasn't
Speaker 3: like we had a really truly novel thing. So it's
Speaker 3: not surprising that a lot of people, but the suppression
Speaker 3: was so the censorship, the smearing of people that that
Speaker 3: said no, was so severe that a lot of people
Speaker 3: kept themselves silent. A lot of very prominent people kept
Speaker 3: themselves silent after after we wrote the Great Parent Doc Christians,
Speaker 3: the people that signed it, some of them lost their jobs.
Speaker 3: A lot of them face like, you know, investigations and
Speaker 3: other things within their own universities for you know, for heresy,
Speaker 3: I guess. And it was it was so shocking because
Speaker 3: I thought the scientific community was more open to challenge.
Speaker 3: I mean, that's part of what science is. You say,
Speaker 3: you think you think a I think that I think
Speaker 3: B we run an experiment, it turns out you're right.
Speaker 3: Now we both think A right, but no, I'm not
Speaker 3: even allowed to say B. You're not allowed to say
Speaker 3: and therefore there's no challenge and we don't know what's right.
Speaker 3: A lot of that happened during the pandemic. People silence themselves.
Speaker 2: Has there been any I mean, here we are talking
Speaker 2: in halfway through twenty twenty three, and you know, someone
Speaker 2: just told me that in New York City where I
Speaker 2: left New York City because of the response to the pandemic.
Speaker 2: I mean, that was the number one reason I just said,
Speaker 2: I can't do this anymore at this place. The libs
Speaker 2: have gone completely insane, and I'm not going to pay
Speaker 2: taxes to support this system, et cetera. Right, but put
Speaker 2: that aside for a moment. A friend of mine who
Speaker 2: was there said that recently, all these they had these
Speaker 2: little COVID testing tents, as if remember there was that obsession.
Speaker 2: It's almost hard to go back and think of this
Speaker 2: as like a nightmare that you're trying to forget. There
Speaker 2: was this obsession with we just had testing everywhere, Like
Speaker 2: what is that? What is that even going to do?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 2: What was the point of having just mass testing, constant
Speaker 2: test test, test test tests all the time. Was just
Speaker 2: an anxiety disorder pretending to be a health policy. But
Speaker 2: you know now they've switched it, so now it's COVID
Speaker 2: and flu testing. Almost like we've created this bureaucracy that
Speaker 2: will now live on forever. Instead of everyone realizing what
Speaker 2: a disaster the policies were, the policies were, we're really bad.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's institutionalized hypochondria book, That's what it was, and
Speaker 3: it is. I mean, I think you know you you
Speaker 3: the testing is is valuable if you use it the
Speaker 3: right way. Right, So if let's take those at home
Speaker 3: managing tests, right, So what if we'd had them very
Speaker 3: early and we use them so that before you go
Speaker 3: visit a nursing home, you test you have to check sure.
Speaker 3: Right before, all we had was those PCR tests. That
Speaker 3: wasn't a technological thing. That was a decision that was
Speaker 3: made by public health that to not promote the andergen
Speaker 3: test early. That could have been you know, sort of
Speaker 3: promoted and like developed much earlier. And the reasoning was that, well,
Speaker 3: if you do a PCR test that has to happen
Speaker 3: in a lab, public health will know if you're positive,
Speaker 3: if you'd had the Amergen test early, people could have
Speaker 3: known for themselves without even directly reporting public health and
Speaker 3: use that information to protect older people, vulnerable people. Matchine,
Speaker 3: We've done that. Like the test, the key question is
Speaker 3: not whether we should test. The question is what do
Speaker 3: we where should we test? What we tell for, and
Speaker 3: what do you do with the information? Testing low risk
Speaker 3: people for for for the viral fragments in a where
Speaker 3: they have no symptoms at all, It is just destructive,
Speaker 3: it puts it results in a whole bunch of low
Speaker 3: people being quarantined for nothing. That's what happened during the pandemic.
Speaker 3: And then a lot of people just stop testing because
Speaker 3: they're like I don't want to I don't want to
Speaker 3: be stuck in quarantine for you end days just because
Speaker 3: I tested positive. So yeah, I think I think the
Speaker 3: testing it's just it's it's like you have a technology,
Speaker 3: but you don't know how to really use it. You
Speaker 3: have to like think, And we didn't do that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, there was there was no thinking. Tier to
Speaker 2: your point about the previous pandemic policies as well, it
Speaker 2: really feels like the people that were supposed to implement
Speaker 2: the policy, looked at the book of what decades of
Speaker 2: thought and research had come up with and said, now,
Speaker 2: let's scrap this. Let's let's just let's go with something
Speaker 2: else right away in the moment, you know, if you've
Speaker 2: been practicing a fire drill and a fire exit plan
Speaker 2: for years, the house catches on fire and you go, well,
Speaker 2: let's forget about the fire. Let's forget about those fire exits. Everybody,
Speaker 2: let you know, everyone think you're crazy. Seems to be
Speaker 2: kind of what they did.
Speaker 1: This for me. But it's an area, you know.
Speaker 2: I still get people docs you know, that say, oh,
Speaker 2: you know, we've moved past COVID. I said, how have
Speaker 2: you moved past COVID? There hasn't been any account any
Speaker 2: accountability for this. Have you seen any major institution. I'm
Speaker 2: here in Miami because I left New York and I
Speaker 2: went to the U Miami Health System just to get
Speaker 2: a yearly my check up, you know, And I don't
Speaker 2: go yearly, but I hadn't been.
Speaker 1: I like, I don't know five or six years. Don't
Speaker 1: tell anyone, doc.
Speaker 2: And so I'm going for a checkup, and they made
Speaker 2: me wear This is a couple months ago. They made
Speaker 2: me wear a mask walking in the lobby and then
Speaker 2: I go in the actual medical area and like, yeah,
Speaker 2: we don't really but I mean they shouted at me
Speaker 2: to put a mask on. I don't feel like there's
Speaker 2: an accountability. I think there's still pockets of lunacy. Do
Speaker 2: you think has anyone been chastened by this? You know,
Speaker 2: does anyone at the CDC feel horrified at what an
Speaker 2: abject failure they were during the US or not really now?
Speaker 3: The CDC, the NI, HD, FDA, they're all they all
Speaker 3: failed in very fundamental ways, and they're basically like they're
Speaker 3: giving themselves awards, like they're patting themselves on the back.
Speaker 3: There have been some attempts to try to like do
Speaker 3: some evaluations. So for instance, the House Select Committee on
Speaker 3: this Coronavirus task coronavirus pandemic has been meeting, but you know,
Speaker 3: like if you look, I testified that the Democrats have
Speaker 3: basically they think they've done everything right. The only problem
Speaker 3: was misinformation by the by the by the right, and
Speaker 3: so like you don't you're not getting like honest, like
Speaker 3: a real honest evaluation in that setting of what actually
Speaker 3: went wrong, scientific questions about what what went wrong in
Speaker 3: policy and in science. There's other places like in around
Speaker 3: the world. The UK has its is it's its parliamentary
Speaker 3: inquiry going on. There are some some some like like
Speaker 3: the Danish of the Norwegian authorities have concluded that they
Speaker 3: shouldn't have closed schools for the two weeks or whatever
Speaker 3: they closed it for the very short period of time
Speaker 3: they closed it. So you're starting to see some push pushback.
Speaker 3: But as it stands, Buck, I completely agree with you.
Speaker 3: We are in a position where if the pandemic, another
Speaker 3: pandemic comes, we will lock down again. We will absolutely
Speaker 3: lock down to it is now thus standard plan. And
Speaker 3: so that means that if you run a small business,
Speaker 3: prepare around that, because it's very likely that you're going
Speaker 3: to face a time where your demand is going to
Speaker 3: dry up because of that. If you have kids, make
Speaker 3: alternate arrangements, make sure that they have some capacity to
Speaker 3: learn even if another pandemic happens. You know, I think, uh,
Speaker 3: a huge amount of civilization depends on some sort of
Speaker 3: certainty that the kinds of guarantees that we have in
Speaker 3: our society. You know, I can send my kids to
Speaker 3: school and I kid the teachers are going to teach
Speaker 3: them I have to worry about it. Those those are
Speaker 3: out the window now thanks to this pandemic manage, this
Speaker 3: crazy pandemic management we faced and that which is now
Speaker 3: I think the standard plan.
Speaker 2: So I want to I want to ask you, Doc,
Speaker 2: hold hold your answer for a second, but I want
Speaker 2: to ever know. We're going to get into what your
Speaker 2: real report card for the mRNA vaccines against COVID. I
Speaker 2: want to be specific on it because I know people
Speaker 2: like to play all these games. No, no, no, no, I
Speaker 2: want your real report card for what we know now
Speaker 2: based on the data and what we've seen in reality,
Speaker 2: not in theory. In just a second, but for a
Speaker 2: moment here, I want to talk about the Tunnel the
Speaker 2: Towers Foundation two thousand, nine hundred and seventy seven People
Speaker 2: lost their lives on nine to eleven, two thousand and one,
Speaker 2: but that day is still taking lives. People are suffering
Speaker 2: and dying from nine to eleven related illnesses. Not to mention,
Speaker 2: there's also a whole generation out there that knows little
Speaker 2: to nothing about nine to eleven. Only two states in
Speaker 2: our nation mandate K to twelve learning about that day.
Speaker 2: That's why the Tunnel the Towers nine to eleven Institute
Speaker 2: is giving educators access to nonfiction nine to eleven resources
Speaker 2: for K through twelve that includes full curriculum units built
Speaker 2: around first person accounts. Tunnel to Towers Foundation has also
Speaker 2: created a Speaker's Bureau with access to nine to eleven
Speaker 2: first responders, survivors, and loved ones. They speak in schools
Speaker 2: and community centers as they're invited. Finally, they've got a
Speaker 2: mobile exhibit, a high tech eighty three foot tractor trailer
Speaker 2: that turns into an eleven hundred square foot interactive museum
Speaker 2: with nine to eleven artifacts. To never forget, we must
Speaker 2: educate future generations. Help Tunnel to Towers educate kids. Donate
Speaker 2: eleven dollars a month at T two t dot org.
Speaker 2: That's T the number two T dot org. All right,
Speaker 2: your grade for the mRNA vaccines, doctor Botocharia.
Speaker 3: See I give it a C.
Speaker 1: So tell us what worked, what didn't? What do we
Speaker 1: need to know?
Speaker 3: Yeah? So, I think the problem actually is again not
Speaker 3: just the technology, but rather how it's used. All right, So,
Speaker 3: in December of twenty twenty, the randomized trials what it found.
Speaker 3: What they found was that the vaccines stopped symptomatic infection.
Speaker 3: At ninety five percent for two months. That was the
Speaker 3: That was the result. We didn't know if it's if
Speaker 3: if the the protection waned after that time. We didn't
Speaker 3: know if it stopped transmission. If you get infected, can
Speaker 3: you still get infected, can you still pass the disease on?
Speaker 3: We didn't know if it stopped asymptomatic infection, And we
Speaker 3: didn't know for certain whether it protected you against severe
Speaker 3: disease and death, because the random zest trials didn't have
Speaker 3: that as a primary endpoint. In fact, the m RNA
Speaker 3: vaccines the trials had actually more deaths in the vaccine
Speaker 3: arm than the placebo arm, but it was like such
Speaker 3: small numbers that you couldn't tell statistically. You had to
Speaker 3: tell it when it world down in the public at large.
Speaker 3: The reason I give it a C is I do
Speaker 3: think that it would protect it against severe disease and death,
Speaker 3: which was really important for older people who had a
Speaker 3: very high risk of dying from COVID. Young people, the
Speaker 3: mortality benefit is small because the risk of dying from
Speaker 3: COVID is small, so I don't see much benefit, and
Speaker 3: I do see some harm, like for young men, like
Speaker 3: folks your age, it's you have I think an unacceptably
Speaker 3: high rate of myocarditis, especially after the second dose, but
Speaker 3: certainly even the first does you know, heart inflammation after
Speaker 3: the vaccine, so for for so okay, So how would
Speaker 3: you use that vaccine with with this kind of these
Speaker 3: kind of characteristic The way I would use it is
Speaker 3: I would use it to protect older people. I would
Speaker 3: very much strongly encourage older people to get the vaccine,
Speaker 3: And in fact, that's what I did, and I think
Speaker 3: it saved lives doing that.
Speaker 2: Kind of like the flu, right, I mean, the flu
Speaker 2: is for older people, immuno compromise people get a flu shot, right,
Speaker 2: that's generally the that's the advice, the guidance that I've received,
Speaker 2: I think a lot of other people here from their doctors.
Speaker 2: But it's not if you're twenty five and you don't
Speaker 2: get the flu shot, you're a monster who's killing your
Speaker 2: killing your grandma.
Speaker 3: Yeah, because the flu shot doesn't stop transmission most most years,
Speaker 3: and it's so like you know, if young young people
Speaker 3: can get actually young flu is probably a little worse
Speaker 3: for young people than covid is, depending on the age
Speaker 3: and the condition you're in. So it's you know, flu is,
Speaker 3: flu is a different thing. The vaccine is a very
Speaker 3: it's a very traditional technology. It's very safe, that flu vaccine.
Speaker 3: It's we know we know that the characteristics of it
Speaker 3: because we've been using it for decades. It wasn't true
Speaker 3: for the mRNA vaccine when we recommended it at scale. Instead,
Speaker 3: we used it to essentially we first first public comp
Speaker 3: made this promise that if everyone got it, or ninety
Speaker 3: percent of the people got or eighty percent of people
Speaker 3: got it, then the disease would stop. You get hurt
Speaker 3: immunity with the vaccine. The problem was like herd immunity
Speaker 3: doesn't work that way. You don't you don't you need
Speaker 3: a vaccine that actually stops you from getting and transmitting
Speaker 3: the disease. There's a famous clip of this woman on
Speaker 3: MSNBC like you know this like incredible delivery. She's like
Speaker 3: telling saying, okay, if you if you get it, you
Speaker 3: are a dead end for the virus. You don't transmit
Speaker 3: it to other people, right, And that was wrong. She
Speaker 3: didn't know that. The public Health didn't know that. And
Speaker 3: yet you had Tony thought you going around saying you
Speaker 3: gotta have eighty percent of people to get it in
Speaker 3: order for the disease to go away.
Speaker 1: Well, that that was the part of it.
Speaker 2: That all that I think bothered so many people. You know,
Speaker 2: I told, and I was saying this on Radio two
Speaker 2: at the time. I told my own parents, who were
Speaker 2: both seeing both senior citizens, unsurprisingly, to go get the vaccine.
Speaker 1: And they did.
Speaker 2: And I think that under the circumstances, given what we knew,
Speaker 2: that was a sensible move. But the whole mandates and
Speaker 2: the federal mandate that Biden tried and then had to
Speaker 2: be overturned, you know, the Supreme Court had to step
Speaker 2: in and say, no, you can't do that. This was
Speaker 2: all premised on you have to get it because you're
Speaker 2: a danger to the people around you if you don't.
Speaker 2: I mean, that was a total lie, right doc. And
Speaker 2: what I want to know is should did they know
Speaker 2: it was a lie all along?
Speaker 1: Was it always a lie? Or did they figure out
Speaker 1: that it was a lie? You know what I mean?
Speaker 3: So early on let's say January Febry twenty twenty one,
Speaker 3: they didn't know it was true because the trial didn't
Speaker 3: check it. So if they confidently said that if you
Speaker 3: get the vaccine, you're not going to spread it, they're
Speaker 3: lying because they're over representing what the trial said. By
Speaker 3: let's say April May June twenty twenty one, it was
Speaker 3: clear from international events that heavily vaccine societies were experiencing
Speaker 3: huge disease burden, a huge spread of the disease. You know,
Speaker 3: places like I remember the earliest one was I was.
Speaker 3: I think it was like the Seychelle Islands, which you
Speaker 3: use the Chinese vaccine. I saw this enormous outbreak in
Speaker 3: like late March, early April Afica, exact the date, twenty
Speaker 3: twenty one. I thought, huh, that's strange. Maybe maybe that
Speaker 3: means that the vaccine, the Chinese vaccine, doesn't work. I
Speaker 3: wonder what that means for the for the these vacs,
Speaker 3: the MR ANDAs we used. And then I saw Gibraltar
Speaker 3: which had an enormous outbreak. And then I saw, I mean,
Speaker 3: it's just like Israel. Country after country there was heavily vaccinated,
Speaker 3: saw enormous outbreaks. It was clear that all of these
Speaker 3: vaccines had failed to stop disease spread, and that at
Speaker 3: that point it was it was a pure lie. They
Speaker 3: should have been seeing these same things I saw, and
Speaker 3: yet they still going on TV saying if you don't
Speaker 3: aren't vaccinated, You're a danger to others. That's a lie
Speaker 3: piled on top of demonization of people. This this sort
Speaker 3: of like separation of people on the basis of like
Speaker 3: are you clean or unclean, which is a very dangerous
Speaker 3: thing to do in public health. A lot of people. Yeah,
Speaker 3: I don't know, Like I heard all these stories from
Speaker 3: Thanksgiving A twenty twenty one where I'm vaccinated, people weren't
Speaker 3: invited to Thanksgiving for their own families. Yes, I mean
Speaker 3: that's public Health's fault. That that's a lie put around
Speaker 3: by public health essentially demonized people on the base of
Speaker 3: the vaccination status. And then there was a parent lie
Speaker 3: with it, which is that if you had had COVID
Speaker 3: and recovered, there was no there's no immunity at all. All.
Speaker 3: The evidence was really clear by July twenty twenty that
Speaker 3: you had pre substantial immunity.
Speaker 2: Yeah, how is it that doctor Fauci could look anyone
Speaker 2: in the health sphere in the face and say, Rather,
Speaker 2: the bigger thing is what he didn't say, which he
Speaker 2: the concept of natural immunity was completely abandoned for the pandemic.
Speaker 2: How couldn't people see, right? I mean, doc, how many
Speaker 2: years did what you went to school? How many years
Speaker 2: for medicine? I mean it was like four years medical school,
Speaker 2: four years residency, right, I mean you spent decades of
Speaker 2: your life studying this. There are like you, How could
Speaker 2: they have not have seen this? I feel like I'm
Speaker 2: just some random dude. I saw this.
Speaker 1: It was crazy, Okay.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So I mean, you know, so I do research
Speaker 3: full time. Just so you know, So I didn't do residency,
Speaker 3: but oh I did a PhD. I got gray hair
Speaker 3: for a reason.
Speaker 1: Buck, Yeah, you studied this stuff for a long time,
Speaker 1: bottom line fair.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but yeah, just so why did they not know?
Speaker 3: I mean I think that the problem is like the
Speaker 3: kinds of people that ran the pandemic response, they're they're
Speaker 3: most of their HIV experts, right, So, like you know,
Speaker 3: Tony Fauci, Rachelle Olenski, all of these folks, they made
Speaker 3: their bones in HIV, and for HIV there's no immunity,
Speaker 3: so and you know, like there's this new virus. They
Speaker 3: use their knowledge of HIV to set expectations about this virus.
Speaker 3: So very early on, it was like you weren't even
Speaker 3: allowed to say that it's the possibility of the immunity.
Speaker 3: Until you can prove it. The problem is like they
Speaker 3: didn't update. By July of twenty twenty, it was clear
Speaker 3: from like a multiple papers in prominent medical journals that actually,
Speaker 3: you know it works pretty well, that is, your body's
Speaker 3: immune response works pretty well. And they didn't update. They
Speaker 3: were like, oh, we can't know for certain, We can't
Speaker 3: know for certain. Well, you know for certain for the
Speaker 3: vaccine either. And if you really look, you're right bucket.
Speaker 3: You don't even need medical training. You can go back
Speaker 3: in history, right, We've known for twenty five hundred years
Speaker 3: during the Athenian Plague, they used people who would recover
Speaker 3: from disease to care for people who are already sick.
Speaker 3: It Right, in the Athenian Plague twenty five hundred years ago,
Speaker 3: people used they used people who recovered to care for
Speaker 3: the people who were sick because they knew about natural immunity. Somehow,
Speaker 3: in the last three years we forgot about twenty five
Speaker 3: hundred years of medical knowledge, and Tony Fauci going around saying, oh,
Speaker 3: I'm not certain that you have protection if you have
Speaker 3: COVID or covered.
Speaker 1: We don't.
Speaker 3: I mean, that's just crazy, it's just bad policy. People
Speaker 3: could see with their eyes that if they got COVID
Speaker 3: that it took for a long time. Afterwards they wouldn't
Speaker 3: get COVID. They could see with their eyes at the
Speaker 3: second than they got it was less severe than the
Speaker 3: first time.
Speaker 2: So I've been called an anti mask fanatic by all
Speaker 2: the worst people. So I want to return and ask
Speaker 2: you about some mask related questions and the possible connection
Speaker 2: to massivesteria here in just a second doc. But first up,
Speaker 2: some days you have to dig deep for the energy
Speaker 2: you need. But where does that energy come from? And
Speaker 2: men's body's testosterone is a critical source. And if your
Speaker 2: body is not producing enough to meet the demand, you're
Speaker 2: feeling worn out before the day is far from over,
Speaker 2: and you're not performing at your best. The solution is
Speaker 2: found with the company by the name of Chalk that's cchoq.
Speaker 2: Their most popular daily supplement. Chalk's Male Vitality Stack is
Speaker 2: specifically formulated to provide more energy and more focus. The
Speaker 2: leading ingredient has been proven in studies to replenish twenty
Speaker 2: percent of diminished testosterone levels in just three months time.
Speaker 2: And that's just one of the many benefits that comes
Speaker 2: from making the Male Vitality Stack A part of your
Speaker 2: daily regimen. You're going to feel so much better as
Speaker 2: a result. Go online today to Chalk dot com and
Speaker 2: get set up. Their website is spelled cchoq dot com.
Speaker 2: Save thirty five percent off any Chalk subscription when you
Speaker 2: use my name Buck in your purchase process. That's Chalk
Speaker 2: cchoq dot com and use my name Buck to get
Speaker 2: thirty five percent off your subscription for life. So doc
Speaker 2: I when I go into any doctor's office, and this
Speaker 2: has been the way I felt now for what three years,
Speaker 2: but certainly still because it does happen in places, and
Speaker 2: I see, you know, the purpose of the people at
Speaker 2: the front desk with the masks on they're walking around
Speaker 2: when I'm told that it's still hospital policy as it
Speaker 2: is in some places that visitors everybody has to walk
Speaker 2: around with a paper mask on. I lose faith in
Speaker 2: the intelligence, the seriousness, and the professionalism of the people involved.
Speaker 2: Are they aware of this at this point? Like this
Speaker 2: is this is no longer a debate that rational people
Speaker 2: can have. It doesn't work, It doesn't help.
Speaker 1: What are they doing?
Speaker 3: It's it's okay, So let me just do a little
Speaker 3: bit of the history. I think this is my theory
Speaker 3: about why they launched themselves or attached themselves to such
Speaker 3: an odd such a bad uh, such an intervention with
Speaker 3: the almost no evidence behind it. In fact, the evidence
Speaker 3: behind it. Coming into the pandemic, there was a dozen
Speaker 3: randomized studies that said it didn't work. Show they didn't
Speaker 3: really work very well for the flu, which transmits very
Speaker 3: similarly to COVID, and so we knew we had the experience.
Speaker 3: There was a reason why we didn't say to school's
Speaker 3: mask up during flu season because there was the randomized
Speaker 3: studies that it didn't work. When the pandemic hit, I
Speaker 3: think public health had two contradictory aims that they needed
Speaker 3: to meet. They wanted to meet first, they wanted to
Speaker 3: tell the public, you've got to take this pandemic seriously.
Speaker 3: Remember how early on, like there was that guy, that
Speaker 3: NBA player, Rudy Gobert, who, like you know, he does
Speaker 3: this like press conference, the licks the microphone and the
Speaker 3: everyone gets on his case because he's not taking COVID seriously.
Speaker 3: Masks serve the purpose of telling everybody you're in the
Speaker 3: middle of a pandemic. Everyone's wearing a mask that means
Speaker 3: you're in the middle of pandemic. Everything's going to take
Speaker 3: the pandemic seriously. The second thing the mass does, and
Speaker 3: this is paradoxical, is they also give people the sense
Speaker 3: of control that they have something to do about the
Speaker 3: risk that they face. So the public health makes people
Speaker 3: feel this sense of risk and then they give them
Speaker 3: something to control it, and now you moralize around it.
Speaker 3: Take I wear the mask and I'm like protecting others
Speaker 3: with it, right, I'm doing good. So I think that's
Speaker 3: really like the fundamental thing, Like it didn't matter what
Speaker 3: the evidence said. All that mattered was that you had
Speaker 3: this sense of control and you have this sense of fear,
Speaker 3: and the mass ser of both of those purposes. The
Speaker 3: evidence during the pandemic became came in loud and clear.
Speaker 3: Randomized studies that were looking at the effective as the
Speaker 3: mass would find nothing. And so yeah, I think the
Speaker 3: places that are still attached to the masks, where they
Speaker 3: treat everybody like a biohazard, they're not following any scientific data.
Speaker 3: And I mean, I'm not sure I should agree with
Speaker 3: you about joejudging them, Buck, but you know what i mean,
Speaker 3: I'm sympathetic.
Speaker 2: Well, I just want to know, like, does anyone would
Speaker 2: anyone in the medical community honesty come up to you
Speaker 2: and say, doctor Botacharia, this cloth mask that I wear
Speaker 2: for you know, a total of five minutes a day,
Speaker 2: maybe when I go into the doctor's office. Nowhere else,
Speaker 2: by the way, nowhere else am I wearing this? This
Speaker 2: keeps me very safe from Aristolas virus? Like, is there
Speaker 2: is there a serious MD on the planet who would
Speaker 2: make that case to you? And if not, how is
Speaker 2: it that there are still places that are making us mask?
Speaker 3: I mean there are still people floating around inside meta.
Speaker 3: I mean, like, you know, you can tell yourself any
Speaker 3: story you like, buck and if you convince yourself for
Speaker 3: you can. I mean, but and people there are people
Speaker 3: like it's just cognitive disonance. They can't believe that they
Speaker 3: were wrong about something, like very very smart people. So
Speaker 3: there's not that there aren't people like that. You know
Speaker 3: on Twitter they still bug me. But like, but it's
Speaker 3: it's it's not. I think most people in medicine understand
Speaker 3: that there was a mistake, that that that there isn't
Speaker 3: the evidence behind did that they wanted, and that they
Speaker 3: embraced an intervention that didn't have evidence, and it's undermined
Speaker 3: the credibility in the eyes of the population. I think
Speaker 3: a lot of people in medicine and public health have
Speaker 3: started if they haven't seen that, they started to see that.
Speaker 2: What do you I want to ask you how we
Speaker 2: can fix this, this credibility issue, or what that would
Speaker 2: look like, doc. And I also just want to say
Speaker 2: thank you for the Great Barrenton Declaration for a lot
Speaker 2: of us who were trying to hold the line for
Speaker 2: sanity while and I'm talking about you know, early on
Speaker 2: right summer twenty twenty, we'd all seen the hospital tents
Speaker 2: in Central Park that never got used because they weren't needed,
Speaker 2: and the hospital ship that never got.
Speaker 1: Used in New York City.
Speaker 2: But you know, they brought up this whole hospital ship.
Speaker 2: We all saw this stuff, and the Great Barrington Declaration
Speaker 2: came out and we're like, wait a second, so what
Speaker 2: we see just as rational people. There are doctors who
Speaker 2: are telling us that that's true. Right, So it was
Speaker 2: really I don't know if anyone told you this. It
Speaker 2: was a glue of light in a darkness of mass
Speaker 2: hysteria and appalling cowardice and political opportunism. And you know,
Speaker 2: I know you're a very nice guy. My disdain for
Speaker 2: Anthony Fauci, who went to my high school, which I
Speaker 2: always tell people is kind of funny. Will never it
Speaker 2: will never cease because he's never apologized. He's never said
Speaker 2: I lied about everything and I was wrong about everything.
Speaker 2: If he does that, then you know, fine, Fauci will
Speaker 2: call it a day, I guess. But the Great Barrington
Speaker 2: Declaration is very important anyway, and you can tell I
Speaker 2: feel very passionate about this. We'll get back to this
Speaker 2: in a second. I just want to say thank you
Speaker 2: for attaching your name to it and giving a template
Speaker 2: for reality and sanity at a time when so many
Speaker 2: of us were looking around saying, I can't believe you
Speaker 2: know double mess. Remember they talked about goggles and gloves too.
Speaker 2: I mean, I remember all this.
Speaker 3: Tony Fauschu said goggles. There's not a single study I've
Speaker 3: seen that talks about I don't know where she get
Speaker 3: that idea.
Speaker 2: Just you know why not right? I mean, to your
Speaker 2: point about the enforced hypochondria, it really turned into Remember
Speaker 2: they put the kids in the bubbles for band practice,
Speaker 2: like the plastic bubbles. Remember remember the plastic dividers that
Speaker 2: they set up.
Speaker 3: In place A study that shows that it reduces airflow,
Speaker 3: making things worse.
Speaker 1: Yes, you're creating like little pockets of virus. I mean
Speaker 1: you can't make this stuff up.
Speaker 2: Everything that they did that people didn't want to do.
Speaker 2: That people you know had a problem with, Like, yeah,
Speaker 2: you're six, stay away from people, stay home.
Speaker 1: That's called having.
Speaker 2: The flu or the cold for all of you know,
Speaker 2: human existence. You know, you don't want to infect people.
Speaker 2: So if you're six, stay home anyway. Doc, But I
Speaker 2: want to ask how we fix this. We'll get to
Speaker 2: that in a second. But for everybody at home, the
Speaker 2: team at my Pillow got to talk to you about
Speaker 2: this for a second. You know, the Geeza dream Sheets
Speaker 2: have done amazingly well their slippers, their pillow products, There's
Speaker 2: so much that they have that are absolutely fantastic. But
Speaker 2: their newest and latest offer is on their six piece
Speaker 2: towel set. It's made with USA cotton, making it extremely absorbent,
Speaker 2: still provides that soft feel you look for in a towel.
Speaker 1: You want that.
Speaker 2: Fresh towel that you get that kind of hotel towel feel.
Speaker 2: You're gonna get it with the six piece towel set.
Speaker 2: And you probably have old towels in your house. You
Speaker 2: need to replace them and upgrade them. And that's what
Speaker 2: you can do with the six piece towel set. Now,
Speaker 2: I just got a piece six piece set myself. You
Speaker 2: should get some, just have it on hand. Great for
Speaker 2: guests too, you know, just to have that six piece
Speaker 2: set ready to go. For a limited time. You get
Speaker 2: this set on clearance for twenty five dollars with my
Speaker 2: first name as the promo code buck. Two bath towels,
Speaker 2: two hand towels, two washcloths. Typically it's retails for ninety
Speaker 2: nine to ninety eight. Get it over seventy percent off
Speaker 2: when you use promo code buck. To find this offer,
Speaker 2: just go to MyPillow dot com click on the radio
Speaker 2: listener special square. Get this clearance price of twenty five
Speaker 2: dollars on the towel set. The deal will not last long.
Speaker 2: Enter promo code buck for that twenty five dollars deal.
Speaker 2: All right, doctor Boticharia giving you the ability here to
Speaker 2: clean up faucheese mess. How do we fix this? How
Speaker 2: do we fix the credibility problem? How do we fix
Speaker 2: the systemic wrongness problem from the pandemic? So to your point,
Speaker 2: we don't lock down again and do all this crazy
Speaker 2: stuff again because I think we would.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think we would too. But at the end,
Speaker 3: to answer your question, the key thing is, let's follow
Speaker 3: what happens after an airline disaster crash. Right, the NTSB
Speaker 3: sends out, it's independent investigators, people who weren't involved in
Speaker 3: the disaster. They take a look at the black box,
Speaker 3: they like try to figure out what happened, and then
Speaker 3: they make reforms so that it doesn't happen again. Right,
Speaker 3: And the same thing happens in medicine. Right, so when
Speaker 3: the patient dies, you'll have these conferences called minem conferences,
Speaker 3: mobility and mortality conferences and where doctors like it sometimes
Speaker 3: can get heated, but like the idea isn't to blame anybody.
Speaker 3: The idea is to like figure out what went wrong.
Speaker 3: We need a society wide eminem conference, a society wide
Speaker 3: airline disaster conference for the disaster that was the management
Speaker 3: of this pandemic. And you know there's some places that
Speaker 3: are starting to do this, but like it's it the
Speaker 3: quote there, no one has asked really all of the
Speaker 3: right questions. So I've worked with a do on a
Speaker 3: document called a Norfolk Group document an o rfolk dot
Speaker 3: org Norfolk Group dot org. Uh that that asks essentially
Speaker 3: like eighty pages of questions, scientific questions, policy questions. You know,
Speaker 3: some of the stuff we discussed, what was the evidence
Speaker 3: on masks, what was the evidence on natural natural immunity?
Speaker 3: Why didn't why wasn't it acknowledged? When did people know
Speaker 3: that the vaccine didn't stop transmission? Why were there why
Speaker 3: we're still there being mandates pushed? All these all these
Speaker 3: questions need to get asked, both at the national level,
Speaker 3: I think, and also at local levels. And and in
Speaker 3: essentially it's an agenda, a blueprint for what an honest
Speaker 3: commission looking at the COVID policy disaster would ask. We
Speaker 3: still haven't had one. I think that's fundamental. Once we
Speaker 3: have that, and it's not it won't be run by me.
Speaker 3: It should be run nor by Tony. Fact you've run
Speaker 3: by independent people who that and you have answers to
Speaker 3: these questions that everyone accepts. Then you can start to
Speaker 3: begin to start to regain credibility.
Speaker 2: Am into that doctor Boticharia, A lot of us out
Speaker 2: there and not just me, really appreciate what you did
Speaker 2: during the pandemic. And then you continue to speak the truth,
Speaker 2: and it feels like the world of medicine is not
Speaker 2: completely going into the abyss of politicization and mass psychosis.
Speaker 2: So thank you for that, and thank you very much
Speaker 2: for being those Is there anywhere you should you want
Speaker 2: to direct people to either look at your research, follow
Speaker 2: you on Twitter, or anything like that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so I'm on Twitter. Probably too much on Twitter,
Speaker 3: as my wife tells me. But doctor J. Boticharia A
Speaker 3: D R J B h A T T A c
Speaker 3: h A R I A. I'm also I have a
Speaker 3: new sub Stack thing called Illusion of Consensus where we
Speaker 3: explore how the idea of consensus arises, why sometimes often
Speaker 3: the idea of consensus and sciences is actually just simply
Speaker 3: an illusion in fact, and we use the pandemic as
Speaker 3: a lens into that process. How the media and the
Speaker 3: scientific community work together to create this illusion when in
Speaker 3: fact there's quite a bit of dissenting ideas inside science.
Speaker 3: So Illusion of Consensus on substack and Twitter, those are
Speaker 3: the two places to follow you right now.
Speaker 2: Doc, you have a new subscriber. I think you've got
Speaker 2: a whole lot of others that are coming your way
Speaker 2: to when they hear this.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much, Thank you Buck, thank you for
Speaker 3: having me, thank you for the great branch of decoration,
Speaker 3: signing it