Dr. Simone Gold (2:36)

Yes. So we came here to talk to the American people directly because of issues like censorship. So it's in the height of irony that we were deplatformed from Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter within hours. My understanding is there's at least 20 million views, and then we would deplatform that the president's son tweeted it and then he was taken off of Twitter. So this is actually part of what I mentioned to you last week about medical cancel culture. This is real. And we feel this very personally as physicians, because people ask us, why don't you speak up more? And the truth is, we try. We try, and that's why we're here.

Charlie Kirk (3:09)

I'll leave this to whomever wants to answer it first. But I've always understood science to be an exercise in trying to challenge dogma. Right. And trying to actually find truth through using the scientific method. Is that not allowed anymore? We're not allowed to have those kind of discussions, or.

Dr. Richard Urso (3:27)

I can answer that. I guess in some sense, that's what we all feel. All of us here at the table feel like science and truth should win out always. Unfortunately, there's others that are basically carrying on more or less what I call right now. Particularly, you've seen statements from the editor of the Lancet, the editor, the former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, actually discussing this and saying how much pressure there was from the pharmaceutical industry on the journals to publish articles that maybe didn't get vetted as much as they could. So it's really hard to. To really have a lot of respect for our major journals when they publish studies that are completely fabricated. So, you know, I don't know if people know this, but a major study was published with data from 671 hospitals, 93,000 patients captured 60 of 63,000 patients in the United States saying they had billing records, their medical records all going to a cloud. It was six continents. The study was completely fabricated. So it's really hard for us to think science is winning out in our medical community right now, because that actually stopped a bunch of trials, for instance, right now with hydroxychloroquine, because fabricated data was allowed to make it into the marketplace and change the minds of many in the world, including the World Health Organization. So it's pretty easy to sit here and say, is there something smelling badly? Yeah, obviously is.

Charlie Kirk (4:59)

So, doctor, can I follow up with that? Are there people that have a vested interest in trying to make sure that hydroxychloroquine is not being used?

Dr. Richard Urso (5:07)

Well, let me say it this way. You know, I don't have a crystal ball. But yes, the answer is yes. Clearly there are pharmaceutical companies that won't do so well, because in a sense, in essence, hydroxychloroquine works like a vaccine in some sense. In very low doses, it's prophylaxic. In an early disease, it's incredibly effective. So that makes the need for a vaccine a lot less. And interestingly, this, we had a lecture yesterday and the mechanism, endosomal acidification, basically that occurs with all RNA viruses, especially airborne RNA viruses, is one that basically makes hydroxychloroquine an effective vaccine, like treatment for almost any airborne RNA virus, including the flu virus. So I think there's some vested interest there that would be not happy about that. But the data is what it is.

Charlie Kirk (6:02)

So, doctor, you went viral. Yeah, in a righteous, indignation way. And first of all, for all of our audio listeners, because most of our distribution is audio, I am sitting around a table with I think seven doctors, eight doctors. So I'm very much outnumbered, but in a good way, I have to say. Doctor, you spoke out in a very specific way about hydroxychloroquine and how we are being deceived. Yeah, tell us about that.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (6:32)

I'm Dr. Emmanuel. I'm Dr. Emmanuel. And there are a few things that kind of made me the perfect candidate to talk about this. I grew up in Africa. I'm from Cameroon, West Africa, and I went to medical school in Nigeria and we took care of patients with malaria. And I'm kind of used to the drug of all the camel queen, flavoquine, mefloquine, all the queens, we gave it to children, to old people, to pregnant women. And we took it Sunday, Sunday. At home we call it Sunday Sunday medicine. Back home we took it for prevention of malaria and stuff. So I'm actually really comfortable with the drug, which is one of the things that I can sometimes I empathize with my colleagues that were trained here that have not really used this drug, when they say, oh, it's going to kill you, everybody gets scared. But it can't, it doesn't kill you because we took it, we gave it to children, it didn't kill them, we gave it to 80 year olds. And my 80 year old parents are on it right now. They're on flavoquine for malaria. And I was like, mom, just stay on that. It will prevent you from catching COVID So I'm used to these drugs. What am I going to say before God that, you know, I knew there was medication that works. And I was too scared for my license. I was too scared from some troll that's going to call me fake. Yeah, I can't say I can't do that. So I have to do stuff that is I can live with. I don't know how doctors live with themselves, sending patients home to die. I just don't know it. I couldn't do something that I could not live with. So that is why when I jumped into it and I saw the effects. This is the thing. In March, when I heard about hydrochloroquine, somebody told me that was a friend, a pharmacist. When the pharmacist told me, I went and did some digging, found some articles by Dr. Fauci. That's why sometimes I get really upset with Dr. Fauci. I found some articles by Dr. Fauci that in 2015 I found in Harrison Book of Medicine. And Dr. Fauci is a writer, one of the writers. So I found these articles that it works. So I started, I jumped into it and I was excited. And of course, the results were dramatic. When you see I have a hashtag called hashtag early hydroxychloroquine and zinc works. If you give it early within. If a patient shows up within 2, 3 days of this disease, you give it early. The effect is so dramatic. I'm talking about in a day or two. These patients are well and hopping around. It's so dramatic. So I was excited. And then I started hearing everybody trying to knock me down and beat me. And there are doctors in Houston, all these looney leftist doctors in Houston threatening to sue me and threatening to. To report me to the border. I was like, bring it on, bring it on.

Charlie Kirk (8:54)

But people can't even find it if they need it in Texas, we can. You can.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (8:59)

Oh, yeah, we prescribe it all the time.

Charlie Kirk (9:00)

We have a few, you know, that's

Dr. Stella Immanuel (9:02)

where we have a few pharmacies that would. A few pharmacists will try to argue with you and tell you you shouldn't. And I tell them, go read your pharmacy board. If my patient wanted to come see you as a pharmacist, they would have come to see you. They didn't. They came to see me.

Charlie Kirk (9:16)

So, doctor, I became made aware of you when you did a kind of ad hoc video walking through just what you were seeing in the emergency room. Is that correct?

Dr. Dan Erickson (9:28)

I had eight medical centers and we had seen the culture, was embracing this sort of fear and was scared. Media was scared, the community in central California was scared. And I said, well, you know, we need to talk about some raw data. So we put our raw data out there. At the time, we had done 5,000 tests. We had had 6.5% positive with the nasal swab at the time. Now we've done 26,000 tests, and 14.9% of them are positive. So we're seeing. This thing is really growing, but society. What I wanted to tell them was 99.8% of people who test positive do extremely and have little to no symptoms. So we were seeing thousands and thousands of patients, and we were following them over weeks and saying, okay, they tested positive for Covid. They have a little body ache, maybe a cough, and within a week to 10 days, it's gone with no treatment. Why isn't the media saying this? They're focusing on the people over 60, multiple comorbidities that are having significant hospitalizations instead of everybody doing pretty well. Yes, we've had death with it. Yes, it affects the older. Yes, we didn't protect our nursing homes very well. But I wanted to talk about the vast majority of people. I want to talk about the 99. They got no media. What about the 99.8? That did well, because when you. When you control people with fear, there seems to be an agenda besides just communicating science. So we came out in April with a press conference, and I said, this is our data. This is my interpretation of the data. And it seemed to bounce all over the globe a little bit because people were looking for a little bit of sort of real data. So that's where we got traction.

Charlie Kirk (11:04)

And your video had tens of millions of views until it was removed by YouTube.

Dr. Dan Erickson (11:09)

Yeah, it hit like 5 million. And YouTube said, that's enough. We've had enough fun. And they pulled it down and they said we were. We had said some things that didn't agree with the who, which I didn't know was the person who was guiding all healthcare information in the United States. So apparently, your first question about the first. Your First Amendment question about the ability to discuss medical information, that's a huge point. Because, you know, for the last 20 years, we were able to have dissenting points, and we would disagree, but we would, at the end of the day, not cancel each other out. I didn't say silence that different opinion than mine. And now that's what we're seeing.

Charlie Kirk (11:46)

So. So, Doctor, I want to ask you, you were the original person who discovered the land, the issue with the Lancet study, and I'm probably not doing it justice describing it, but it ties into this broader point, which is, is there an agenda behind some of these studies? And also an even bigger question, which people are starting to wonder. And, you know, I had a conversation with someone I really respect, and they said, charlie, you got to stop diving into all this conspiracy stuff. They just. That's basically what they call every single one of you and what we're trying to do here, which is nonsense. I mean, you guys are all doctors. Can you tell us about what you discovered in the Lancet study? First of all, for some of our listeners that are their teenagers, tell them what the Lancet is and then the significance of what you discovered.

Dr. Meryl Nass (12:30)

Sure. So to even take a step back from that, you know, there's been this orchestrated attack, which I think most people that look at independent media sources can see has been going on against hydroxychloroquine. And this actually started when. So I co authored the first Google document that got tens of millions of views. It was tweeted out by Elon Musk proposing hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for coronavirus. This is back in March. And that Google document was taken down. Okay. And again, the social media platforms, the World Health Organization is the authority, and anything that goes against them is subject to censorship. Now, fast forward a couple months to May of this year and the Lancet. So this is the second most prestigious medical journal in the world, about 200 years old. Okay. It's only second to maybe the New England Journal of Medicine. They publish a study, supposedly with 96,000 patients, that showed that hydroxychloroquine increased your risk of dying by over twofold and then also increased your risk of lethal arrhythmias. Sounds very bad, right? To independent researchers, this study didn't make sense to the World Health Organization. They embraced it right away, almost immediately. They suspended all clinical trials on hydroxychloroquine worldwide. Dr. Anthony Fauci went on CNN with Jim Sciutto an interview and said, in all likelihood, it looks like hydroxychloroquine causes cardiovascular problems. Right after the was published, it was independent researchers like myself who actually dug into the data, looked at who was providing this incredibly large data set, which was impossibly large. And it was this corporation called Surgisphere. And many of you heard, but the story, as I dug deeper in that it was unbelievable. It was almost clearly a shell corporation that had an erotic model for hire, who was posing as a director of sales in one of their promotional videos, which, it's unbelievable.

Charlie Kirk (14:21)

So, but like, this is Hard for people to really process. So I want you to walk through it more deliberately, please. That the Lancet organization, for lack of a term, the journal. Yeah. Which is supposed to be the gold star. Something that we trust publish, something which is supposed to be pretty. It's supposed to be peer reviewed. Right. It's supposed to be something that is widely accepted from a company that has a vested interest to try to discredit hydroxyl chloroquine through a shell company using you dig into it. They have some sort of bizarre, almost like credit card fraud looking landing page, if you will. This is what now is influencing the decision of billions of people.

Dr. Meryl Nass (15:06)

So you're exactly right. So the Lancet for medical professionals is like the bible. Okay. If something is published in the Lancet, it's like word from God itself almost

Charlie Kirk (15:16)

very much to say that. Go deeper.

Dr. Meryl Nass (15:18)

Okay. And so when the study was published, this affected doctors opinions everywhere, especially when the World Health Organization amplified this message by suspending all clinical trials worldwide, saying that hydroxychloroquine wasn't even safe enough for clinical trials. Now, as Dr. Irsa was alluding to earlier in 2003, Richard Horton, he's the editor in chief of Lancet, and I believe he was at that time as well, complained about the influence that the pharmaceutical companies have, big pharma, over what's published in these journals. And it's a real problem because most or a large percentage of their publishing revenue comes from these big pharma advertising and sponsorships. So there's a direct conflict of interest which these journals are the gatekeepers to what's supposed or supposed to be the gatekeepers to what's true and what's not in medicine. And so there is a tremendous financial incentive behind the scenes here for hydroxychloroquine to not work, you know, for the immediate future. You know, Gilead with their drug Remdesivir, appears to be a real contender. And you know, just to put a number to this, when the President did his press conference on March 19th where he dropped that bombshell announcement that hydroxychloroquine is a potential candidate for treatment of COVID 19, Gilead stock, right before that was at a local high, hadn't reached $85 a share for the previous two years. Within hours after the President announced hydroxychloroquine, which was now being seen as a competitor to remdesivir, the stock plummeted 8.7% and continued to drop over the next week, erasing $21 billion from Gilead's market cap. Okay. There's a lot of money at play here. Hydroxychloroquine is a cheap generic drug that's manufactured by over 10 facilities in the US alone. Very hard to prosper off. And that's why independent physicians like us, who care about patients, about people, about opening up the economy, are coming together to speak out for it. But you won't hear this from a lot of the other parties that may have conflicts of interest.

Charlie Kirk (17:24)

So I want to zero in on hydroxylchloroquine and I want to get into a couple other topics around because I don't want to spend too much time on the hydroxychloroquine issue. But let's narrow in on this. I know people that have got the virus, they want to get hydroxychloroquine, they refuse to get it. And they've heard your podcast, for example. And tragically, I know people that have actually done very poorly and did not make it. And I can only imagine what would have happened. I don't know for sure, but that's a real thing that I've experienced. And MAD doesn't even begin to articulate like a feeling like that. It actually just makes me really incredibly cynical and jaded about the world we live in. And that's not a good place for any human being to be. But Dr. Gold, can you build out further how it's possible that the patient doctor relationship is now being violated by a third party source? Because I call me idealistic, but I thought we lived in a world where the doctor actually had a private relationship with their patient and that some pharmaceutical company or some journal can't even interrupt it. If you believe something is going to help your patient, you should have the freedom to be able to give them that. Right?

Dr. Simone Gold (18:42)

Right. So I actually started this journey because of the violation of the doctor patient relationship. You, you know, that's a little psychosanct area of free conversation. It's actually been silenced in both directions. The direction that's less obvious is that the patient is actually silenced because they have self censored because of all the information that they themselves have heard from the media. So patients that would normally come in and say, oh, I saw this ad on TV for this medicine. Is that something I should use? Or my cousin's on this medicine, Is that something I should try? Patients don't feel that way about hydroxychloroquine. They feel that it's bad and dangerous. They don't want to talk about it. They're done. So they've self censored due to the media disinformation campaign. On the other side is the physician who knows, let's say you have a physician like us who understands that it works. We are being threatened, sanctioned, censored. So we should not discuss with our patients. And I'll share with you. I think I said this to you previously, that at my own work, I was threatened with my job if I were to give hydroxychloroquine. And much like Dr. Emanuel, it was just impossible for me. It just never occurred to me that sitting and looking at a patient who needed a medicine, that I wouldn't give them the medicine. It just.

Charlie Kirk (19:55)

Have you ever had an experience where you were threatened because you were prescribing anything ever?

Dr. Simone Gold (20:00)

Never.

Dr. Richard Urso (20:03)

Yeah, I can attest to this. So in this particular disease, yes, I've been reported to the board for giving hydroxychloroquine to patients to save their lives.

Charlie Kirk (20:16)

But in your decades of never, it's never happened. 100 years of combined medical experience sitting at this table.

Dr. Richard Urso (20:24)

And we do it all the time. We use off label medications constantly. So a doctor in their office typically will give on label prescriptions a good part of the time, but somewhere between 20 to 40% of the time we're using, we're using drugs off label. So this is unheard of. And the biggest problem is this drug is one of the safest drugs that we have. So this, this should not be an issue.

Charlie Kirk (20:49)

And so, first of all, I want to thank all of you for speaking out, because this is what courage looks like. Secondly, everyone watching and listening to this should understand how, how tragic of a state America is in, that this relationship has been violated and science has become a monarchy, that if a certain person says something, we must listen to it. So now I want to shift from the hydroxychloroquine issue and we could talk about how we can try and fix it. I think what you're doing helps fix it. To actually something that always, you know, strikes me as rather contradictory. So, Doctor, I was always told that there's something called the Hippocratic oath where you say, first, do no harm. Were the lockdowns helpful for our society?

Dr. Mark McDonald (21:38)

I'm Dr. Mark McDonald. I'm a child psychiatrist practicing out of West Los Angeles. And I see primarily children, but I also treat adults. My opinion is that the shutdown, specifically the shutdown of the schools, was the single biggest mistake in the government response to this pandemic. Since then, a confluence, I would say, A. A sort of holy or unholy trinity of politicians, of media, of special interest groups like the teachers unions, have, I think it's fair to say, conspired to keep people in fear. We are in a pandemic. But it is not a medical pandemic. Is it? A pandemic of emotion, of fear? People have been terrorized. My patients come to my practice, if they even come at all, and. And they tell me that their kids are wetting their beds. They're scratching themselves while they sleep. They're attacking each other with knives at home, in the kitchen while their parents go to work. The children in my practice have. They've suffered more than I've seen in my eight, nine years of private practice. The lockdowns and the closures have not helped. I do believe that there is a way out of this. And I think that we've all, in the last 24 hours, everyone sitting at the table, have conclusively shown that if we can remove the fear so that we can go back to our lives, removing the mask, the social distancing, the little stickers at Trader Joe's that tell us what direction of our cart to push in the store so we don't kill somebody on the opposite side of the peanut aisle, all of these small liberties, small freedoms that have been taken away from us. If we can restore safety and a sense of comfort and trust by using this medication, then I think the fear can go away. I think we get back to our lives. But the end game here, the end game for all of these parties that have moved and conspired to keep us down, to keep us locked in, is to remove every possible option and choice in our lives. It's not just about closing the schools and closing the businesses. It's also about removing the option to go to charter schools, to home school, to open your own business. You now have to have a license in Los Angeles, a permit to post a sign on your business saying that takeout food is available, and if you don't pay the permit fee, you get a ticket. 300 bucks. So this is more than just about medicine, and it's more than just about compliance. It's really a much bigger issue. It's a bigger issue that revolves around removing options. It is tyrannical. It is statist. And we have to accept that that's what's happening. We have to acknowledge it, and we have to attest and affirm that as Americans, we are in the best position as individuals to make choices in our lives in consultation with our physicians. And our families, period.

Charlie Kirk (24:38)

I can tell you that people that were marching in the streets four years ago, five years ago in the Tea Party movement for liberty and freedom, and they were. They had that great don't tread on me flag. Some of them are staying at home and they're petrified with fear and they wear a mask to the bathroom. And I'm not making. I'm not trivializing it. I'm just saying there's a real. I look around at some of the liberty fighters from four or five years ago, and they've just disappeared. They're like, oh, no, we have to shelter in place. And this is the worst thing ever. I want to get into that. And then I want to talk about masks. Any one of you can contribute to this. Can you just give some scale? And you were talking about this earlier, Doctor, but the scale of what we're dealing with. Is this the worst pandemic in the history of the planet? No. I mean, it's very help. Very helpful because I think that would be a good way to set terms. Please, Doc.

Dr. Simone Gold (25:29)

Yeah. So, you know, this is not the worst pandemic in the history by a long shot. And I just want to refer to probably the most recent, very large pandemic, which was the 1968 Hong Kong flu. And if you go back and you do some searches on microfilm, you'll find the headlines in the New York Times said 100,000Americans have died from Hong Kong flu. You'll find headlines that attest to its presence worldwide. 100,000 in 1968 would correlate to 150,000 to 175,000 today due to various factors. And so right in the middle of the Hong Kong flu, when 100,000Americans were taken, right, that was a summer of Woodstock. There were no headlines. Even thinking of a thought in someone's head about postponing Woodstock. And we're now at a situation where you shouldn't go to school, you shouldn't open a charter school, you can't talk to your doctor. It's not a normal response. This is not the only pandemic, and it won't be the last. And one of the reasons we're here is because a lot of us think this is a preview of things to come.

Charlie Kirk (26:34)

Definitely want you to tell me more about that. But let's complete the point on the data. Any one of you. What are we dealing with? Who's most at risk? Yes, please, Doctor. More numbers. The better to help alleviate the fear. Because I know a lot of people that are still completely paralyzed by fear right now.

Dr. Scott Barber (26:50)

So my name is Scott Barber. I'm an orthopedic surgeon practicing in Atlanta, Georgia. I've been practicing for about 20 years now. And I've been very much an advocate for free market medicine my entire career because I see how bureaucracy affects the doctor patient relationship. And nothing has really proven that to me more than this pandemic. And I can tell you that over the years, I've been fortunate. I have five clinics in the Atlanta area. I have a surgery center. And so we have about 150 employees. That's thousands and thousands of patient interactions, hundreds of surgeries. And this pandemic is not the first problem that I've ever faced. Meaning as a doctor, you know, you learn things, but you don't learn everything. And certainly you don't remember everything. So when you're faced with a new problem, it's part of our job to reacquaint ourselves with the facts, to make decisions, to help present those decisions to our patients, and we move forward. So when I first started hearing something through social media that something was going on in China, I made the decision that we needed to protect my PP and E. I started thinking about suture and antibiotics and masks and gowns and things like that for my surgery center. And so I talked to my people about making sure that we had enough of that. And then I started following the numbers on World O meter because the very next thing that was important to me is what is this virus and who is it affecting? Right? So I found out that it was a coronavirus. It was presented to us as the novel coronavirus, and it was constantly emphasized, novel coronavirus, as if we haven't seen coronaviruses before. But everybody at this table knew what a Coronavirus was before 2020. We've all studied it and we're aware of what it can do. Sars, mers, we've seen it in the past. You start looking at the World Health Organization saying that there was no human to human transfer. Well, other coronaviruses have human to human transfer. So right off the bat, I was like, something strange seems to be going on. Then I started tracking the numbers in Italy, and it became obvious very early that the disease was affecting primarily older people with comorbid conditions. And I thought that was enormous information, but it never seemed to never seem to get presented in the media. It was always more cases, more cases, more cases. And I'm kind of looking at this going, this is actually good news. We can protect older people with comorbid conditions and Younger people can get out. You were talking about, you've done so many tests and it was about 14%, right? Well, we know that coronaviruses never get herd immunity greater than 20%, because when they get to 20%, they just hop into another vector, an animal, a cat or something like that. And so in the whole history of coronaviruses, we've never seen herd immunity greater than 20 or 30. We all know this. Then they started talking about the lockdown. Now, nobody here has studied lockdown because it's not a scientific measure to take. In fact, I've been researching it since the virus came around. And lockdown actually came after the H5N1 outbreak. That never really turned into anything. But President Bush actually commissioned a task force to ask, how are we going to address this thing? And so lockdown actually came from computer programmers doing modeling. And we've seen how horrible modeling's worked. This went up through the bureaucracy and sort of became policy. And doctors are like, what is this lockdown thing? This has no basis in science. And then the World health organization said, 3.4% of us are going to die. And I'm thinking to myself, a mortality rate of 3.4%, you don't need a PhD in statistics to. To know that you're only measuring the sickest of people. Clearly, there are other people out there who have the disease and are not sick and are not being tested that are gonna make that number much lower. And of course, we now know that the CDC says that the mortality rate is 0.26%, more akin to the flu, which to me is amazing news. But why is the media not reporting it, then? The hydroxychloroquine thing, I know you don't want to touch on it, but I'm doing this as a daily thing. I get up, I go on the Georgia Department of Health, I go on the CDC website, and I go to Worldometer, and I start looking at the numbers and I start counting for myself who's dying. And it's always older people with comorbid conditions. They started to do this thing with the Kawasaki's disease early on that young children. It's a red herring. And the point I'm trying to make is as a private physician, doing what I always do, which is I study and I research and I figure out to best treat my patients. It got harder and harder and harder for me to find proper information that wasn't contaminated by politics. And so I had to work even harder to get these accurate numbers. Now my practice has been open now, for the entire time, I've been virtually not shut down at all. I've made very small adjustments in terms of early on when I had older people that I thought might end up in the hospital. I didn't do those cases, but I've pretty much been open the entire time, and we haven't had a single incident. Now, I've had people test positive, and I've had even a couple of people get sick. I give them hydroxychloroquine and they get better. And so I'm thinking to myself, this is real life experience. And I'm not the only one. I mean, we have doctors sitting at this table that we know that this is working. And then when the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, I don't think we can underestimate just how monumental this is. When the Lancet in New England Journal of Medicine posted research saying that hydroxychloroquine was not only ineffective, but that it was killing people, I knew that was false because by that time, I had been studying for months and months, and I was like, there's tons of research on hydroxychloroquine. And then two weeks later, it gets retracted. Now, anybody who's published scientific research, like myself, knows it is incredibly difficult. It takes a long time to get the data. Getting through peer review often takes years. And now we're seeing studies come out, you know, in months. Masks work. All of a sudden, hydroxychloroquine is deadly all of a sudden, after 65 years. And so this sort of what we were talking about, this unholy alliance between media and politics and medicine has made it virtually impossible to practice. And, you know, the importance of the New England Journal of Medicine and Lancet publishing that hydroxychloroquine was ineffective was that it led the World Health Organization to then suspend all studies on hydroxychloroquine. And it gave people, governors and things like that, the ability to prevent use. And also in Georgia, I've been able to prescribe it. But during that time when, when the FDA came out and said that it was dangerous, even if I wrote a script for hydroxychloroquine, it would not be filled by the pharmacist, which, by the way, the FDA doesn't have that power. Once a medicine is. Is FDA approved, it's up to the doctor and the patient to decide how to use it.

Dr. Simone Gold (33:58)

And what is so interesting. This is Dr. Gold again, what's so interesting about what you're saying is that the Whole WHO very quickly removed the studies from like Indonesia and other countries and the European Union stopped studying it in response to the Lancet and the New England Journal. Now the Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine articles were retracted quite quickly. Right. However, the WHO did reverse itself eventually, but the state governors which are restricting our ability to prescribe it, they never reversed course. So they're standing with that statement that it's not effective based on fraudulent studies. And may I just say, I can't.

Charlie Kirk (34:36)

You guys know this. I know people that are dying because they're not getting it. It's just.

Dr. Simone Gold (34:40)

So the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine are the number one in two or two in one medical journals in the world. The number three is jama. I didn't have time to share with you, but the JAMA study in April by Arthur Borba is filled with fraud from top to bottom. They gave super toxic doses of the medication. They gave two and a half times the lethal dose of the medicine and then they published that the medicine didn't work right. So many people died in a super lethal toxic dose. They stopped giving, they stopped that arm of the study and now they're being criminally investigated for so many deaths. Nonetheless, the headlines were that it's the chloroquine that doesn't work. And the governors of the states are still restricting us based on these faulty and fraudulent studies.

Dr. Scott Barber (35:25)

And the other thing too that's important is, you know, we were talking about how difficult it is to get through peer review and to gather data and all this stuff. It takes you five minutes as a doctor to read the study and go, this is ridiculous. You know, I want to say, you know, the numbers better. The New England Journal of Medicine had something like 637 hospitals over six continents. And the Lancet, you know, three continents. And you know, it's so ridiculous when you looked at it that it, I can't explain how it possibly could have gotten through peer review.

Charlie Kirk (35:55)

Dr. And then.

Dr. Richard Urso (35:56)

Dr. Yeah, well, Dr. Richard Erso again, speaking, a couple comments about the numbers. First of all, a comment about what Dr. Gold said. I don't think people realize how poorly these studies were designed. I think the best way I can say it is they gave, as she said, six, six times the normal dose as a loading dose. And I always tell people the same thing. What they proved in the study is that toxic doses are toxic. We already knew that. Why they chose those numbers, I have no idea. There was a beautiful study done where they actually optimized the dose and they said, oh, you should load with 800 milligrams a day for the first day and then 400 milligrams for the next four days. And that was an optimization study that was done. In fact, they call it a major article in the clinical journal Infectious Disease that basically highlights how we're supposed to use this drug. So they gave 2,400 milligrams. So it's insanely. I just can't say enough. It's malfeasance. I don't know what the right word is. It shouldn't have happened. And as she said, they're actually going after, legally after the people in Brazil who did this. And it should probably happen in other places. The recovery trial, the solidarity trial, the REMAP study, I call those the funeral trials. If you were in them, you died real quick.

Dr. Dan Erickson (37:23)

This technical description is brilliant. I want to make it super simple. We were in eight hours of lecture yesterday with all these brilliant people and we saw nations with over a billion people who had almost no Covid. And the doctor looking into it said, do you know why they have no Covid? Because they're prophylactic. They have a prophylaxine system of hydroxychloroquine. He said, why do these systems, these nations with, you know, very poor health conditions and a billion people have no cases? Why is nobody asking that? And he said, it's because of prophylaxine with hydroxychloroquine. I think that's easy for people to understand. Why do they have no cases?

Dr. Stella Immanuel (37:59)

Let me explain. Like, you know, in Nigeria, like one of the lectures I was given yesterday, Covid got to the US the same time Covid got to Nigeria and he did a really brilliant. This thing on it. They got the same day. But you see, when the people, when the Chinese people left China and came to the US they were not mandated by the CDC to be on malaria prophylaxis. When they left Wuhan to go to sub Saharan West Africa, sub Saharan, they went. They are all told to get on malaria prophylaxis. So you see. So when people leave, when you're traveling, if I leave right now, I'm traveling to Cameroon, Nigeria or any of the subar African countries, they advise you to take malaria prophylaxis and you take it. So the people that left Wuhan and came to Nigeria and went to other parts of West Africa and everything, they took malaria prophylaxis because they were on that malaria prophylaxis. They did not. They were not able to seed this Virus into Africa. Because that's why people are saying that Africa is. So we have people. You cannot even social distance in the slums of a. In Lagos. You understand what I'm saying? But people are not sick like that. Why? Because these people that came in took hydroxychloroquine, so they could not see the virus because the hydroxychloroquine knocked the virus. They took hydro. They took mefloquine, they took flavoquine or one of them. So basically that was an indirect protection on the continent of Africa.

Dr. Annie Bukacek (39:20)

Why?

Dr. Stella Immanuel (39:21)

Because they were on. They were on. On prophylaxis with this one of the queens, you understand? So if. If people are not looking at this stuff, I say this again. I said, you cannot. I love this state. You cannot social distance in the slums of Kolkata. We have 1.4 billion people in India. And the death rate in India is so much lower because hydroxychloroquine is over the counter in Nigeria, in Cameroon, in Mexico, in most of the hydroxychloroquine, mefoquine, nivaquine, camoquine. My parents are taking flavoquine. They are all over the counter. People can just walk into the chemist and buy it. Just because of that, people are taking these drugs and the disease is not causing the same kind of pandemonium in Nigeria or in Cameroon or in. Or just that is causing here in America. So my question is that why are Americans and Europeans dying? Why don't you just look and say, you know, this is what's happening. You see the problem, and this is the part that gets me really upset, is that real people are dying. We can have a conversation about, you know, difference in politics, difference in this thing, but you can live to talk about it tomorrow. People are like dying. They're not waking back up to come and have conversations. And that is what really makes me want to pull my hair out. There are people telling me, Dr. Sarah, oh, you should talk more. You should, you know, be more gentleman. They are more doctor like, for real. I have been doing all this trying to be a doctor and explain to people and send, you know, different studies to people. I'm done. Right now we're going to take the battle to the gate of the enemy. Whatever we have to do to get this going, it's going to go. Covid has a cure. It's called hydroxychloroquine. Covid has a cure. It's called whatever you have, whether you have chamoquine, flavoquine take it. Covid has a cure. We don't have to go through all this. We don't have to lock down schools, we don't have to lock down children. We don't have to lock down our businesses. If we, I'm telling you and I, I'm telling if we put everybody that gets sick early on hydroxychloroquine, if a lot of people go on, on prophylaxis right now, we will stop this virus in its tracks in the next maybe one month. I can bet that.

Dr. Simone Gold (41:24)

Dr. Emanuel, thank you so much. Let me share with you also. This is not, of course, just Dr. Emanuel's opinions, all of our opinions. There's lots of people. The most famous epidemiologist in the country, Dr. Harvey Risch from Yale School of Public Health, has said exactly the same thing. He said that if we had had a more liberal hydroxychloroquine policy in our country, one half or more likely, three quarters of the human beings who died in America would not be dead. That's 100,000Americans that would be alive. And what I say to that is, is let's say going forward, let's do that going forward. Let's get hydroxychloroquine and zinc in the hands of the people. That's what we need. There's a lot of obstruction at multiple levels. There was obstruction at the scientific journals with the corruption. There's obstruction at the media level. They won't report the good news. There's obstruction at the state level. The governors are barring doctors abilities to prescribe it. And they empower pharmacists to stop our prescriptions. There's not stopping us at the federal level, right through the department, the HHS says that it's not allowed to be used outside of trials, which is not true. And the FDA says it's not effective. So there's obstruction at four different levels. So my solution, I feel the solution is all of us here really is let's get it to the people. And I just want to say that if we wait for doctors to do it and pharmacists to do it, it's going to be months and months. Lots and lots of people are going to die. And let me remind everybody who's listening or teach them for the first time, the over the counter dose that you need for prophylactic hydroxychloroquine is very, very low. That seems to sometimes get lost. But the proper dose of hydroxychloroquine for most patients with lupus or rheumatoid arthritis, which is the typical use in America, is 400 milligrams a day. The prophylactic dose, or let's just say prophylactic dose is 400 milligrams a week. That's all. And even less. The data's not quite there yet for less, but most of us feel like you need even less. We're talking about a really low dose, right? This is safe. I want you to know that you can buy this over the counter in Indonesia. You can buy this over the counter in Iran. You can buy this over the counter most of Latin America. You can buy this over the counter in most of Africa. Why can't we buy it here?

Charlie Kirk (43:18)

The issue, Dr. And we had you on the podcast last week and made top 50 of all Apple podcasts. I got hundreds of emails and there are people that are saying, I want it. I can't get it. So what are they supposed to do? No, seriously. I mean, there are people that are emailing me and they're saying, my doctor says it will kill me. I can't have it. My father's dying of COVID I can't find it. What are they supposed to do?

Dr. Simone Gold (43:41)

We need it over the counter.

Charlie Kirk (43:42)

Okay, but that's not a solution. What are they supposed to do now?

Dr. Stella Immanuel (43:44)

We need an executive order, okay?

Charlie Kirk (43:46)

Because doctors are saying to their patients, this doesn't work.

Dr. Simone Gold (43:50)

So right now there's a request of the FDA, Dr. Hahn, for an emergency use authorization to use hydroxychloroquine on label for COVID 19. That would remove doctors fear and would remove the fact that pharmacists have been empowered to overrule doctors. That can be done immediately. Dr. Hahn, if you're listening, you could do this today. We can allow on label usage of hydroxychloroquine. Zinc is over the counter. That would immediately stop some of the problem.

Charlie Kirk (44:19)

I will be tweeting right at Dr. Hahn that exact clip. Here's my point. What I'm saying, though, is that I can't get it. I've tried to get it and I've had doctors say, you don't need it. It doesn't work. And it's like, I'm not at the at risk category. So I'm not saying feel sorry for me, but I'm like, no. You know, I travel. I'm exposed. I want it. I want to use it as a preventative. I literally cannot get it. Cannot. I'm sure one of you guys could find a way to fix that problem. But I Hasn't been like. It hasn't been a top priority for me, but it's not easy. There are Americans that hear this, they see this, and they're being told by their doctors, oh, that's the fish cleaner thing. And you'll die. Doctor?

Dr. Scott Barber (44:56)

Yeah, I was gonna say, you know, the Hippocratic oath is do no harm. That's how we think of everything when we first figure out how to treat patients. You know, not everybody that comes through the door has a, you know, an automatic treatment. Sometimes you have to figure it out. If I was to tell you taking a Tylenol might protect you from this deadly disease, would you say back to me, hey, listen, I'm gonna need another randomized controlled placebo.

Charlie Kirk (45:21)

The deadline setting, Tylenol sitting in Walgreens and hydroxy.

Dr. Scott Barber (45:24)

That's what I'm saying, though. Is this drug, is that safe? And, you know, this. So it's disingenuous for people to say they need more research.

Charlie Kirk (45:31)

A lot of people have kidney issues, Advil or something.

Dr. Dan Erickson (45:36)

How do we get it, though, is Charlie's question.

Dr. Simone Gold (45:38)

It's sold in the vitamin section of stores in Indonesia and Iran.

Dr. Dan Erickson (45:44)

But it's a marketing issue to a certain extent, because in April, I went to the big pharmacies and I said, I need to get this for my clinic. And they said, no, you don't. We don't have it. The supply locally was out. So what I do, I went to smaller boutique pharmacies and was able to order it. So how do we get it now? We have it in the storehouses. We have to get it to the doctors that will prescribe. And as it starts to gain momentum and as people start to use it, other doctors, I guarantee you by supply and demand will move. Move as the people say, I want this or I'm going elsewhere.

Charlie Kirk (46:16)

That's helpful. And so the more. Look, I.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (46:20)

They need to allow us to dispense it in the clinic.

Charlie Kirk (46:23)

Look, it should be abundant and people in the third world are able to get it. And in America, you have to go shut down your country.

Dr. Simone Gold (46:29)

You know, last week, Charlie, when we talked about the 63 million dosages that are sitting.

Charlie Kirk (46:33)

Yes, in Arizona.

Dr. Simone Gold (46:34)

Right.

Charlie Kirk (46:34)

So trying to locate them.

Dr. Simone Gold (46:35)

By the way, part of our plan is to see if that's 63 million dosages could be released directly to physicians. So we need to bypass the pharmacists in this regard.

Charlie Kirk (46:44)

Well, what I can't understand is why some sort of drug dealer in West LA hasn't figured out a way to make this. No, seriously, I mean.

Dr. Annie Bukacek (46:53)

Well, it's funny you bring that up because. Can you hear me with this?

Charlie Kirk (46:56)

Yeah, you're good.

Dr. Annie Bukacek (46:57)

In Africa, there is actually a lot of fraudulent. There are a lot of fraudulent pills. It's a problem because it's an important, important medicine. And so there. There does become a market for dealing and dealing counterfeits. We don't have that problem here, luckily. I'm not suggesting we should. But, you know, we talk about doing our part wearing masks to block the transmission and to tie those together. It's also very much doing our part to prophylax ourselves against being a vector. I treat older patients, and so I think it's as important, if not more important, because it's more effective in me not being a vector of bringing this virus into my clinic to be prophylaxing on hydroxychloroquine. So, you know, I still do. This is part of what we have to do is wear masks for now and face shields and block the transmission in that way. But intrinsically, blocking the transmission is much more effective. And there's no way to contaminate. I mean, we're. Everybody's touching their masks. The minute you touch your mask, it's contaminated. Now we're getting in that negative.

Charlie Kirk (48:01)

I want to talk about masks because I've had a very. I'm just confused. And some of you can clear it up for me. First, they say no masks. Vehemently, no masks. Right. It was the most aggressive no mask statement I've ever seen. Then they say now it's if you don't wear a mask, they're literally. That's why we're all wearing masks here. Not out of choice, but they could shut down this beautiful hotel that we're in. And out of respect to them, I've spoken out against the governmental overreach of masks. I say that the science is undetermined. I would love to have you guys talk about that. And if anyone chime in. I'm not expecting consensus here, because I don't think there is consensus. But anyone want to talk about the mask?

Dr. Richard Urso (48:42)

I can talk about that issue. Okay. This has been looked at for many years because we all operate. I've been in the operating room for 35 years, 31 years in practice. So the issue is we know what works. These don't work against viruses. Regular masks don't work. That's simply what it is. It's been shown many times. It's not. It's nothing to do with COVID Covid doesn't even factor into the Equation because for years we've been looking at these issues. So they have these spacesuits, they're called PAPRs. They're incredibly effective. They filter viruses down to, I think, the 0.01 or something like that. Basically, we have materials like N99, N100, but N95 blocks, let's say 5%. Only 5% of airborne particles can get through. But all viruses can get through, period. All viruses can get through. Now, do they get through? No, it's just like a chain link fence. If you throw sand in a chain link fence, not all the sand gets through. So I think the best example I can say is, like, the reason we wear masks and the reason I wear a mask, because the fear is so massive in this country. I wear a mask so people don't think I don't care about them, okay? But I don't wear a mask because they work. All right? And if you have, if you have a mask and it's super sealed, it's N99, N100. Yeah, it'll probably work. And you can do a pamper. It's like a spacesuit. Orthopedic guys wear them when they're drilling a lot. So he can tell you more about that. But the bottom line is we don't. We know that masks work a little bit like a chain link fence, so that's very helpful.

Charlie Kirk (50:14)

It's. It's been one of the most aggressive government campaigns I've seen recently to try to get people to wear masks. I think they're incredibly dehumanizing. And my own philosophical bent, I just am very reluctant when people tell me what to do, personally. Doctor, can you comment on this and the efficacy of it, because you had some comments earlier.

Dr. Scott Barber (50:33)

Yeah, I was going to say, you know, people at this table, People at this table didn't start thinking about masks in 2020. You know, we. I've been thinking about masks for probably close to 30 years now. Studying them, researching them. I'm a surgeon, so when I operate, I have to wear a surgical mask. I happen to know that there's no studies that show that it helps decrease my infection rate, but just it seems like an easy thing to do to keep spittle from getting on the patient, and more importantly, to keep stuff from getting on me. But at the end of every case, my nose is running, my eyes are watering, and the first thing I do is run to the sink to blow my nose, wash my hands, wash my face. And so masks are not necessarily benign. And when I was telling you I'VE been following the CDC guidelines immediately. When I first got online, when this first started happening, they said don't wear a mask. And then suddenly in a few months they're saying to wear a mask. And when I look at the reference, it's based on a case study of two hairdressers in St. Louis.

Charlie Kirk (51:40)

So just so you know, I talked about this in my podcast. I got destroyed by the media. You don't know this study. And I, I'm just a very simple minded person. It didn't seem highly scientific.

Dr. Scott Barber (51:52)

No. And it's not a study. That's my point is that is not a study. That is not something that we should be basing, you know, world policy on. It's information and I certainly use it to process and everything. And I'm, you know, like other people at the table, I'm not convinced that masks work. And I've been studying it for a long time. But the issue is other people. And also it's important for patients because it's about having control. The mask is give individuals a feeling of control. Just like hydroxychloroquine availability gives people control.

Charlie Kirk (52:22)

So I want to ask about the cycle.

Dr. Annie Bukacek (52:23)

So go ahead, say you're thinking about before 2020 and after. That's really.

Dr. Scott Barber (52:27)

Yeah, you know, and I would, I would just encourage anybody. Go and research masks for yourself and just throw out anything from 2020. Then go research masks again and only look at things in 2020 and you'll get very different results.

Charlie Kirk (52:41)

That's a phenomenal point. What are the psychological implications of children wearing masks? Because when I, I was in Jackson Hole, Wyoming and I saw 5 year olds wearing these masks and they looked miserable and they looked confused. And I say this very confidently. I'm so glad I didn't grow up in an America where I had to grow up with a mask on. What are the implications of this?

Dr. Mark McDonald (53:03)

Well, aside from the fact that they're absolutely useless and that kids won't abide by putting them on, which sort of renders the whole point moot. They are actually psychologically damaging. They instill and reinforce fear. I keep getting back to this point about fear because I think it's really the crux of this entire issue right now. Without managing the fear, we cannot move forward. I see dozens of children every week, about a quarter of whom don't wear masks. Parents appropriately dissuade them from using them. About half of the kids are sort of on and off the mask and about a quarter are on the mask all the time. What I'VE noticed is that in families that insist that their children wear masks or that limit their children's activities to activities that require masks, which is actually quite common now in Los Angeles, kids are not allowed to play with one another, they're not allowed to bike, they're not allowed to go to the park. A private park in my neighborhood, where I live was just closed four days ago because the homeowners association noticed that there were. This is their bulletin, by the way, that I'm quoting. Too many children not wearing masks in the park and that the grass might become contaminated. And that because children like to touch the grass and roll in it, they could become infected and then kill their grandparents that they're living with. So they sprayed toxic chemicals on the grass in order to disinfect the grass. And it's now going to be closed for 30 days with the option of renewing on a 30 day rolling basis. Sort of like the lockdown. What happens to kids when they live in that kind of environment? What they learn is that everything is scary, everything is dangerous. They are dangerous, their friends are dangerous, they, the grass is dangerous. They could kill grandfather.

Dr. Dan Erickson (55:02)

How many kids have transferred infection to adults?

Dr. Mark McDonald (55:05)

As of right now, the number is. Wait for it, zero. There is not a single documented case of transmission from a child to an adult in any of the school systems. There is no death of a child in the state of California under the age of 18 from coronavirus. That's documented by the CDC, which we know exaggerates number, but you can't exaggerate zero. Multiply it by any number. It doesn't go up. So my concern as a child psychiatrist is seeing this. I am seeing a generation of children who are learning by mask wearing, mask enforcement, mass police and mask shaming because it happens. We've all seen it. We all saw it here the first day when we walked around the Capitol steps and the Supreme Court steps. People walk up to you about two feet away and tell you that they're contaminating each other, you and them, because not wearing a mask. Why they wouldn't stay more than six feet apart, it's beyond me. But what they're being taught the children is that everything is scary and fearful and dangerous. So what happens is the children stay at home. They don't go out. I'm putting aside all of the health problems like immunologic issues, rashes, heart disease, obesity, etc. Putting that to the side for a moment. Their emotional development become stunted. They become scared and phobic. They're unable to then associate with people outside the home to engage in conversation, to date, to marry. I'm going down the line here. 10, 20, 30 years down the line, we're going to have an entire generation of youngsters who are going to become adults, who are going to become afraid to live outside of the basement.

Charlie Kirk (56:40)

That is.

Dr. Mark McDonald (56:40)

I'm not exaggerating this, I don't think. And often they're comfortable with it. And comfort is a very, very bad thing to be living in for a long time when you're not challenged. We know it with adults who are being paid extra money to stay home and not work. They don't want to go back to work because it's more comfortable. When kids become too comfortable in an environment that's not healthy, they stay comfortable and they stay sick and they don't grow and they don't develop. And to have a whole 10, 20 years worth of kids not actually becoming part of our country and achieving their potential is not just an error. It is not an error. It was an error to close the schools. This is negligence. This is abuse.

Charlie Kirk (57:18)

It's diabolical. So, doctor, can you talk about some of the external costs of the shutdowns? Because there are calls to shut down America again. They might. They might shut down other states, including Florida, very soon.

Dr. Dan Erickson (57:29)

I think the smartest thing you can do is look at a nation that shut down. Nation that didn't shut down. How'd it go?

Charlie Kirk (57:34)

Well, so just so you know, the zeitgeist of America is that Sweden is an unbelievable disaster. Disaster.

Dr. Dan Erickson (57:40)

Which is not true.

Charlie Kirk (57:41)

Tell us why.

Dr. Dan Erickson (57:42)

5,600 deaths in 10.2 million people. When you ask Anders Tegnal, chief epidemiologist, how are you doing? How are things going? He said, well, we're content with our results. Please extrapolate. They ask him, he says, well, our nursing homes weren't protected well, they're very large compared to our Nordic neighbor. They're very large. They had some hygiene issues. They had rampant 50 to 60% death rate came from those in the elderly centers. So if you decrease that, it's down to 2500. And then Norway, which is right next door, is 5 million half the size. They had much less death rate, but they also have less immunity. So 1 to 2% immunity versus about 20% immunity. So guess what happens during cold and flu when this starts up again and you have a nation that has immunity and a nation that has no immunity. You don't have to be a scientist to know one nation is better prepared than the other. Also they didn't have a free falling economy. There's a public health, there's medical problems that arise when you shut down. People say it's just financial. Au contraire. I have to say to that. Let's talk about the 600% increase in suicide reportings. Let's talk about the spousal abuse, let's talk about alcoholism. We are seeing. I have firsthand cases of suicide in my area. I have firsthand cases of people who are going into a bad depression. These are not just me. I've talked to ER physicians around the country that said public health crisis secondary to financial lockdown. This is not financial, this is medical. So you can't just say that it's a financial issue. And when I look at Norway and I say, kids are in school, restaurants are open, economy is not in free fall. I think that is a sustainable model. When you ask Anders Tegnal, how are you guys doing? He goes, we're in a sustainable model. He goes, the US pulled it back down to an unsustainable, impractical model that you can't do. We can do this for years. Can you?

Charlie Kirk (59:35)

And they want to shut down America again, which, again, it seems a common theme here, if I were to kind of summarize, is that we've been deceived and we are continually being deceived. There seems to be a broader totalitarian agenda at play and that there is a solution that actually no one wants to talk about.

Dr. Meryl Nass (59:54)

I think one thing that, you know, overall problem to this approach is we are, you know, it's a strategy problem where we're locking down everyone. We want masks on everyone. And we're kind of forgetting that the fatality rate in children, children that go to schools, in people under 45, people under 60, is extremely low. This is not a universal strategy for everyone. There's no reason to destroy the, the youthful, the youth's lives, to destroy the economy, to destroy businesses. When this affects a small percentage of the population, that, that should be the focus, which, that we made that mistake back in March with nursing homes. We didn't focus on the most vulnerable people. And that's, I think what we're still doing is we're not focusing on the most vulnerable people. We're worried about the 22 year old who's walking down the street without a mask on. That's who we're yelling at right now. Okay? And so this is a misdirection on appropriate resources and energy to focus on those older patients, those people that maybe should be on hydroxychloroquine the ones that maybe should have guidance, the right guidance that's different from someone who is younger. And there's a total messaging problem, I think, on that front.

Charlie Kirk (61:02)

Dr. And then.

Dr. Annie Bukacek (61:04)

Doctor, could we return to masks for just a moment?

Charlie Kirk (61:06)

Yeah, please.

Dr. Annie Bukacek (61:07)

I have two points I wanted to bring up. People often ask me, as a physician, when, what do you think about masks and should kids wear masks to school? And things like that. And so there's so much messaging everywhere you go. I mean, you're at the market and they're talking about masks on TV. You can't turn on YouTube now. It's all PSAs on that. And so having been in a field where we wear masks a lot, and even if we're not surgeons, we've spent a lot of time in the or, you develop mask hygiene. And that is really missing as the part of. Of the conversation. I'll get to the fact that they're not effective also. But so to go back to are they effective or not? They have done studies with SARS Covid 2 to look at viral transmission through that mask, whether it's a surgical mask, whether it's a cloth mask. And in those with people who are infected and cough or sneeze into those masks, they can detect virus on the inside of the mask and the outside. So when you go to the grocery store and people are wearing their masks in case they have Covid and they cough on their mask, then they touch their mask 200 times in the market, adjusting the nose. They touch the mayonnaise. You touch the mayonnaise, pick it up and touch your mask. I mean, that's more of a contamination than if we were walking around with no masks because people are touching their faces so much and they don't realize when you touch your mask, I tell my kids, it's like you're picking everybody's nose in the market. That's how great gross it is when you touch your mask.

Charlie Kirk (62:30)

So you're actually making the argument the mask could be doing more harm, could

Dr. Annie Bukacek (62:33)

be right, because you're touching it. So, I mean, people touch the masks more than they would touch their face, although they still touch their face too much. So that's point one about the masks. The other thing, when you even look at the World Health Organization, I am a person who, if I have a mandate that affects my life or law that affects my life, I read it. And so, you know, when we had our mask mandate in California by the California Department of Health, the first thing I did was look at it and read it. And that was important to me because I'm hearing impaired, and there is an exception for hearing impaired individuals. The appropriate thing for me to wear is a shield. When you're talking to me, you're actually exempt from wearing a mask because I do rely on your lips as communication. And so it would be appropriate for you to wear nothing or a shield, if possible. When you look at the whole. They go through physicians and they say, for health care workers, the appropriate thing to wear would be a medical mask or a shield. And they specifically say cloth masks are not appropriate for healthcare workers. And so I think an interesting thing in terms of mask shaming and being uncomfortable about seeing faces now is this is what I wear and actually have my staff wear these because I need to see their faces. It really is difficult for me without that. And so to see. I've had difficulty getting on planes several times recently where people say, oh, you have to wear a mask also, when actually this is more effective in German spill transmission. And it's just that fear that. I don't know if it's fear I'm not conforming, but I actually have to carry the statute with me and my hearing test to document that I'm hearing impaired. And so it's. It's really odd to me because it's so uninformed. And also, you know, most of the states, when they have a mask mandate, they'll say they'll specifically exclude outdoors greater than six feet. You know, you don't need to wear it for casual contact. There's been not a single case of outdoor transmission with casual contact like that. And yet somebody standing 30ft away will walk up to you to tell you you're not wearing a mask outside and come in that zone when you know they're not reading even the rules that apply to their life. And so I just, It's. I feel so like people are so scared of me wearing a shield, which is safer. And so it does call into that, like, what is this about that. Are you that scared of seeing me smile at you now? Are you that upset that I'm not like everybody else? I'm not conforming? I mean, this is actually safer if that's where we're going. And I'm impaired, so you're infringing on my ADA rights.

Charlie Kirk (65:02)

Precisely. That's a great point. And part of this is that we have to realize how programmable our society actually is. And we convinced ourselves as a country really believe in liberty. And I think that's a bunch of nonsense. Actually, I think that we are far less, Far less likely to fight for our freedoms. I think people are standing up. You guys are. And I go to South Dakota and I feel like I'm still in my country, but I can't. I was just in, In New York. I cannot walk three feet without the mask Gestapo to come through. Doctor, you had a comment?

Dr. Scott Barber (65:37)

I would go back to the depression issue, please.

Charlie Kirk (65:41)

Can you talk about that, please?

Dr. Scott Barber (65:43)

Sure. Depression is worsened by a lack of vitamin D, a lack of zinc. Many articles about this problem. We need to make sure that our children are getting enough vitamin D, our children are getting enough zinc. They're not in school. They're not getting their milk. Our. Our ca. Our milk supply is actually being dumped into manure pits right now.

Dr. Simone Gold (66:12)

Yeah. Off topic.

Dr. Scott Barber (66:14)

Thank you.

Charlie Kirk (66:15)

Okay. Did you want to say something, Dr. Gold?

Dr. Simone Gold (66:18)

No, no, I just. I, I.

Dr. Annie Bukacek (66:20)

No, we're good.

Charlie Kirk (66:21)

Okay.

Dr. Richard Urso (66:21)

Yeah. I'm going to reply a little bit about what Dr. Todaro said about schools and about children, and I think it's really clear. I think it's good for the audience to know that influenza kills a lot more kids than Covid. So I think that's good to hear, that that's the reality. So up until about age 45, there's where you see us start to see a little transition between 45 to 70. It's about even with the flu, over 70, clearly, Covid has been more deadly. So I think as we move forward and think about this as we go forward, if we can, I think the elephant in the room is hydroxychloroquine. We don't talk about that. That needs to be brought to the forefront. And then those statistics that I just mentioned, that's why we should open schools.

Charlie Kirk (67:09)

Well, so, doctor, Doctors, I should say the couple minutes we have remaining. There's one topic here. We talked about masks, talked about lockdowns, talked about social isolation, but there's this incredible fixation on finding a vaccine. Does anyone want to take.

Dr. Richard Urso (67:27)

Yeah, I want to get one comment and I'll let you go. The vaccine. We don't have very good RNA vaccines, period. So to say we're going to get coronaviruses. We've never had a vaccine for a coronavirus ever. We have a flu vaccine. It's not very good. It's like a dog chasing his tail. Okay. So to expect a vaccine to come out and be effective in a brief period of time is really unrealistic. If it happens, it'd be wonderful. Okay. But the likelihood of getting a vaccine that has Long lasting immunity is we don't have one for the HIV virus, we don't have one for influenza, we don't have one for coronaviruses. Most of these airborne RNA viruses have. We don't do that well with vaccines. That's just the way it's been historically. Will we make a breakthrough? Maybe. All right. But the likelihood is probably not that high waiting for a vaccine. And if we do get one, it'll probably be more like the flu where every year we'll be chasing our tail.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (68:25)

Let me say a little bit about the vaccine issue and full disclosure. I'm not an anti vaxxer. I'm a pediatrician turned ER doctor. So I'm not an anti vaxxer. I believe children should get vaccinated. So nobody gets crazy hearing this. I'm part of a clinical study, one of in fact an FDA approved clinical study on hydroxychloroquine. And we've been doing, looking at stools, the concentration of the virus in the stool and we've actually been able to isolate and you know, and the genome of the virus and we're working on that right now. That's actually one of the big things. It takes us a long time. We're not, we're not. I'm working one of the doctors in California when we're self funded. So we did, they did, they had done about maybe 15 people where they actually isolate. They actually like sequence the genome of the virus in six, in about 15 different people. It's still a small sample, but they found five different strains in 15 people. They can't, the strains of this virus, there are so many. They are not going to be able to find a vaccine because there are too many strains of the same virus.

Charlie Kirk (69:36)

So it would just almost impossible to find a vaccine. It'll be something next to a placebo and they should take, according to you, 400 milligrams a week. And that's much more effective than that

Dr. Stella Immanuel (69:47)

screen is more effective. Yes.

Dr. Scott Barber (69:49)

I was just going to say typical of all the different viruses that cause respiratory infection, you know, paramyxovirus, rhinovirus, influenza virus, coronavirus, and by the way, all of these have been around for a long time. They change very quickly. You know, they get into different animals, they change. And that's why the only one that we even have a vaccine that works a little is influenza. And we have to change that every year because the virus changes. And the influenza vaccine is usually only effective between about 6% and 40% of the time. So it's not Even that effective with the only one that we have. And guess what? We have this medicine called hydroxychloroquine and zinc that works amazingly well.

Charlie Kirk (70:30)

Doctor.

Dr. Simone Gold (70:31)

Yeah. So I'm also an attorney, so I'm very interested in this vaccine issue because there's a lot of civil liberties issues that are coming up around the vaccine issue. First, Americans need to distinguish between lethal and non lethal diseases. You know, we're giving kids lots and lots of vaccines. I again want to say, just in case somebody thinks I'm an anti vaxxer, I'm not, I've got children, they've been vaccinated. But you need to distinguish between lethal and non lethal diseases. Is there a reason to vaccinate against a non lethal disease? That's just a question you need to think about because there's lots of diseases out there. And the point is we have not really made a mandate to vaccinate against non lethal diseases. Second, from a civil libertarian perspective, the only way we've enforced the concept of getting vaccines in our country is really through the school system. You can opt out for religious reason and other reasons, but in general it ends with the school system. We're now entering an era due to so much fear that should this vaccine ever become available, it's going to become mandated. And it won't be mandated by the government. It won't need to be. It'll be mandated by employers. And average Joe won't be able to get a job unless they prove that they're vaccinated Americans. This is a sea change in your country and your civil liberties. This is huge. Keep an eye on that.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (71:47)

Yes.

Charlie Kirk (71:48)

Is there a financial incentive for a vaccine more so than hydroxychloroquine? Talk about that. Most people don't know that.

Dr. Meryl Nass (71:55)

Many companies.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (71:55)

Many companies. Do you know how many companies are making money off a vaccine? Many companies that their market share, their stocks have skyrocketed because they're going to make a vaccine. Nobody makes money off a cheap generic drug like hydroxychloroquine. We don't need a vaccine. We don't need mask, we don't need all this stuff. We just need to get on hydroxychloroquine and everybody need to get. Listen, if we want something that we need to match out on the street, run match for hydroxychloroquine. The right to use, the right to try. People need to come out. There has to be an uprising. We have the right to try. It's an American law. Come out on the streets and Match, I'll be there with you with a big placard going, try hydroxychloroquine. Let's go.

Charlie Kirk (72:32)

The issue is that I believe the tech companies are directly harming human beings because every time. So I had hydroxychloroquine tweet back in March and it was about the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine tweet got taken down, account suspended. And since then I, all my, I mean I was reaching about 82 million people every two days. It's about half that, 40 million now. Poor me.

Dr. Dan Erickson (72:54)

Right?

Charlie Kirk (72:55)

But no, there was a total directive to stunt all my content. Since then,

Dr. Stella Immanuel (73:02)

can we sue them for crimes that give humanity.

Charlie Kirk (73:04)

Well, the government should do something against it because I mean there's for different reasons unrelated to the medical issue, just the speech issue. But what's always really, what's really perplexing to me about this whole thing, and this is just. You guys remember back in the early 2000s, the leading anti pharmaceutical people were the far left. Like now all of a sudden, they love the pharmaceutical companies. It's really bizarre. I mean, you guys remember that, right? In fact, you probably thought they went too far in the early 2000s and they were like, oh, no one should ever take anything, ever. And you know, there's probably better solutions. And now it's really weird to see how the left's embracing it. Yeah. Dr. And then we have to close.

Dr. Richard Urso (73:40)

Oh, Charlie, I was going to ask you a question. I was going to ask you a question.

Charlie Kirk (73:44)

Sure.

Dr. Richard Urso (73:44)

Let's see if you can answer this for us. I would suspect that there's going to be a media discrediting campaign being run on us. That's correct. I would think that would happen as a journalist, as a social media influencer. What's your advice?

Charlie Kirk (74:03)

Well, so first of all, the power is in the group, not in the individual. So that's my first piece of advice. You guys being here together makes it a lot harder to discredit. You try to grow your numbers but be very skeptical of infiltrators or people that are going to try to misrepresent you for what you're not. I'd stay focused. That's the other thing. I think the hydroxychloroquine issue is probably should be the primary focus because you get into too heady stuff. I think you agree, Dr. Gold. The second thing is they will try to discredit you personally. I've been through that. Daily Today, Media Matters had this huge thing. Charlie Kirk says he's not Gonna wear masks. As he says, they don't work. If you go to what I said, it was much more nuanced about that than that. It was just this ridiculous big label. All I said is that I don't. I think there might be unintended consequences and the science is not yet determined. Nevertheless, it was, you know, not. Not easy to get through. But you just have to kind of, as a doctor, realize that what you're doing is actually an incredibly courageous thing. And I want to thank you guys for that, because I'm going to be honest, I thought that I was living in some sort of Orwellian dystopian nightmare for the last couple of months. And I said, either I'm completely missing something or my logical thinking has just gone backwards. And I want to comment on that, but my piece of advice is anticipate it and expect it. My opinion, the worst type of attack is one that you're not expecting. If you just anticipate they're going to try to discredit you, then I think you'll be able to get through it. But you guys probably knew there was a price to be paid by coming here. But you're going to be. You're going to be written up as heroes and think about if just one person listening to this podcast is able to get to their doctor and say, hey, can I. Can I. Can you please subscribe? Hydroxyquarium, please, Blah, blah, blah. And they might do it. What if one person's life is saved? I think that's worth the disinformation campaign that they're going to launch against you.

Dr. Scott Barber (76:01)

I just. I really wanted to make the point to people that, you know, as a doctor who was just trying to keep myself informed so that I could make decisions. I've been following the numbers very, very closely, and we've gotten to a point now where the numbers are very difficult to appreciate because they're doing things. And this is not my opinion. This has already been admitted by the cdc, but they're conflating positive testing with patients who have immunity to coronaviruses that are not COVID 19, the ones that cause just a regular cold. They're conflating PCR testing for virus, an antibody test that might actually just mean you're immune to the virus. And they're putting all of these numbers together, making it impossible to figure it out. And I can just tell you, I was on Fox News, Wall Street Journal talking about masks, and they had a doctor come on behind me that said the opposite, and he referenced statistics In Florida, California, I'm sorry, Florida, Texas and Arizona. And he talked about this, this bump, this spike. And then what really happened was they took deaths that occurred in April and added them to the deaths in July to create the illusion that there was a greater number of deaths in July. And then they called it a spike. And then of course, it went around the news media as a spike. And I just think people need to be aware that that is happening a lot more.

Dr. Dan Erickson (77:20)

And doctors can't freely speak, by the way. So many doctors have, I mean, thousands have come to me and said, I work for, for such and such institution. If I speak out, I've heard many doctors say I would be fired instantly.

Charlie Kirk (77:32)

Since you're all independent, you're able to speak out.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (77:34)

We're putting together frontlinemds.com doctors frontlinemds.com if you walk, walk. Doctors. If they stop you from treating your patients, walk. If we have enough of us, walk and become independent and walk as a group, we will win.

Dr. Simone Gold (77:49)

We're going to stay focused in what we're here to do. So the Americasfrontlinedoctors.com Americasfrontlinedoctors.com, there were a lot of emails sent into Charlie's Twitter and various social media looking for the references for things that we've said. So if you go to America's FrontLineDoctors.com There's a reference section, there's a white paper on hydroxychloroquine. I urge every American simply to read it. Next to that is a compendium of all the studies on hydroxychloroquine. It's two or three hundred pages long, demonstrating its efficacy. And just to follow up on the question that my colleague asked about the social media, how you handle it, have you ever seen anything like this? So we just had our summit yesterday and we reached, I think 18 or 20 million views within hours. We were deplatformed by Facebook, deplatformed by Twitter, deplatformed by YouTube. I don't think I've ever heard of. Have you ever heard of that, Charlie? Where three within hours.

Charlie Kirk (78:44)

Not that quickly, no. I mean, I'm familiar with many cases, but this is, and I'm dealing with this intimately because we run between our Twitter, our Instagram, our Facebook and our YouTube. We have about 7 to 8 million subscribers and followers. And so we deal with this quite a lot now. There is a concerted campaign to the tech companies to make sure what you're saying does not get out. And they do it by saying, well, we want to make sure medical disinformation is not being spread, which in a very Orwellian weird way is. That's exactly what they're doing. So, I mean, it's, it's not even a lie. It's doublethink. And if you guys know 1984, it's. It's so much worse than a lie because they're the ones actually doing what they're in it would almost be projection. Well, so interestingly, we anticipate this video to be taken down by YouTube and by Facebook. I know some people at some places, let's put it that way, I'm going to tell them this video should not be taken down. However, this is going to be embedded up on our own private servers on our website, so they won't be able to take that down as well now. And that's because, and it should be a broader question of what exactly that was said here was so incredibly controversial. And the reason, I think is that there isn't a prophecy. I think this crisis goes away in 30 days if what you guys talk about is actually applied. Would you say that's true?

Dr. Richard Urso (80:03)

That's true. And Charlie, one for one last comment on hydroxychloroquine. I need about a minute. Is that okay?

Charlie Kirk (80:11)

Yes, you got it.

Dr. Richard Urso (80:13)

So I think the one thing I'd like to say to the audience to wrap this up about hydroxychloroquine, what do we know about it? We know in places where they have a lot of people who are already using it, the rate of COVID is very, very low. And I mean 100 times lower than it is here. We know in countries where they used it and used it in studies in India and they looked at patients that were already on it in Italy, Portugal, they did in Nigeria, where they put patients on it prophylactically, the overall reduction in cases was about 80%. We know that the number one infectious disease person in the entire world, Didier Raul, used it on 4000 patients with azarythromycin and zinc and had tremendous results. And finally, I think lastly is that if we can get this over the counter, hydroxychloroquine will end this pandemic one month tops.

Charlie Kirk (81:13)

You guys all agree with that?

Dr. Simone Gold (81:14)

Yep, 30 days.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (81:16)

30 days tops.

Dr. Scott Barber (81:17)

That's it.

Charlie Kirk (81:19)

We have over 200 years. You said 200.

Dr. Simone Gold (81:21)

We have about 200 years of experience.

Charlie Kirk (81:23)

200 years of combined experience.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (81:25)

30 days top.

Charlie Kirk (81:26)

But also not just 35,000 foot view actually treating patients. You see what it does to children, see what it does to families see what it does to human beings. And this crisis can end without a need for a vaccine, without a need for more shutdowns or lockdowns, canceling more sports. I have seen friends commit suicide. Unfortunately, during this entire crisis that I believe was directly attributed to the lockdown and the lack of social cohesion. I've come to the conclusion that the architects of chaos in our society do not care about human life. They care about control. And that's a very cynical and unfortunate place to come at. But there's no other way I can justify the truth that you're telling me with the opposite of the truth that they're saying. Any other closing thoughts? In just a couple seconds. We have remaining.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (82:13)

Yes, Covid is not a Democratic or Republican disease. While some of us are using this thing as a way to, we're just being opportunistic and thinking that it's going to help us politically Remember that the people that want to control the society and everything, they don't care whether you're Democratic or Republican. Covid doesn't care whether you're a Democrat or Republican. It's time for America to unite. Leave politics out of it. Unite as a people and fight for our combined destiny.

Charlie Kirk (82:45)

All right, well, thank you guys so much. And for the audio listeners right now, they can go to Americasfrontline doctors.com we're going to post that link. God bless you guys. Thank you so much.

Dr. Scott Barber (82:58)

Thank you.

Dr. Stella Immanuel (82:58)

Thank you.

Charlie Kirk (83:01)

That was incredible. Please get involved with TurningPoint USA at tpusa.com, tpusa.com if you have a question for any of these Doctors, email us freedomarliekirk.com freedomarliekirk.com and if you want to win a signed copy of the New York Times Bestseller Maga Doctrine, type in Charlie Kirk show to your podcast provider, hit subscribe and give us a five star review. Screenshot it and email us freedomarliekirk.com thank you guys so much for listening and please consider supporting our program@charliekirk.com support thanks so much and God bless.