One can have empathy and still insist that our borders be respected.
True story. The above happened. It was real. Not made-up. We lived through this.
Ensuring that it never happens again – means that we can not forget and we can not let history erase the crimes that were committed in the name of public health.
Robert W Malone MD, MS Aug 16 · Malone News. TARCZYCA
Please read this important essay and then take action to protest this latest affront to logic and natural medicine from the FDA. FAERS data show natural thyroid is very safe. Fortunately, Dr. Marty Makary @DrMakaryFDA recently tweeted that “FDA is committed to pursuing the first-ever approval of desiccated thyroid extract, pending results of the ongoing clinical trials. In the mean time, we will ensure access for all Americans.’ Please help Marty overcome his own bureaucracy and support women’s health! And consider subscribing to my fellow MAHA advocate Sayer Ji’s substack!
In what represents an unprecedented overreach of regulatory authority that prioritizes pharmaceutical profits over patient welfare, the FDA has declared war on 1.5 million Americans who depend on natural thyroid medications for their very survival. As Dr. Robert Malone warned in his urgent alert: “You might think that the FDA wanted older women to be disabled with brittle bones, cognitive decline, metabolic disease, obesity, and poor health.”[1]
This is the systematic dismantling of a treatment that has worked successfully for 130 years—since 1891 when Dr. George Redmayne Murray first used desiccated thyroid extract to save a woman dying from myxedema, an extreme form of hypothyroidism.[2] The FDA’s August 6, 2025 enforcement letters threatening to ban all natural desiccated thyroid (DTE) products—including Armour Thyroid, NP Thyroid, and Nature-Throid—represent medical tyranny designed to funnel billions into synthetic drug manufacturers while condemning millions to unnecessary suffering.
But here’s what makes this particularly egregious: natural thyroid is essentially ancestral food—organ meat that humans have consumed for millennia. The FDA is attempting to ban what is fundamentally a concentrated form of dietary thyroid gland, the same substance our ancestors prized as sacred medicine and nutrient-dense food.
The Bioidentical Illusion: Why Patient Experience Is Ontological Truth
Natural desiccated thyroid extract from a porcine source is the most physiologically complete thyroid replacement available. Unlike synthetic levothyroxine’s single-molecule approach, DTE provides:
T4 (Thyroxine): The storage hormone
T3 (Triiodothyronine): The active metabolic hormone
T2 (Diiodothyronine): Critical for mitochondrial function
T1 (Monoiodothyronine): Emerging metabolic roles
Calcitonin: Essential for bone health
UNKNOWN YET HIGHLY LIKELY: Yet to be fully characterized indispensable biological co-factors
As Dr. Malone emphasizes, “T3 is the active thyroid hormone responsible for controlling metabolism, heart and digestive functions, muscle and brain activity, growth, and temperature regulation. Its actions are more potent than its precursor T4, and balanced T3 levels are essential for good health.”[3]
The Molecular Deception
The FDA wants you to believe synthetic levothyroxine is “identical” to natural thyroid hormone. This is scientifically false. As GreenMedInfo’s research has revealed for over a decade, synthetic T4 is produced through a mind-numbingly complex chemical process involving “nitrating L-tyrosine,” “tetrazotized and iodized” compounds, and treatment with “aqueous HI in acetic acid.”[4] This Frankenstein molecule is then contaminated with up to 6% dextro-thyroxine, a mirror-image stereoisomer that is cardiotoxic and acts as an endocrine disruptor.[5]
One patent describes the dizzyingly complex process of levothyroxine synthesis as follows:
“The process for preparation of Levothyroxine sodium comprises the steps, wherein compound obtained from steps a-g is prepared by conventional methods, a. nitrating L-tyrosine to give 3,5- dinitro-L-tyrosine, b. acetylating 3,5- dinitro-L-tyrosine to give 3,5- dinitro-N-acetyl L-tyrosine, c. esterifying the compound obtained from step (b) to give 3,5- diπitro-N-acetyl L-tyrosine ethyl ester, d. reacting the compound obtained from step (c) with p-TsCI in presence of pyridine to give corresponding tosylate salt, which is further reacting with 4-methoxy phenol to give 3,5- DinKro-4-p-methoxy phenoxy-N-acetyl-L-phenyl alanine ethyl ester, e. the compound obtained from step (d) is hydrogenated to give 3,5-diamino-4-p-methoxy phenoxy-N-acetyl-L-phenyl alanine ethyl ester, f. the compound obtained from step (e) is tetrazotized and iodized to give 3,5-Diiodo-4-p- methoxy phenoxy-N-acetyl-L-phenyl alanine ethyl ester, g. the compound obtained from step (f) is O-demethylated, N-deacetylated, and deesterified using aqueous HI in acetic acid to give 3,5-Diiodo-4-p-hydroxy phenoxy-L-pheπyl alanine followed by preparing hydrochloride salt of same and isolating, drying it h. lodinating 3,5-Diiodo-4-p-hydroxy pheπoxy-L-phenyl alanine HCI salt using methyl amine.”
The critical epistemological issue is this: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because current assays cannot detect functional differences between synthetic and natural T4 doesn’t mean such differences don’t exist. Biological systems are nonlinear and exquisitely sensitive to subtle variations that cascade into significant physiological effects.
The Thyroglobulin Reality: Nature’s Infinite Complexity
The image above exposes the breathtaking gulf between natural and synthetic thyroid hormone. Natural desiccated thyroid contains T4, T3, T2, T1, and calcitonin bound to the massive thyroglobulin protein—a 660,000 dalton molecular complex representing millions of years of evolutionary optimization. Each hormone exists in specific conformational states, held in precise spatial relationships, creating an information-rich matrix the body recognizes holistically.
In contrast, synthetic hormone consists of isolated T4 molecules floating in pharmaceutical void, stripped of biological context, devoid of the intricate molecular choreography that defines natural thyroid function.
Levinthal’s Paradox and the Information That In-Forms
To understand the true magnitude of this difference, we must invoke Levinthal’s Paradox. For thyroglobulin to fold from a linear chain into its precise three-dimensional structure requires navigation through near-infinite conformational possibilities—a journey that would take longer than the universe’s age if done randomly. Yet it folds perfectly in milliseconds.
What Levinthal’s Paradox teaches us is that biological specificity contains inconceivable amounts of information—but not information as mere data. This is information as that which in-forms—that which puts form into biological matter, guiding the transformation of potential into actuality.
When thyroglobulin folds into its native state, it demonstrates information as a formative force. Each T4 molecule bound to thyroglobulin is literally in-formed by this protein matrix. The scaffold puts form into:
How the hormone is held in three-dimensional space
What microenvironmental conditions it experiences
How it relates to neighboring hormone molecules
When and how it will be released
What conformational memory it carries forward
This formative information—accumulated over millions of years of evolution—cannot be replicated in a reaction flask.
The Hydration Shell: Water as Information Carrier
Consider a dimension rarely discussed: every biological molecule exists within a hydration shell—a structured water envelope. Research into water’s fourth phase reveals it as an exquisite carrier of information and memory, capable of structuring itself in ways that drive molecular actions and cellular communication. The water surrounding naturally-produced hormones has been structured by living processes, carrying biophysical information that influences hormone behavior.
Remarkably, even when natural thyroid is desiccated, this information is not entirely lost. The freeze-drying process preserves molecular architecture, and upon rehydration in the body, water restructures itself according to the biological template, partially restoring the information field. It’s like a compressed file expanding back to its original form—not perfectly, but with far more fidelity than starting from scratch.
The synthetic hormone’s hydration shell, formed in industrial conditions, lacks this biological structuring entirely. The qualitative difference between natural and synthetic forms is ontologically vast—an insurmountable chasm that the false equivalence model cannot bridge.
From “Subjective” to Structural: The Science of Patient Experience
When patients report life-changing improvements on natural thyroid—like Vicera co-founder Chrissy, who shared with me her experience of restored energy, mental clarity, weight loss, and emotional balance using the natural thyroid product she developed with her husband Heath —the medical establishment waves these away as ‘subjective’ or ‘merely anecdotal.’ But the molecular science reveals why dismissing these patient experiences is anti-scientific:
1. Conformational Intelligence: Each hormone bound to thyroglobulin exists in a specific three-dimensional state that carries information. The protein presents hormones to the body in evolutionarily optimized conformations that synthetic hormones cannot replicate.
2. Synergistic Delivery: The thyroglobulin complex ensures coordinated release of ALL thyroid hormones, creating cascading physiological effects patients experience as comprehensive well-being.
3. Information Beyond Chemistry: The 660,000 dalton thyroglobulin molecule represents biological information—protein folding patterns, binding sites, enzymatic cleavage points—all influencing how the body receives and processes hormones.
4. Evolutionary Recognition: Human physiology evolved with thyroglobulin-bound hormones. Our cellular machinery is optimized for this natural presentation. Synthetic T4 is a 70-year-old pharmaceutical approximation of a system refined over evolutionary time.
When patients report feeling profoundly different on natural versus synthetic thyroid, they’re experiencing the difference between medicine that carries biological information and medicine that doesn’t.
The landmark 2013 Hoang study in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism revealed a truth the pharmaceutical industry desperately wants suppressed.[6] In this randomized, double-blind, crossover study with 70 patients: natural thyroid was preferred by nearly 3x as many patients as synthetic levothyroxine—48.6% preferred DTE versus only 18.6% for levothyroxine.
Those choosing natural thyroid reported dramatic improvements in their lived experience. Their scores showed statistically significant improvements (p < 0.001) in energy, mood, mental clarity, and quality of life.
Perhaps most tellingly, patients on DTE lost an average of 3-4 pounds without trying—actual metabolic activation from receiving the full hormone spectrum.
The 2021 Shakir study reinforced these findings. Among the most symptomatic patients—those failed most dramatically by synthetic monotherapy—switching to DTE produced significant improvements in mood, memory, and well-being.[7]
The Conversion Crisis No One Talks About
The dirty secret of synthetic thyroid treatment: up to 15% of patients cannot efficiently convert T4 to T3 due to genetic polymorphisms affecting deiodinase enzymes.[8] For these millions, synthetic levothyroxine is metabolic poison. Their bodies flood with inactive storage hormone while being starved of active T3.
When they report persistent symptoms despite “normal” TSH levels, they’re told it’s psychological. Meanwhile, their bodies deteriorate with:
The Postmenopausal Crisis: FDA’s Betrayal of Women’s Health
Dr. Malone’s warning about postmenopausal women exposes a particularly cruel dimension. Research demonstrates that declining estrogen levels directly impair the body’s ability to convert T4 to active T3.[9] The FDA’s mandate forcing these women onto T4-only treatment is tantamount to prescribing metabolic dysfunction.
The calcitonin component becomes critical during this life stage. Studies reveal 50% of thyroidectomized patients develop osteopenia specifically from calcitonin deficiency.[10] Postmenopausal women already facing dramatic bone loss from estrogen decline are essentially guaranteed osteoporosis without access to DTE’s calcitonin.
Clinical evidence shows postmenopausal women on natural thyroid experience:
Better cognitive function
Improved energy levels
Modest but significant weight loss
Enhanced mood stability
Given that thyroid disease incidence is 5-20 times higher in women (much of which is preventable and even reversible through root-cause resolution medical approaches applied early enough)*, with highest rates in postmenopausal and elderly women, the FDA’s actions appear designed to maximally harm the population most dependent on comprehensive thyroid support.
From Dr. Murray’s first use in 1891 through seven decades as standard treatment, DTE has 130 years of real-world safety data.[11] During this time, it transformed myxedema from death sentence to manageable condition.
The FDA’s own adverse event database tells the story they want buried. Between 1968-2025, only 500 adverse events were reported for DTE—approximately nine per year across millions of doses.[12] Compare this to synthetic levothyroxine:
Associations with increased lung cancer risk
Documented links to atrial fibrillation and fractures
Recent FDA recall of 160,000+ bottles for subpotency[13]
Most damning: the X account OpenVAERS’s analysis of FDA’s FAERS database shows synthetic medications have proportionally higher rates of injury and death, even accounting for larger user population.[14] Their conclusion: “There is no world in which taking natural hormone is more dangerous than the synthetics.”
The agency’s selective enforcement reveals the truth. Smaller manufacturers face recalls for minor potency variations, while AbbVie’s Armour Thyroid—made by the same company producing Synthroid—continues unimpeded. Safety isn’t the concern—market control is.
The Economic Conspiracy: Follow the Money
The global levothyroxine market generates $4 billion annually, projected to reach $5.88 billion by 2033.[15] The DTE market, serving only 1.5 million patients, represents a dangerous precedent that natural solutions can outperform patented drugs.
Synthetic levothyroxine costs 50-100 times less to produce than natural thyroid extract. When you can charge the same price for a product costing pennies versus dollars to make, eliminating competition becomes a business imperative.
AbbVie’s unique position reveals the conspiracy. This pharmaceutical giant, spending $4.53 million on lobbying, manufactures both Synthroid and Armour Thyroid.[16] While smaller competitors face extinction, AbbVie remains untouched. Consider:
RLC Labs ($30 million revenue) can’t afford regulatory lawyers
Acella Pharmaceuticals ($120 million) lacks political connections
These companies face extinction not for safety reasons, but for lacking financial firepower
Research documents that 73% of FDA advisory meetings include members with drug manufacturer ties.[17] The endgame is clear: force 1.5 million DTE patients onto synthetics, eliminate competition, establish precedent for banning natural alternatives.
The Resistance Movement
Multiple Change.org petitions have gathered tens of thousands of signatures. Board-certified endocrinologists who personally take DTE lead opposition campaigns. The Alliance for Natural Health and numerous medical professionals condemn the FDA’s action to “Protect Natural Thyroid!”, and have created a call to action you can participate in right here now.
The post-Chevron legal landscape offers hope. The Supreme Court’s elimination of automatic deference to agency interpretations means the FDA must prove clear Congressional authorization, scientific basis, and rational enforcement after 130 years—all impossible.
The Thyroid Disease CARE Act of 2024 (H.R.10297) specifically addresses “barriers that individuals diagnosed with thyroid disease face in accessing treatments.”[18]
The Call to Action
This is about medical freedom—the right to access ancestral foods and traditional medicines that have sustained human health for millennia.
I don’t care where you live, everyone likes chicken dinner. Most varieties of chickens – particularly those docile, backyard egg laying breeds just aren’t fast enough.
If you want tick control on your farm, get guineas.
Chickens just ain’t gonna last long enough to do any good.
A technical point – I think this is more of a Boomer Disaster Kit -This model had all been made obsolete – before GenXers hit the schoolyards.
Malone News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
“Dr. Robert Malone on MAHA, Censorship & The Future of Truth”:
Dr. Robert Malone joins Brian Rose to expose the battle over truth, censorship, and the rise of MAHA (Make America Healthy Again).
From silenced voices to digital control, this explosive conversation dives deep into the war on free speech and the future of independent thought.
Is truth under siege? “
Brian Rose of London Real with Dr. Robert Malone Watch The Full Episode: “The Fight Has Just Begun” Dr. Robert Malone on MAHA, Censorship & The Future of Truth –
Brian Rose of London Real with Dr. Robert Malone. Watch The Full Episode:
A State Department of Fish and Wildlife sent a letter to a home/landowner asking for permission to access a creek on his property to document the decline in a certain species of unheard of frogs.
The letter is as follows:
Dept. Of Fish & Wildlife:
Dear Landowner:
WDFWR Staff will be conducting surveys for foothill yellow-legged frogs & other amphibians over the next few months. As part of this research, we would like to survey the creek on your property. I am writing this letter to request your permission to access your property.
Recent research indicates that foothill yellow-legged frogs have declined significantly in recent years and are no longer found at half their historic sites. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated and will help contribute to the conservation of this important species.
Please fill out the attached postage-paid postcard and let us know if you are willing to let us cross your property or not.
If you have any concerns about this project please give us a call. We would love to talk with you about our research.
Thank you for your inquiry regarding accessing our property to survey for the yellow-legged frog. We may be able to help you out with this matter.
We have divided our 2.26 acres into 75 equal survey units with a draw tag for each unit. Application fees are only $8.00 per unit after you purchase the “Frog Survey License” ($120.00 resident / $180.00 Non-Resident). You will also need to obtain a “Frog Habitat” parking permit ($10.00 per vehicle).
You will also need an “Invasive Species” stamp ($15.00 for the first vehicle and $5.00 for each add’l vehicle) You will also want to register at the Check Station to have your vehicle inspected for Non-native plant life prior to entering our property. There is also a Day Use fee, $5.00 per vehicle.
If you are successful in the Draw you will be notified two weeks in advance so you can make necessary plans and purchase your “Creek Habitat” stamp. ($18.00 Resident / $140.00 Non-Resident).
Survey units open between 8 am. And 3 PM. But you cannot commence survey until 9 am. And must cease all survey activity by 1 PM.
Survey Gear can only include a net with a 2″ diameter made of 100% organic cotton netting with no longer than an 18 in handle, non-weighted and no deeper than 6′ from net frame to bottom of net. Handles can only be made of BPA-free plastics or wooden handles.
After 1 PM. You can use a net with a 3″ diameter if you purchase the “Frog Net Endorsement” ($75.00 Resident / $250 Non-Resident).
Any frogs captured that are released will need to be released with an approved release device back into the environment unharmed.
As of June 1, we are offering draw tags for our “Premium Survey” units and application is again only $8.00 per application.
However, all fees can be waived if you can verify “Native Indian Tribal rights and status”.
You will also need to provide evidence of successful completion of “Frog Surveys” and your “Comprehensive Course on Frog Identification, Safe Handling Practices, and Self-Defense Strategies for Frog Attacks.”
This course is offered on-line through an accredited program for a nominal fee of $750.00.
Please let us know if we can be of assistance to you. Otherwise, we decline your access to our property but appreciate your inquiry.
The above little meme caught my attention because during our extensive travels across Europe, we have noticed just how truly depressing and ugly the vast swathes of cities bathed in Brutalist architecture truly are. These buildings are like entering an Orwellian nightmare.
What is Brutalist architecture?
Brutalist architecture is an architectural style that emerged in the 1950s, characterized by its use of raw, exposed materials, most notably concrete, minimal ornamentation, geometric forms, on a monumental scale.
The ‘social ambition” of Brutalist architecture refers to its primary goal of using architecture to promote socialism and communism for people of all social classes. Whereby, everyone are forced to live in the same structures – in the name of equity and inclusion. Hence, social equity becomes the driving force for “public” housing. Housing for which all are expected to dwell.
In fact, Brutalist architecture is a socialist and communist construct, especially during the mid-20th century. While Brutalism originated in the postwar West (notably the UK), it soon became the dominant style across the communist Eastern Bloc from the 1960s through the 1980s, including in the USSR, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia. Socialist and communist governments, in particular, promoted them with purpose.
While Brutalist architecture does not include explicit surveillance features like cameras or monitoring systems – as those systems were not available at the time, in its style – the design elements, such as minimal external windows, centralized layouts, and controlled entry points, facilitate restricting public access and controlling environments. These all align well with government security goals. Furthermore, the association between Brutalism and government bureaucracy, authority, and secrecy has made these structures symbolic of surveillance for the public and in popular media.
Let’s turn to 15-minute cities. They are supposed to provide:
Sustainability – By keeping people within a 15-minute walking distance from where they live and work.
Community and Social Cohesion:
Economic Resilience:
Equity and Inclusion:
Sound familiar?
The truth about 15-minute cities is that they allow governments to conduct massive and routine surveillance of their populace, as well as impose permanent restrictions on the daily activities of large groups of people. These cities work to exclude car ownership from ordinary citizens by making it too expensive through the permitting process and via road restrictions (such as limited traffic zones in residential areas). In the name of social equity, the rights of citizens to move freely are being restricted.
What happens when one gets a better job elsewhere, but other family members are forced to stay within their zone for work or educational purposes? Where one can’t afford to commute or own a car? Will this cause the extended and even nuclear family to break down further?
During any sort of public emergency, the government can limit who can move in and out of these zones. For instance, if one doesn’t have an updated vaccine green pass, their ability to leave their enforcement zone can be easily disabled.
We witnessed this on a massive scale during the COVIDcrisis in Europe. Similarly, in Canada, people were not allowed to board a train or take an airplane for almost a full year, even for medical care, work, or a funeral. Just think if being able to leave the 15-minute zone of your residence was tied to your ability to take public transportation.
In places where 15-minute cities have actually been implemented for any length of time, such as London, most people are resentful and not happy living under these conditions.
Whereas government security goals were once associated with brutalist architecture, in London, there are over a million CCTV cameras, and 15-minute cities have also become associated with the security state. Under these conditions, the right to privacy disappears… when centralized planning becomes the law.
But it gets worse: Brussels is now actively pursuing the 10-minute city model, not only for “climate and sustainability reasons”, but also to explicitly promote equity across its neighborhoods.
The architectural style of a 15-minute city may not be “brutalist,” but the goals don’t seem much different.
Yep- another true story. The Norwegian censorship authority invoked the blasphemy section of the Penal Code (section 142) to prohibit The Life of Brian, even though this law had not been applied in decades.
And yes, the Swedish film industry did run a marketing campaign on that fact.
Thank goodness for our First Amendment rights!
Malone News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
One of the benefits of being elderly and having held numerous roles within the US biomedical enterprise is the ability to delve into the details or broaden the perspective to see the bigger picture when necessary. I do not know many people who have the same breadth of exposure that I do, for better or worse. And now, as the sun sets on my so called career, my bicoastal random walk through academe, non-governmental organizations, pharma, DoD, NIH, FDA, and CDC while trying to pay my bills and raise a family, I have become even more aware of how dysfunctional the whole system has become. My learned cynicism is being further refined consequent to getting a glimpse from an inside-the-CDC point of view due to the recent ACIP appointment. One important conclusion is that the deep dysfunction of the US Government’s response to COVID is not only due to the nefarious activities of bad actors who have refined abilities to game the system, but it is also the product of evolved structural flaws that they exploited for personal and corporate gain.
This recently came to a head when questioning a CDC leader during the most recent ACIP meeting, and then speaking to a colleague about the immunologic consequences of repeated dosing (“boosting”) with any vaccine, including the gene therapy-based products (mRNA or recombinant AdV). During the recent ACIP meeting, I asked a question about lot-to-lot variability in safety and effectiveness with the mRNA products. The “how bad is my batch” question that is near and dear to my own heart (so to speak) as my second dose elicited such significant adverse events (POTS syndrome, restless leg, atrial fibrillation, malignant hypertension) and was identified as being a “bad lot” based on VAERS report analysis.
The answer I received from a CDC official was that it was not CDC’s job to monitor lot-to-lot variability, but rather that was FDA’s job. No matter that CDC VAERS data clearly document significant lot-to-lot variability, not in our wheelhouse. As an ACIP member, I was told to seek data from the FDA.
The immunology discussion related to the perplexing, persistent issues of whether repeated antigen exposure can cause the immune system to become less (rather than more) responsive to either a specific antigen, pathogen, or even in general. The immunobabble terminology related to these issues include “original antigenic sin”, “immune imprinting”, “immunoglobulin class switching”, “high zone tolerance”, and Allergen immunotherapy, also known as “desensitization” or “hypo-sensitization”. Bottom line? In immunology, more is not necessarily better. And yet rigorous vaccine primary and “booster” dose selection, timing and repeated boosting studies are rarely if ever done, even in rodent models. Now the ACIP makes recommendations to the CDC director about such matters, so you might assume that the CDC would have the data to demonstrate that decisions about the short and long term effects of re-administration of “vaccines” are based on solid human clinical research findings, wouldn’t you. And you would be wrong. These data just do not exist within the world of CDC data sets. Why you ask? Same answer as for the lot-to-lot variability. Not in our wheelhouse. Paraphrasing- “We do not have the capabilities to do those studies.” “This would require sophisticated immunologic analyses and we do not have either the equipment or the staff.” So who does, one might ask? WELL, that is NIH’s job.
I have DECADES of experience with the NIH and its grants, contracts, and peer-review processes. And Jill’s PhD research project specifically focused on the NIH peer review process. We know a lot about both intramural and extramural NIH funding. First thing you should know about that, aside from the chronic and persistent conflicts of interest and bias (overt and subtle) inherent in that system, is that it takes 4-5 years from initial concept to actually awarding a grant or contract via NIH. A paragon of bureaucratic inefficiency. So, rapid response to a novel public health threat is not consistent with the NIH system.
Aside – Which is why the “other transactional authority” contracting system was set up over at BARDA and DoD. Which was the system that lead to the famous Pfizer defense (paraphrasing) that “we did not commit fraud, we delivered the fraud that the government contracted us to deliver’. Someone should be charged with contracting fraud on that one, but that is a different topic. I was there over a decade ago when this “OTA” system was developed, and have used it myself for major contracts that I have built and won for clients. I know what I am talking about.
But getting back to the crevasses. In the case of the immunologic consequences of repeated dosing with antigens (ergo, “boosting”), no Dr. Peter Marks, inbred mice do not predict human responses.The only thing that predicts outbred human responses is outbred human responses. Not mice, not ferrets, and not monkeys.
And immune system responses in humans that live in the rough and tumble stew of chronic parasites and pathogen exposure on the African continent do not even predict how North American humans will respond, in part due to the cytokine responses generated by the parasites and pathogens. Does NIH routinely fund evaluation of these sorts of issues for existing or new vaccines? No. That would be the job of the FDA. Does the FDA do it? No, that would be the job of the pharmaceutical companies.
Another fundamental inconvenient truth is that, if you are a pharmaceutical industry researcher, it is career suicide to do any studies during advanced development (clinical research stage) just because they seem like the right thing to do to answer an important question. You only do those studies that the FDA forces you to do. Otherwise you might get an answer that will delay or block FDA marketing authorization. And if the FDA is not on the ball or willfully looking the other way due to various pressures and biases, they do not require the studies that would address things like, say, shedding or adverse long-term effects of repeated boosting.
So, CDC says it is FDA or NIH’s problem. NIH is distracted, incredibly inefficient, and driven by fame, fortune, the Nobel Prize hunt and racking up “peer reviewed” publications that go nowhere. DoD does what it can, but its mission is fighting wars and protecting the warfighter, not civilians. And the FDA just muddles through, constantly getting pressured, gamed and spun by Pharma. Medical caregivers have been indoctrinated to have faith in the system and have no idea of how deeply messed up things actually are.
And the average person (and average politician) believes the promoted marketing and propaganda that all is “safe and effective” and that they should just shut up and do what their doctor tells them to do. And the profit rolls in like a tsunami.
This is what I see from my perch. Yes, over decades of experience, I have become deeply cynical. But I still hold out hope that things can be made better. And I hope that you do too. The Make America Healthy Again movement is like nothing I have ever experienced or even imagined. It will not be easy, and it will not be quick. Secretary Kennedy and his team do not have a magic wand, and the resistance to change (internal and external) is enormous. This will take years, and will require massive reimagining and restructuring of the entire health enterprise.
Do we have a choice? If we fail in this endeavor, then our children will continue to live shorter and less healthy lives than their parents. And this is just not acceptable.
One of the big outstanding COVID crisis questions is “How did the medical care system get things so wrong?.” This excellent essay from Dr. Randall Bock uses personal experience and anecdotes from a lifetime of primary care practice spanning rural W Virginia to big city Boston to illustrate and illuminate the sickness at the heart of modern western medicine. I first met Dr. Bock right after the recent election when he reached out to interview me about USG HHS, government contracting, and BARDA. We have had many conversations since, and I have become a fan of his work and perspective. But I had no idea of his personal history. What this essay reveals is the systemic medical system dysfunction seen throughout the US and western medicine during COVID was part of a much broader problem.
“Chemistry – well, technically chemistry is the study of matter. But I prefer to see it as the study of change…. But that’s all of life, right? It’s just the constant, it’s the cycle…. It is growth, then decay, then transformation. It is fascinating. Really.” — Walter White, Breaking Bad
Like Walter White, I started as a chemistry major. During medical school summer breaks, I taught organic chemistry at Yale. That subject (which for most premeds involved “rote” memorization) is better tackled gleaning structure; finding coherence in complexity; crossing pathways of learning a language and mastering circuitry. I co-majored in physics as both disciplines demand clarity, logic, proof.
College, for me, had been a time of free-form exploration: fear, discovery, curiosity, and the exhilarating process of learning how to make propitious use of time with so many diversions possible. Medical school, by contrast, was a shock. I had imagined a deeper dive into science; what I found instead was regimentation: biology boot camp. The emphasis wasn’t on understanding but on discipline– on memorizing vast catalogs of facts before smartphones made the world’s knowledge a thumb-swipe away. It was a jarring adjustment. You weren’t guided to think critically so much as force-fed– like the goose in the pâté de foie gras process– stuffed with information until deemed ripe. Then tested.
Medicine talks a lot about being a science– but too often, it behaves like abstract art. And not the rigorous, rule-bound kind. It resembles Jackson Pollock: slapdash, mood-driven, open to interpretation depending on who’s paying the bill or writing the guideline. To be fair, some domains– like pathology or parasitology– offered clarity. I had professors in those fields whose lessons I still carry. The facts were the facts; the science was the science.
But in softer, more interpretive areas– especially those entangled with human behavior, hormones, or institutional consensus– medicine shifts. It gets personal, tribal, even theatrical. One moment, doctors are confidently headed in one direction; then comes a splash in the water– and the whole “school” veers. This isn’t clinical reasoning– it’s choreography, and fishy at that.
We call medicine an “art,” but that doesn’t excuse it from having structure. When medicine forgets it is grounded in science, it stops being either: good medicine or good science– let alone worthy art.
A Physician’s Unorthodox Path
My journey through medicine hasn’t followed the path most physicians walk. It’s been both more mundane and more surreal. I’ve practiced more hands-on primary care medicine—without mid-level clinicians—than any other MD in my circle (27 years running a solo outpatient office in a blue-collar town). I followed a simple principle: if you’re sick, come in; letting care come before coding (I also offered appointments).
A few years earlier, I’d stepped off the medical-academic track—turning down a Yale Psychiatry residency to spend a year doctoring in Calhoun County, West Virginia: a region of proud but impoverished, tradition-bound people, where time moved differently, and medicine meant earning trust across the chasm of an English spoken seemingly from different centuries (theirs from the previous).
Switching back and accepting a slot in Harvard-MGH’s Psychiatry, I found myself clashing with hierarchy and conformity, a theme that has dogged and defined much of my career. (For those interested, I tell the full story in On Becoming a Doctor, a chapter within my as-yet unpublished memoir.)
That restless streak—the refusal to go along just to get along—shaped everything that followed. I’ve questioned sacred cows, challenged orthodoxy, and paid dearly for it: a personally and professionally painful form of “no good deed goes unpunished”.
I have always believed that physicians (like attorneys) must serve the needs of the individuals enlisting them– not any institutional nor governmental directive (unless those happen to align). But in today’s system – far too often, the opposite has become the norm: medicine (perceptually and practically) genuflects to bureaucracies, to pharmaceutical incentives, and public health “narratives”– all wrapped in the sterile armor of “consensus”.
I’ve essentially never not said what I thought. That is the starting point for creating patient interactions’ comprising integrity; and shepherding a best pathway to health– or at the very least an accommodation to chronic disease. I practiced just outside of Boston, arguably a “medical mecca”; yet time and again, I saw patients emerge from these prestigious institutions utterly confused, unable to grasp what their physicians had explained: words spoken over the patient’s head, directed to medical students in tow. “Elite care” had failed the most basic test of communication.
One episode that has stayed with me involves a brilliant, older family friend who had had a one-day bout of delirium, likely due to an infection. The hospital– Brigham, no less– quickly slotted him into a psychiatric pathway (albeit on a medical floor, but failed to obtain acutely the most basic of tests to rule out intercurrent infection); perhaps subtly branding him as just another doddering, demented elderly man. Various medical teams seemingly hadn’t bothered to ask the right questions or listen. They didn’t grasp that this man had been attending dinners and holding his own in conversations at the highest intellectual levels. He had a life, a mind, a voice– and they ignored all of it: seeing only the outer mask of an old man’s briefly spouting nonsense.
It wasn’t the hospital that called me in, but the family, who were rightfully alarmed that he was being dismissed and misunderstood. Unpaid and unofficial, I found a disjointed set of subspecialists’ drifting by like ships in the night, each pursuing its own protocol without any unified direction or clinical narrative– or cohesive “business plan”within the chart.
Shockingly, no blood cultures had been done. I had to push to get even a urine culture ordered. They weren’t curious, merely operating in silos: ticking off non-sequitur procedures; entirely missing (and never finding) the cause of his condition. I made multiple phone calls to each of the sub- branches (pleading for a concerted effort to find the cause of his acute delirium), but could never get them together on a conference call.
Fortunately, he recovered fully (because of – or despite this medical stay). His mind is sharp as ever (but for that one day).
This experience, among many others, crystallized my growing disillusionment with a medical system that too often prioritizes protocol over patients, pushing me to question not just clinical practices but the very institutions shaping them.
Challenging Medical Dogma
My Authority Magazine bio-interview sketches the outlines of regulatory injustices’ culminating in professional tragedy – and rebirth. I grew up in a financially struggling (five of us in a 1.5 bedroom apartment) but conversationally forthright household, where my parents sacrificed to send us to private school. Asking inconvenient questions in pursuit of truth is my way of paying them respect. That paradigm led to my exposing the shakily irrational underpinnings of Zika-microcephaly in my book Overturning Zika; to dissect the institutional and semantic inflation behind autism diagnoses in my Substack (praised by Dr. Robert Malone as a “treatise”); and to push back against both the COVID panic machine and the prevailing mythologies of addiction.
These seemingly disparate medical topics are not unrelated threads. They represent stories of how external factors distort medical theory. Public health today isn’t about your health: it’s about managing perception, maintaining hierarchy, and avoiding blame. This pattern of prioritizing ideology over evidence extends beyond addiction to other medical domains.
Rethinking Addiction: A Heretic’s Approach
When I wrote that methadone maintenance had ignited (and continues to fan) the opioid crisis, I wasn’t merely guessing.
I had developed a successful, (multi-month-duration) slow-taper detox program– offering a pathway back to genuine sobriety, not a subscription to a lifetime of dependency, via replacement narcotics (whether methadone or Suboxone).
My patients came from all over New England– but mostly from poorer enclaves of Lynn, Chelsea, and Revere (and so often with stories sadder even than merely poverty: foster care, broken households, abuse). Many gave testimony to the joy at making progress in their lives rather than being treated with methadone clinics’ “soft bigotry of low expectations” that they would never be able to “get clean” completely. This was especially poignant on the occasion of women in early pregnancy who had begged and begged their methadone counselors and physicians to be allowed to taper to zero so they could avoid the mewling, tense, isolating detox that a methadone-babyendures on birth.
“When I first had her, she was really bad. Like, she had tremors real bad. It was the worst thing I could ever, ever see for an infant to be withdrawing.”KATIE (on methadone)
But the Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine (BORIM), led by proudly biasedDr. Candace Lapidus Sloane, didn’t see me as a physician committed to helping addicts reclaim their lives. It saw a heretic. My medical license was suspended, in part, based on testimony from a so-called “state expert” who never reviewed a single one of my patient charts. Moreover, she objected to my tapering narcotic addicts to sobriety (vs. “maintaining” them); while her own practice involved tapering benzodiazepine-addiction. Her entire argument amounted to quoting Nora Volkow and proclaiming, without a trace of irony, that addiction is “a brain disease by definition.” By definition (!?), that’s not science; it’s dogma.
To be fair, BORIM had its foot in the door via a patient complaint– a vindictive, vengeful, and entirely self-serving grievance from a narcotic addict who feared I might jeopardize his disability payments by helping him get sober. I never would have “snitched,” but that didn’t matter. He embellished and distorted his story, and BORIM took the word of a part-time heroin dealer over mine. It was a classic “he said, he said” (even though I had four witnesses on premises who had never noticed an untoward word from me nor any note of displeasure from him during his time in our office).
In retrospect, I was probably naïve. Maybe too self-assured. When the Board first opened an inquiry into me, I assumed its sage members would recognize that I was serious, conscientious, even thoughtful about addiction treatment. I had just finished writing Withdraw to Freedom: Navigating the Addiction Maze, which existed in manuscript form. I believed– wrongly– that reading it would reassure them. Instead, it had the opposite effect.
BORIM leadership treated the book as a smoking gun. My core sin? I didn’t believe addiction was a “disease.” The Board’s own summary got even that wrong: I didn’t merely propose “discourse and reflection.” I implemented a structured, taper-based treatment protocol from the outset—gradually reducing Suboxone over months, not just “toward the end.”
Patients came in grieving, broken, often self-destructive—and many left restored. Addiction isn’t Type I diabetes. People fall into despair and drug use, but they can climb back out. I saw it happen, repeatedly. Until I didn’t, 2014, my annus horribilis.
“Addiction is not a disease. We have a word for diseases– it’s diseases— and we have a word for addiction– it’s addiction. Changing the names of things may work for a moment, but ultimately the meaning catches up with them. People say, ‘Well, it is a disease because it changes your brain chemistry.’ Love changes your brain chemistry. Taking a walk in the woods changes your brain chemistry. That’s what the brain is: the brain is a router… for communicating spiritual truths to your physical body so you can experience them as a physical entity.”
That’s not denialism. That’s clarity. Addiction may be tragic, consuming, and complex– but so are many aspects of human behavior. Calling it a disease because it feels grave or because it changes the brain isn’t medicine. It’s theology in a lab coat; dogma dressed as science.
I don’t deny addiction’s complexity. But I reject its rebranding into a deterministic, pathological inevitability– as though relapse were as unpreventable as pancreatic cancer. Not every serious problem is a disease. Break your hip, and it might kill you– but we still call it an injury, a trauma, not a chronic illness.
The author of Naked Lunch (1959), William Burroughs– a dissolute scion of a wealthy family, muse to the Beat Poets, (in)advertent William Tell–wannabe wife-killer, and (of course!) a Harvard man– didn’t stumble into heroin addiction blindly. By his own account, he embraced it knowingly. Burroughs aptly called narcotic addiction a “disease of exposure.” It doesn’t arise spontaneously. It requires cultivation, distribution, and availability of the drug– “junk,” in his terms. Nobody in 1000 years of (not so Dark-) Middle Ages’ Europe suffered from heroin addiction. It didn’t exist. Some in Asia, where opium was prevalent, perhaps did. That makes narcotic addiction a condition with a historically and geographically contingent distribution– not a timeless biological disease.
Even today, addiction correlates more closely with trauma, alienation, idleness– and yes, bad choices: just like gambling, porn, or compulsive overeating– than with any pathogen or gene. And irony abounds: the same population, placed in different social and moral environments, can display wildly different addiction rates. The English and Scots-Irish stock of the Intermountain West, for instance, show nearly zero heroin addiction when Mormon, but substantial addiction rates when not. Likewise, heroin and opium abuse plagued a war-torn Southeast Asia, but plummeted when the same people– Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian– migrated to the U.S. and thrived in ways they never could back home. In Indochina, they were impoverished, but for opium crops – but never diseased at the molecular level. Addiction is not destiny. It is context.
Yet instead of treating narcotic addiction as a human condition (or even analogously to how it treats alcohol- or benzodiazepine- addictions: certainly with care and psychotherapy but with either abrupt or gradual detoxing completely away from the addicting substance), medicine decided (surprise!) to “medicalize” it– carving out a permanent revenue stream, wrapped in scientific jargon, enforced by regulation. I had challenged that model: arguing for autonomy; for tapering; for sober pregnancies’ leading to unaddicted babies; for personal agency; for treating the individual– not for extending dependency any longer than necessary under the guise of (a coincidently self-reimbursing) compassion. That stance put me squarely in the crosshairs.
Professional Exile and the Cost of Truth
After I overturned the Board’s first suspension in court, it reinstated my license– and then immediately suspended it again. Not because I had harmed patients, but (arguably) because I was a threat to the model: refusing to endorse the “lifetime Suboxone subscription” racket that lines the pockets of addiction “specialists.” I fought back– again– and won. But the damage had been done: years of lost income; professional exile; endless legal forays and expenses; my beloved walk-in clinic shattered and shuttered.
“Regrets, I’ve had a few”: the upheaval my family was put through; a lack of realizing a Sword of Damocles’ looming within an ideologically-driven BORIM (but how could I have known?)– however, I don’t regret my thoughts, my imperatives, my theories, and (case-by-case) my actions. I am a (pre-Covid -era) victim of thinking freely (wrongthink thoughtcrime). Conversely, my docketed Supreme Court case advocates for medical free speech– and a reversal of politicization of medical boards.
Panic as Policy: Medicine’s Failure to Learn
I see now that this pattern– of channeling physicians’ thoughts and actions through ideology rather than evidence– is everywhere. It’s not just addiction. It’s COVID. It’s autism. It’s Zika. It’s menopause. Remember Dr. Susan Love? A prominent breast surgeon with little clinical focus on hormone therapy, she helped spark a national panic over HRT in the 1990s. The ensuing hysteria– amplified by the media and medicine (via the 2002 Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study, led by JoAnn Manson)– drove millions of women into abrupt, unmanaged menopause.
Dr. Manson two decades later called it“the most dramatic sea change in clinical medicine that I have ever seen.” Newsweek characterized the response as “near panic.”
Lost in that stampede was the simple truth: regular medical contact– especially for women on HRT– not only improved quality of life, but also enhanced early cancer detection and survival. The initial WHI findings, skewed by a cohort of older women well past menopause, ignored the benefits for younger women in early menopause– where the risks are lower, and the improvements in vitality, mood, and long-term health are significant.
It’s the same playbook we saw during COVID: a narrow risk in one demographic– exaggerated, universalized, and weaponized against everyone. The best course for the young was buried beneath panic meant for the old. We were told the science had spoken, when in fact it had only whispered– and been misheard.
They say history doesn’t repeat, but it rhymes. In modern medicine, it rhymes with silence, panic, and obedience. The fallout from that blind spot is only now being reversed. “Women live longer, feel better. The benefits are overwhelming”, said the FDA’s Dr. Marty Makary– just days ago.
“We” (in “Big Medicine“) should have known better, sooner. PS, I did – and I never changed my HRT-prescribing willingness throughout the 2000s and 2010s: as a lonely voice in the wilderness: treating individuals individually.
Big Medicine too often prefers consensus to truth. Same with autism. As I outlined in my essay Unraveling Autism’s Surge, the explosion in diagnoses isn’t just biology– it’s semantic. Funding, insurance codes, and shifting diagnostic categories, have fueled the surge in autism diagnoses. COVID followed a similar pattern, prioritizing catastrophe over calm, mandates over choice, and censorship over debate, dismissing the collateral damage– overdoses, shuttered businesses, educational collapse– as necessary.
A Call for Courage in Medicine and Beyond
What I’ve learned is this: we have too many experts, too few advocates.When O.J. Simpson went to court, he didn’t get a general counsel for society– he got lawyers just for him. We are far more innocent than he and we deserve the same and better: not groupthink; not population-level dictates. A physician (rightly) serves the patient, not the state, not the insurer, not the CDC. That was the ethic of my medical office. And for that, I was crushed.
Now, I’m still speaking out: through Brownstone; through Substack; through YouTube; through the courts, where I argued that licensing boards shouldn’t get a free pass to crush dissent under the guise of (a falsely-perceived sense of) “safety.” I’ve paid a price. But I’ve gained something more valuable: clarity.
The real public health crisis isn’t opioids, viruses, or autism. It’s cowardice. It’s the institutional refusal to say, “We were wrong.” And worse– it’s the power to punish those who do. If you’ve read this far, you already know what I mean. You’ve probably felt it. If so, I invite you to stand with me. Because the truth isn’t cheap– but it’s worth every sacrifice.
“The trouble is that …much of the application process isn’t built for honesty. Just as I once scrambled to demonstrate my fluency in D.E.I., students now scramble to script the ideal disagreement [civility test], one that manages to be intriguing without being dangerous.” Alex Bronzini-Vender
Why not admit students based on merit, and then teach them how to debate vigorously and disagree honorably? Civility has its place– on the bus, at the dinner table– but not as a gatekeeping metric for truth-seekers– and not on the debate stage whether real or metaphoric (and medical). Not when lies are on the line, personally and societally. But that’s the direction we’re heading. DEI initiatives, peer enforcement of ideological etiquette, and a shift away from academic rigor toward enforced emotional consensus are eroding the very foundations of intellectual independence.
We need a generation of physicians– and thinkers– trained not in compliance, but in courage. The future of medicine, and of liberty itself, depends on it. But liberty is eroding fast. In the UK, the benignly named Online Safety Bill grants bureaucrats sweeping authority to censor speech online in the name of “protection.” In reality, it’s protection for power– protection from dissent. Echoing Elon Musk, Hananya Naftali noted, “They don’t ban hate speech. They ban speech they hate.”
When we can no longer tell the truth– about medicine, about biology, about addiction, about risk then all we have left are narratives. And those who challenge the narrative become the enemy. We must continue with clarity, courage, and a commitment to serving the individual– not the system. That is the only path forward. The only oath that matters.
Today’s essay provides brief reviews of two recent books that I recommend for your reading pleasure, links to two important recent “insider’ substack essays, and some updates concerning the ongoing PsyWar campaigns designed to divide the Make America Healthy Again movement. MAHA is increasingly acknowledged as the most significant contemporary US political movement. Those industries, cabals, trade organizations (particularly corporate political action committees), and Medical guilds (AMA, AAP, etc.) that are at risk for losing revenue, stock value, power, and status from the coming policy changes are not going to take this lying down.
Forbidden Facts: Government Deceit & Suppression About Brain Damage from Childhood Vaccines
Author Gavin DeBecker is unquestionably the most important person you have never heard of in the campaign for truth, transparency, and medical freedom during the COVID crisis. The author of the bestseller “Gift of Fear”, Gavin is a personal friend of both Jill and me, as well as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Tony Lyons (publisher and leader of the MAHA Action 501C4), and an amazing broad cross-section of Hollywood/entertainment elite. One of many examples is that he was a close lifelong friend (since childhood) of actress Carrie Fisher. He has provided quiet behind-the-scenes support for many that you would recognize in the COVID “medical freedom”—movement, including myself. He was the original financial backer of the super-PAC that financially supported RFKjr during his Presidential Campaign. During the COVID crisis until now, DeBecker, author of multiple bestselling books published under his own name, has silently ghostwritten and published important COVID books using the names of others. Now he has decided to publish this important new work under his own name.
How do you counter officious “debunking”? How do you refute government-promoted medical falsehoods, propaganda, and gaslighting? This book leads by example. You carefully, calmly, and objectively cite and document multiple examples of how a fake “debunking” process is deployed. How government, industry and academia collude to craft seemingly definitive but false narratives designed to avoid corporate and governmental accountability. You demonstrate that those doing the “debunking” are actually agents acting at the behest of the organizations facing blowback from their actions, lies, and coverups. You leaven the loaf with a bit of sardonic wit to lighten the reader’s burden as they encounter repeated patterns of fraud. You provide the data proving the inconvenient truths previously obscured by the coverups. And then you let your readers draw their own conclusions. That is precisely what this clearly and persuasively written book does, no more and no less.
I was grateful to receive an advance copy to read and review. Talk about truth bombs! One after another. Once again, as when Bobby Kennedy asked me to edit “The Real Anthony Fauci”, I was struck by the sense that – despite all that I thought I knew about US government, Academic medicine, and Pharma/Bio collusion, misdeeds, propaganda, and just plain outright coverups, there is so much more to know. This is a book both for our times and for the ages. Once again, what I learned is not to trust pseudo-government-sounding organizations like the “National Academy of Sciences’, which is just as much of a government organization as the “Federal Reserve”. Read this carefully researched book, and then make your own determination about the promoted truths and falsehoods concerning the safety of the current US childhood vaccine schedule.
As many are increasingly aware, the worm is turning, and now even Wikipedia is allowing edits to the outright defamation and slander that has been woven into what many now refer as “Wokopedia.” While on “working vacation” recently, I was talking to a colleague who specializes in reputation reconstruction following targeted defamation campaigns, and we started discussing the aggressive editing of my own bio on Wikipedia. To my great surprise, when I looked up the latest version of my Wiki bio, I was pleasantly surprised. The usual sentence that I “spread vaccine misinformation during COVID” (which never defines what that misinformation was and relies on biased corporate media propaganda) is still there. As is a quote from the NY Slimes hit piece on me written by the “disinformation reporter” Davey Alba – after which she was terminated from the NYT. No context provided for that one either, including her uncanny insider knowledge of CIA matters. But all and all, it was packed with accurate and generally favorable new information – including a section on Jill, listing her PhD, and reporting that we have a long-standing stable marriage beginning with being high-school sweethearts.
People often speak to me of “how hard” it must have been/still is to deal with the barrage of censorship and defamation campaigns I have experienced during the last five years. My response is always that what I have had to deal with pales in comparison to President Trump. But right up there is the smear campaign and roll up smears deployed against the “Disinformation Dozen” that include Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Dr. Mercola, and Sayer Ji. Akin to my failed suits against the NYT, WaPo, and various social media influencers that engaged in coordinated delegitimization and defamation campaigns, Sayer has filed a lawsuit against the firm that launched this campaign against him – the Center for Combating Digital Hate (CCDH). Notice how these shadowy astroturf organizations like to give themselves such benign-sounding names?
Unlike my lawsuits, Sayer is making progress. The legal climate has shifted considerably, and judges are increasingly aware that people’s rights have been damaged by these PsyWar campaigns. And now, like my own, his Wikipedia page is starting to come around. If you want to know more about what is going on in his case, I recommend you read this recent Substack.
I hesitate to mention this essay because it will just feed the ongoing trollery. Still, for those of you who have been following the escapades of Jane Ruby and her colleagues and associated outrage farmers Sasha Latypova and Naomi Wolf, there has been an update from “Open Vaet”. Just to address that attack line, “Open Vaet” is not an anonymous pseudonym for me, despite Jane Ruby’s delusions. If for no other reason, it is useful to read and engage with this author and her work to better understand the tactics and strategy being used by the current crop of chaos agents.
It’s been an interesting few days since the release of our coverage – produced with a few selfless anons – of Jane Ruby’s life and how her frauds directly endangered children with opioids, for career advancement… before she mysteriously evaded accountability and emerged unscathed from the lawsuit that led to her company’s $2-billion fine…
Another fascinating and very readable survey, in this case written by an author who is firmly rooted in Academic Medicine but has also decided to come out and put his insights and criticisms of the vaccine enterprise on paper, despite the blowback he is likely to receive. And as was the case with the DeBecker book, I was provided with a publisher’s pre-print to read and review.
Author’s Bio follows as provided by the publisher. Northwestern Med Transplantation Immunology (Chicago- my alma mater) AND Scripps (LaJolla, CA) is about as mainstream medicine as you are going to find. And yet here it is. An amazingly broad analysis of the history of virology, vaccines, molecular biology, and the comprehensive corruption of the entire academic/governmental/pharmaceutical industrial complex inadvertently brought about by the Bayh-Dole Act.
DR. RICHARD K. BURT is a Fulbright Scholar, CEO of Genani Biotechnology, a tenured retired Professor at Northwestern, and current Scripps faculty. He pioneered America’s first hematopoietic stem cell transplant for autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis and scleroderma. Dr Burt has seven United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patents on using induced pluripotent stem (IPS) cells for aging and degenerative diseases.
Dr. Burt was awarded Leukemia Scholar of America, the Lupus Foundation of America Fidelitas Award, the van Bekkum Award by the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT), the Distinguished Clinical Achievement Award by the Clinical Research Forum, the EBMT Clinical Achievement Award, and the “Keys to the Vatican” in Rome. He has spoken at numerous conferences, universities, and institutions. Hospitals worldwide offer his stem cell protocols to patients.
Dr. Burt was recognized by Science Illustrated for accomplishing one of the Top 10 medical breakthroughs and by Scientific American as one of the Top 50 individuals for improving humanity and outstanding leadership. Dr Burt has written 150 medical / science articles, four medical textbooks, and two lay books: Everyday Miracles and Kill Switch.
What is the Kill Switch that Dr. Burt refers to in the title? Basically, Burt argues that transparent disclosure of risk and proper informed consent for medical procedures provides the most effective check on out-of-control medical research and mandates.
The scope of this volume is amazing, reaching back to the dawn of the written history of western civilization and the role of Smallpox as both a bioweapon and as a key factor in the collapse of the Roman Empire, through the development of the initial Smallpox vaccines, to the missteps and consequences of early polio vaccine development and deployment, through AIDS, the Ebola vaccine, and ending with the origin of SARS-CoV-2. However it stops short of commenting on the missteps associated with Operation Warp Speed and the genetic vaccines, and to my jaded eye, cautiously side steps a number of controversies that I have had direct experience with. Particularly notable is the lack of a chapter describing the early attempts to develop an RSV vaccine and the problem of vaccine-associated disease enhancement. Despite those mild reservations, I really enjoyed reading this during my recent ‘working vacation’, was fascinated with the many historic facts that the author did discuss, and am completely aligned with his comments and analysis concerning the central critical importance of informed consent as well as the deeply corrupting effects of the Bayh-Dole act.
Another book that is absolutely worth reading, made even more so because the author is so deeply embedded in mainstream academic medicine and biotechnology. The intellectual landscape concerning the modern vaccine and biomedical industrial complex is clearly shifting. This book provides hope that it is moving in the right direction. For those not familiar with the history of vaccination, the role of modern biochemistry and molecular biology, and the ethical issues confronting this sector, this is also an excellent introductory primer.
For the gullible, easily manipulated, and frankly, paranoid personalities, outrage trolling – or really, rage-baiting posts and essays- often cause great confusion and anger, as they are meant to do.
What is outrage trolling or rage-baiting?
(Definitions below) are based on AI queries)
Outrage trolling involves intentionally posting inflammatory, provocative, or offensive content online designed to provoke strong negative emotions like outrage or anger.
It exploits controversial topics or polarizing opinions to spark heated arguments, disrupt discussions, or manipulate groups into public outrage. This behavior is common on social media, comment sections, or forums where emotionally charged content can spread rapidly, increasing division, misinformation, or the visibility of the troll’s message.
Outrage trolling is a specific form of provocative trolling and is closely related to rage-baiting or rage-farming, which also aim to generate engagement by manipulating emotions.
It is related to what I often refer to as “Fear Porn”, but represents a significant departure and evolution of the use of fear to drive clicks, likes, follows, and social media engagement.
**Key features of outrage trolling:**
• **Intentional provocation:** Posts are created to maximize anger or offense.
• **Escalation of conflict:** It often amplifies debates and spreads misinformation through emotionally manipulative tactics.
• **Viral potential:** Emotions like outrage are particularly effective at increasing online engagement and visibility.
**Limitations:** Although related to general trolling behaviors, outrage trolling mainly targets anger and public controversy, not just annoyance, confusion, or humor.
Rage-baiting is a deliberate online tactic aimed at provoking anger or outrage to increase engagement, such as comments, shares, and visibility or revenue. This is often done through inflammatory posts, memes, headlines, or comments intended to trigger strong emotional responses – mainly anger from audiences.
Key aspects of rage-baiting include:
Intentional provocation: Content is crafted to elicit anger or frustration, often without regard for truth or accuracy14.
Engagement-driven: The manipulation is aimed at increasing online interaction, which in turn boosts the post’s visibility due to how social media algorithms reward engagement, regardless of whether it is positive or negative246.
Financial and social incentives: For creators, this can result in more followers, subscribers, and sometimes direct financial gain from increased traffic or monetization27.
Distinction from trolling:While similar to trolling, rage-baiting is usually more calculated, aiming at maximizing algorithmic reward rather than simply upsetting individuals for amusement3.
Common in politics, political influence campaigns, media and marketing: It is also used as a political tactic to manipulate public opinion, distract from issues, or target opponents, sometimes by combining partial truths with misinformation.
Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
There isn’t any way to respond to rage baiting, except to ignore it. That includes queries and comments from the gullible, who don’t seem to understand that the attacks are coordinated and meant to stir up outrage and confusion. Usually for revenue and that these attacks are being coordinated.
It used to bother me a lot, so a few years back, I consulted various experts as to how I should respond. This is the standard playbook that I follow:
“Do Not Engage Emotionally: Trolls thrive on provoking emotional reactions. Responding in anger feeds the cycle and can damage your public image. Maintain a calm, collected, and professional tone in all public interactions123.
Resist the Urge to Respond: In most cases, the simplest and most effective response is silence. Ignoring trolls deprives them of the attention they seek. They often lose steam if there’s no reaction from their target145.
Block and Report: Use moderation tools to block the offender and report abusive content to the platform. Take screenshots before doing so, in case legal action or official reporting becomes necessary.”
The truth is that blocking stops the angst, but reporting does very little.
That said, I personally have recently had a full day with two FBI agents about the harassment, threats, cyberstalking, cyberbullying, psyops, etc. Apparently, an investigation has been launched from within the government.
And yes, we do fear for our lives sometimes.
So, when I don’t respond to the hate, which is designed to cause engagement by the readers, it isn’t that I don’t want to. It is that my responses would literally “feeds the trolls.”
What I don’t know is how many of these attacks are coordinated. I do know that some (maybe most) of the people involved are getting paid to do this. And I know of at least one organization that pays people to write this filth.
I recently received an apology from someone who has been involved in slandering and libeling me. I won’t dox them – but here are parts of their letter (some of it has been redacted both to protect the writer and because of the ongoing investigation0:
“I’ve owed you an apology for quite some time now, and I deeply regret not delivering it sooner. That delay is on me. But I believe we’re now more aligned in how we view things, and I want to be transparent with you. First, the article in question (redacted) was written by me. I regret it deeply. I didn’t write it voluntarily—I was under duress. But that’s not an excuse. I take full responsibility and offer you a sincere apology.
(redacted)
I said things like, “His posts don’t seem to be affecting sales. There’s no reason to go to war with him publicly.” I wanted us to focus on content that mattered to people, not petty drama. I was worried that obsessing over you would sink the business (redacted). But (redacted) shut me down: “We tried ignoring him. He’s not going away. We have to do something.”
I tried to resist further, but I eventually caved to the idea of … (redacted). Drama was the only angle you were vulnerable to because, frankly, you had been right about almost everything. I published (redacted) under the (redacted) name because I did not want my name attached to it.
At first, I didn’t promote it. I was already mad that I was strong-armed into doing this, and I didn’t want to be a part of their drama. I figured no one would even see (redacted) unless I shared it (redacted).
Then came the pressure. (Redacted) called me and said (redacted) was worried I was “wavering”—meaning that I was not passing his loyalty test. At the time, 80% of my income came from (redacted). I caved and chose the path of least resistance.
For that, I am truly sorry. I’m even more sorry that it appears the (redacted) may have harmed your reputation. That’s what weighs on me the most. You didn’t deserve that (redacted), and your criticisms of (redacted) were completely fair.
I see (redacted) for what they are now, and I’m disgusted that they built their success by exploiting my influence and grifting off the medical freedom movement. (redacted) operation deserve to be held accountable. I am sorry that I not only hurt your good name but contributed to their success. If there is anything I can do to make this right, I am open to having that conversation. Sincerely, (redacted)”
(end of letter -sent to my X DM from an account with almost two million followers)
At least one person apologized. More than I ever expected. But this is my world. Sometimes, it is hard not to be bitter or afraid.
The outrage trolling and rage baiting is not “just” about engagement farming. The outrage trolling and rage baiting is coordinated, and yes, pharma is involved.
Secretary Kennedy and his team at HHS are also under attack. From literally all sides. But please understand, none of us subjected to these types of attacks can defend ourselves. We just have to suck it up. No matter how much we want to fight, clear our good name, or strike back with some pithy comment.
The only thing we can do is go quiet. To engage in their war is to lose.
In the meantime, I continue to keep my gate closed, my dogs wild, and my weapons nearby. But not too nearby, because frankly, the risk of getting swatted is great, and makes any defense dangerous. And yes, the widespread deployment of swatting continues unabated, and according to my sources, the FBI won’t do anything to stop it.
The rage baiting against MAHA may eventually get someone killed, and at times, I am afraid it will be me.
There is no winning in this war, except by educating followers and MAHA movement supporters of how this trick is played, in hopes that they will not fall for the bad jacketing and false flag attacks.
In retrospect, was this an attempt by legacy media, at the behest of the deep state controlled by Obama, to set the narrative that the findings of the Mueller report were inaccurate, due to Mueller’s “cognitive aging”?
As the deep state knew dam well that Trump did not collude with the Russians all along and that the report exonerating Trump was exactly what they didn’t want to come out – with the 2020 presidential election on the horizon?
This was propaganda, plain and simple. PsyWar tech was repeatedly deployed by the deep state against American Citizens to delegitimize a duly elected president.
Will there be consequences?
Malone News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
With Stephen Colbert gone from Cable TV, just think about we all will be missing.
Yah, “that” vaccine dance!
But for anyone who needs more indoctrination and propaganda from our good friends in the pharma industry and government – oh, Stephey delivered so much more!
(If you watched all of that video, you are a better man than I)!
So say we all- Good riddance to bad trash news!
But what about big bird?
Let’s face it, who remembers when “Bird Bird” tried to guilt parents of toddlers into getting their babies vaccinated with an experimental product, to “save” grandma?
And we thought thegood times would never end <insert sarcasm>!
Taking out the trash…
The truth is that when Big Bird became a child predator, it became time to defund PBS.
This week Congress did the right thing. They deserves our gratitude for defunding PBS.
It is past time to eliminate such rubbish from the airwaves.
Malone News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
My experience working in the Ebola response in 2014 re-enforced a very different lesson than that of the COVID policy wonks, who ran Operation Warp Speed and then the Biden White House Response.
That is that vaccines would never be the answer to an ongoing viral outbreak. Just to say, once again, the genetic “vaccine” products did not work. They did not stop infection, transmission or death. They may have even driven viral evolution towards vax/antibody escape mutants. In the case of the West African Ebola outbreak, it was controlled using non-pharmaceutical interventions. Not vaccines or drugs.
Medical countermeasures for future outbreaks involving pathogens for which we do not have direct-acting anti-pathogen pharmaceuticals must include a response that listens to hands-on physicians tinkering to find medical countermeasures that work in the field. Generic, FDA-approved medicines that have worked in the past for early treatments of disease processes will work in the future. They must be the first line of defense.
Rather than being suppressed, autopsies and fundamental understanding of the pathophysiology of disease caused by novel pathogens must be promoted. Furthermore, public health responses to non-respiratory infectious diseases will differ from those for respiratory contagious diseases. One size does not fit all.
And finally, that the US intelligence community is deeply embedded in the bureaucracy that sets “public health” policies, particularly during infectious disease outbreaks, and works hand-in-glove with Bill Gates, WHO leadership, US State Department, and the giants of the BioPharmaceutical industry, such as “Bio”. And the US “Intelligence” community has repeatedly bungled “public health” policy. They are not equipped for this mission, and should not be meddling in this space. This is yet another example of mission creep.
During COVID, the all-of-government response focused on vaccines and that is what they got (all of government meaning DHS, HHS, DoD, Department of State and CIA/IC). And it was a colossal fail that infringed on fundamental human rights principles.
The USA had far more deaths attributed to COVID per capita than most or all other countries. This response was developed and operationalized by Ron Klain and then by Jeff Zients. Zients was both President Biden’s COVID czar and then moved to Chief of Staff. Jeff Zients WAS one of the key COVID puppetmasters. There must be investigations, and there must be consequences.
We live so far out in the country that even Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t knock on our door.
My life…
Exactly one year ago today, President Trump narrowly escaped an assassination attempt. Just 64 days later, on a Florida golf course, the Secret Service intercepted another potential assassin, Ryan Wesley Routh, who was aiming a rifle through bushes at the President, 400 yards away.
Malone News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Tomorrow will be the one-year anniversary of the attempt on President Trump in Butler, PA. There has still be almost no information released by the government regarding this event. No Secret Service agent has been held accountable to any serious extent, with only six agents suspended for brief periods, ranging from 10 to 42 days.
How can that be possible?
BTW- Ryan Wesley Routh’s trial is set to start in September… Let’s see if the dead media actually reports on it – or whether it will be yet another buried story. Not worthy of headline news.
The same goes for cats.
One of the most important acts that Trump did early on was to stop the Federal funding of progressive causes. USAID was symbolic of that – but the WH administration is systematically going through each agency, from HHS to the State Dept, and cleaning out the BS.
Thank goodness!
Thanks for reading Malone News! This post is public so feel free to share it.
Transitioning to a cashless society results in more frustrating self-service machines and reduced personal interactions.
The right to privacy is guaranteed in our Constitution. A cashless society can never protect our right to privacy, there every transaction is recorded and put on the cloud.
Who has access to that data?
How long before hackers, the government or the CCP find ways to use that data without permission?
Some like to call it summer, not climate change…
Malone News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
According to a new book reviewed by the New York Post, the choice to pick Tim Walz as Kamala Harris’s running mate was based on a gut feeling by Kamala, that was rooted in Walz’s love for Diet Mountain Dew…
It turns out that the other candidates, Shapiro and Kelly, chose water, while Walz requested Diet Mountain Dew during the final interview for the VP position.
Kamala believed that this demonstrated his Midwest credentials and would help her connect with rural voters. She thought Walz would appeal to the flyover states because… well, apparently, rural Americans prefer vice presidential candidates who eat junk food.
Makes sense to me!
That disastrous and frankly bigoted decision cost her the election – right from the start of her campaign.
“He ordered a Mountain Dew, so the Coastal Elites thought he was an authentic midwesterner. They never met someone from the Midwest before, but had seen the Wizard of Oz, a film that takes place in Kansas.”
-Winnie Psaki, comment on NYP article
Can’t make this stuff up.
Musk’s America Party seems to have pretty much fizzled, before it even left the launch pad…
Musk’s fantasy:
Versus the reality:
“How’s the AmericaParty working out now that we know the FEC filing was fake?
As of the latest available information, Elon Musk has not officially filed with the FEC to create the AmericaParty. While Musk announced the formation of the AmericaParty on X on July 5, 2025, following his public feud with President Donald Trump over the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” there is no evidence in FEC records or credible reports confirming that he has submitted formal paperwork to register the party.
Multiple sources note that Musk’s plans appear conceptual at this stage, with no concrete steps toward legal formation, such as setting up a tax identification number, bank account, or treasurer, which are required for FEC registration.”
Some basic facts about homelessness. The homeless population in the U.S. is growing. Recent data indicates a significant increase nationwide, with 2024 recording the highest number of homeless individuals since tracking began. Over 770,000 people were homeless in 2024, surpassing the previous year by more than 118,000. The homelessness rate increased from 1.75 per 1,000 in 2022 to 2.3 per 1,000 in 2024, representing a 30% rise over the two-year period. Overall, the homeless population increased by 18% from 2023 to 2024. Additionally, chronic homelessness, defined as individuals homeless for at least a year or experiencing repeated episodes, grew by nearly 30% between 2020 and 2023 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Under the Biden/Harris administration, the U.S experienced the largest increases in homelessness ever recorded, both in terms of the number of people and the percentage rise. Many experts believe that the federal spending and stimulus measures under the Biden administration contributed to inflation, which in turn drove up rents and home prices. Since 2019, rents have grown by more than 27% and home prices by nearly 50%. This forced many people to live on the streets.
Once people become homeless, it is very difficult to find employment and to lift themselves out of poverty. This leads to a spiral of dysfunctional behavior as people no longer have opportunities for a better future.
This is our future, unless we change American culture right now.
This is a children’s playground in Oakland, California. Kamala Harris’ hometown It is now completely overrun with a homeless encampment, trash and needles. This is what Gavin Newsom and Democrats have done to California you don’t see reported on the news.
Not all homeless individuals are without jobs. In the U.S., approximately 53% of those in homeless shelters and 40% of homeless people on the streets are employed in some capacity.
Many homeless individuals are functionally unemployed. About 66 million Americans, or nearly one in four working-age adults, are functionally unemployed—meaning they are either jobless, unable to find full-time work, or earning less than $25,000 annually. That accounts for 24.3 percent of the workforce 7.
Somehow, we have a situation whereby almost 25% of the workforce is functionally unemployed. Yet it is also argued by the experts and industry leaders that we have to import illegal aliens to do our “dirty” jobs. That Americans are incapable or unwilling to mow lawns, do landscaping, garden, do farm work, butcher, houseclean, and even complete basic construction tasks. The list of jobs we rely on illegal immigrants for goes on and on.
Of course, none of these are jobs that AI will replace anytime soon, which is why these “dirty jobs” are the jobs of the future.
But the situation gets worse. Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic, one of the world’s leading creators of artificial intelligence, forecasts that over the next five years, AI could automate or eliminate between 10% and 25% of jobs in advanced economies, with certain sectors and entry-level roles facing even higher risks. The overall global job loss rate due to AI is projected to be between 9% and 14% by 2030, with the most rapid disruption expected between 2025 and 2028 7.
This is the future we all have to prepare for.
Work has become the enemy in the minds of many Americans. For many years now, the USA has been slowly drifting away from core elements of a functional industrialized society. There is a strong belief that a four-year college degree is the best route for most people to achieve success. Pop culture has celebrated the “corner office job,” overlooking the important roles played by the workers and jobs that helped create that office.
Moreover, the traditional and essential roles of maintaining a household and raising a family have been denigrated.
Because of this, many see other pathways to success, like trade schools, apprenticeships, and certification programs, as less valuable or just “alternatives.” Well-meaning parents and counselors often view apprenticeships and on-the-job training as suboptimal options, relegated only to individuals who aren’t suited for a college degree in some manner.
This focus on higher education is in part due to a decline in vocational programs and trades classes in high schools nationwide. Unfortunately, these trends have contributed to a growing skills gap. A gap for which the solution for many small and large businesses is to either hire illegal immigrants or export their labor needs overseas.
Last Monday, I was at an event in DC, speaking with a conservative who matter-of-factly told me that we have to import labor because Americans are not going to go out and cut their grass or clean their own houses anytime soon.
However, here’s the thing: when things get bad enough, or the stigma is removed from such jobs, they will. And that is the future we have to plan for and enable.
On Sunday, we had dinner with a German family visiting the States. I was speaking to Julian, who is a German housewife. She and I were discussing the dire economic situation in Germany, primarily caused by the large influx of immigrants. The proportion of people in Germany who are immigrants, as well as their children (where both parents are immigrants), is almost 25%.
Juxtapose this with Poland. Immigrants in Poland represent about 7% of the population, and the vast majority of immigrants in Poland are from Europe. Poland’s economy is expanding at one of the fastest rates in the European Union. There is almost no unemployment. Why is this? One of the main reasons is that Poland has not taken on vast numbers of immigrants, unlike Germany. Germany is awash in immigrants who can not find work and are now relying on government services to live. [Nie słyszał o Zełanskim i Ukraińcach? md]
According to Julian, the economy in Germany is so bad that now some Polish people are actually hiring German women to clean their houses. This is an exact reversal of the situation a few years back, when Germans hired Polish women to clean their houses.
Another reason the Polish economy is thriving is that it has a highly skilled labor force. Poland has made significant, ongoing investments in teaching people the trades. This has been achieved through a combination of government funding, employer incentives, and curriculum modernization. The result is that in Poland, a more flexible and industry-aligned vocational education system has been established, equipping both youth and adults with the skills necessary for the modern economy. [fantazjuje… md]
There is a lesson to be learned from all of this for America. We must prepare for a future where trades, including manufacturing, play a significantly larger role in the economy.
Work must become not an enemy of the middle class as it is now, but their savior. And this major shift in thinking must happen rapidly.
Unfortunately, our primary and secondary schools teach children that attending college is the path to success, implying that without a college education, one cannot achieve a successful career or true mental enlightenment. College has replaced religion as the citadel of knowledge. Teachers are teaching what they were taught in college, that the pathway to success and happiness lies in a “good education.” That the trades are something we hire “others” to do. That the domestic arts are not of value. This has to change.
The Department of Education should start by creating educational materials for elementary schools that highlight the advantages of entrepreneurship, the requirements of trades careers, and the positive impact on families of such employment. These materials should emphasize that working in an industrialized setting or as a tradesperson offers stability and job security, along with opportunities for family and leisure time. That a career in the trades requires as much or more skill than a college degree. That such a career is desirable and a goal worthy of a young person’s consideration. Additionally, a vocational education system aligned with industry needs must be implemented in high schools immediately. This system should equip students with essential skills for the modern economy, taking into account the impact of AI on various industries. High schools need to stop hiring teachers with four-year degrees and instead hire skilled tradespeople.
The USA has a huge unmet need for tradespeople, and lots of high paying jobs are going begging for applicants/
To Make America Great Again, Make the Trades Great Again!
Of course, this will be implemented on a state-by-state level, as it should be. But as long as we have a Department of Education, it can be used constructively to facilitate these changes.
We can not afford to be like Germany, whereby we have a vast immigrant population and not enough jobs. In the USA, we already have almost 25% of our workforce as functionally unemployed, capped off by a growing illegal immigrant population. This imbalance is unsustainable. Without a strong economy and good jobs, our birth rates will continue to decline, and our nation will stagnate economically. Overnight what constitutes a “good job” has changed, and Americans must adapt to this new reality.
The golden future for America is work. Real work. Not bullshit make-work jobs.
That means, good-paying jobs that have meaning, but that do not require a college degree. People have to be re-educated to view such jobs as worthy of their time and effort. This will require that our children learn to work again. This will require that many college-educated people be retrained for jobs in the trades.
For our families, they must reorient to this new reality. Saturday morning chores, which require our children to perform real work, must become the norm again. Families must relearn that the risk-benefit ratio of being outside and playing will cause more injuries, but that is offset by strong, healthy bodies. That children learn that physical work is not to be avoided, but rather to be embraced. That parents set an example and work with their children to clean the house, teach organizational skills – the domestic arts as well as how to use a screw driver, how to mow their lawns, plant vegetables and keep chickens. These basic homesteading skills teach children how to move their bodies and teach muscle memory. A child who has spent their life on their cell phone is not equipped for the world that awaits them.
I had a little chuckle yesterday when someone commented that my homesteading posts seemed elitist because they thought most people couldn’t homestead. But that really isn’t the case at all! Even folks living in apartments can enjoy a vegetable garden or try their hand at hydroponics. Learning a craft like knitting or how to cook to feed a family is all part of the self-sustainability movement. This isn’t elitist; it looks towards a different future. His inability to understand this reality and message reveals that a certain mindset is at play, one that makes it seem like tradecraft and a lifestyle focused on self-sustainability are out of reach for most Americans.
The cognitive dissonance that homesteading and prepping are elitist, while also viewing the domestic arts and trades as inferior uses of time, is a real phenomenon. This is a result of our educational system and media.
Teaching basic skills in our educational programs is critical to the well-being of society. Home economics must become a core curriculum, along with how to use tools. I took shop classes in high school – woodworking, metalworking, auto, drafting, at the same time I took advanced algebra, chemistry and biology and participated in the California gifted and talented high school training program. I would not have the skill sets I have needed throughout my life if I had not done this. That was California back in the 70s. All gone now, all gone woke.
Modernizing those old educational programs and making them the centerpiece of a model educational system is a critical step in shaping the American economy for the future. Those old-fashioned jobs in industry combined with modern training for skills involving robotics and artificial intelligence have to be elevated to the place in the hearts of Americans that they deserve.
“Behind the Curtain of the New CDC Panel on Vaccines: Dr. Robert Malone and Retsef Levi”
After retiring the entire prior membership of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and appointing first eight, then seven (one could not resolve conflict of interest concerns) new ACIP members, a wave of coordinated media attacks on both Secretary Kennedy and those he appointed hit the internet, newsstands and corporate cable news broadcasts. This time, the approved narrative was that none of the newly appointed members were qualified or had any vaccine-related experience. Whether congratulations or condolences were due, I was one of those whom Secretary Kennedy appointed and passed the conflict of interest review. But what I actually am is a highly experienced academic and commercial vaccine developer, and all of my fellow appointees have deep, highly relevant experience and expertise. To the surprise of precisely no-one who has been paying attention to details or to how fake news media likes to spin up fear to advance the interests of their corporate sponsors.
The decisions made during the first meeting of the reconstituted ACIP were quite conservative (in the classical sense) and most definitely based on objective analysis of available data tempered with a focus on patients (and their children) rather than physician and corporate interests. However, after the meeting there was a lot of criticism of the decisions made. Criticism from all sides. It seems that no-one got exactly what they wanted, and they were mad as hell about it. The sense of entitlement ran strong in these ones.
I suggested that Epoch Times should be allowed to interview myself and Dr. Retsef Levi to discuss what just had happened during the meeting, and examine the logic, discussion and internal ACIP member dissent revolving around those decisions so that others can see for themselves how this new team approached these issues. Fortunately, the HHS Press Office agreed to this proposal, the resulting interview has now been released, and a copy is provided below in native Substack format so that you can view for free.
Hopefully this will demonstrate to all concerned that, in fact, the “new” ACIP committee is not a rubber stamp organization, that the members take their assigned tasks very seriously, and that they have the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to do the job and do it well.
Yes, the interview gets a bit technical in places. We tried to avoid diving too deep into “The Science”. Please keep in mind that there are two general audiences being targeted here. First and most importantly, the citizens of the United States. Secondly, the nattering nabobs of the self-annointed vaccine expert caste. The deeper science discussions are targeting the latter, and demonstrate that these will continue to embarrass themselves if they persist with the false narrative that the new ACIP is inexperienced and incompetent.
I hope that, at a minimum, each of you learn something from the interview.
“This is the full version of Jan Jekielek’s interview with Dr. Robert Malone and Retsef Levi, released on July 5th, 2025.
Recently, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) met for the first time after Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. replaced its entire membership with new picks. In this episode, I’m sitting down with two new ACIP members, Dr. Robert Malone and MIT professor Retsef Levi, for a deep dive into all things ACIP.
“They basically impact billions of dollars of revenue for the pharmaceutical industry. So there’s big money at stake here. There’s big policy at stake,”
Malone.
“One of the problems that we had in the context of vaccines, and more broadly maybe pharmaceutical products, is that debate was considered confusing to patients and something that we should avoid,”
Levi
We take a look at some key discussions during the recent meeting, from thimerosal in certain flu vaccines to RSV shots for children, and what may happen with this committee moving forward.
“What you’re seeing here is a firm commitment on the part of these two volunteers, and I think the committee as a whole, in trying to be open and transparent to the general public”
Malone
CHAPTER TITLES
0:00:00 – Introduction to ACIP and New Committee Members
Malone News cross-posted a post from Randall Bock
Sayer Ji’s Substack
OpenVAET’s Substack
