Pam Popper, Fight for Health Rights |526|

Pam Popper is a leading public health activist and advocate for personal health rights.

[box]

Listen Now:

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Subscribe:

[one_third][/one_third] [one_third][/one_third] [one_third_last][/one_third_last] 

Click here for Pam Popper’s website

Click here for forum Discussion  

https://youtu.be/tBG85CWOXqg

skeptiko-526-pam-popper

Video clip: [00:00:00] I was on Facebook one day, and I found this video, I press play it was the worst video I’ve ever seen. It needs to be stopped immediately. People went nuts.

[00:00:20] Alex Tsakiris: That’s a clip from the Netflix documentary Don’t Fuck With Cats, which is about, well about many things, one about people who do very, very horribly evil things. And maybe I guess a bit of light at the end of the tunnel, how there does come a point when people are willing to face evil and collectively try and fight evil. It’s so documentary worth watching. But it also has an interesting corollary with today’s show, in my interview with a very excellent Dr. Pam Popper, if you don’t know Pam, if you don’t know her story, she’s the one who made the governor of her home state of Ohio back down and do an about face regarding his fear based ridiculous health policies. So we talked about a lot of things. She’s very inspirational. But we also talked about whether we can really crack the case the same way the Don’t Fuck With Cats people did. They get a lot of swings at the plate, you know what I mean? So it ain’t over. It ain’t over it. But you …

[00:01:23] Dr. Pam Popper: But every swing at the plate gets more careless. That’s the thing that to look at, it gets more careless. And it’s less incremental and incremental is the only way you keep this going. So what we’re left with is the stupidest people in the country are the only ones left that are buying into this. So you have people like me who from the get go, when you understood something was wrong. You had people who are stupid beyond comprehension. These are the sheep who are wearing masks in their cars. And we’re not going to do anything for those people. This middle group of people are persuadable. And those are the ones that are going to make the difference and they are coming our way. They’re not picking up anybody. Nobody is going to their side at this point in time.

[00:02:06] Alex Tsakiris: Like I said, inspirational love to think that it’s so. But this being Skeptiko. My also asked her about the evil slash spiritual angle in how we are to really understand at a deeper, deeper level, what’s going on here.

[00:02:21] Dr. Pam Popper: I think that what we’re dealing with is people who have no respect or regard for human life or any life. I’m not a devoutly religious person. Although I think there’s a God, there’s something, I think it’s God. And I think that this is a battle between good and evil. It’s not the first time that’s happened. I am a fan of Victor Frankel’s book, Man’s Search for Meaning. And so whether you believe in God or not, I think that all people who have character respect other humans, and we respect human life, we respect all life to a certain extent, the animals and the birds and the trees, and we have some respect for everything and all beings. The thing with evil people is that they respect nobody and nothing, except for their quest for power.

[00:03:14] Alex Tsakiris: Dr. Pam Popper was a great guest. I really hint you talking to her. And I hope you enjoy this interview too. And if you do, I’m going to remind you that the only way I get these interviews out is by you, sharing them with other people, appreciating them and sharing them. So we can spread this kind of information. You hear this interview with Pam Popper, you’re not going to hear anything quite like it that gets into these topics. She’s done some great interviews, but I think this kind of has a different voice. And I want to see if we can share this voice. Help share the interview, help grow Skeptiko. Here’s Dr. Pam Popper. Welcome to Skeptiko where we explore controversial science and spirituality with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris and today we welcome Pam Popper to Skeptiko. Pam is the founder and president of wellness forum health, author of COVID Operation, and a very inspiring health advocate, science advocate. Heck, advocate for truth, justice, freedom and all that stuff we’re supposed to care about. And I have to say, it really, really lifts my spirits, to think that someone as smart as Pam is as successful as Pam is, is willing to fight this battle that I have to say most of the time seems impossible to win. And it’s really great to have you on and welcome.

[00:04:51] Dr. Pam Popper: Thank you and I don’t think it’s impossible to win. I’m in it to win it. And I think we’re gonna and I think we are winning it, in many ways.

[00:04:59] Alex Tsakiris: Right on, well, we definitely need to talk about that. You know, at first, I heard you on the higher side chats, you did an excellent job, Greg Carr would did an excellent job. And it reached cuz I love that show, it probably reached an audience that maybe you don’t always reach, but I was listening. And then I was excited to I mean, I really want to talk, we have to talk about what you do, and you have to deliver your message and tell people that, but then I want to talk about some of the deeper aspects of that, particularly as regards to science in general, you’ve been at this for a long time, it’s not like you just popped your head up when this COVID thing happened. And there’s a lot of implication for science where science is heading, how viable science remains, given how there it’s just like completely overrun, even in the time that I’ve done this show the degradation, what they attempt to get away with it, every branch of science is just more extreme than it used to be. And then there’s a bunch of other stuff we have to talk about. But of course, we have to start with the basics. Dr. Pam Popper, I mean, even that title, we could spend an hour on that title. Should I use Dr. Pam Popper, should I not us who controls that? Who tries to limit that in terms of its use, its regulations, its laws and all the rest of it. Heck, you’re 10 times the doctor that most of the doctors I’ve ever seen in my life. But there’s even some controversy about whether you should be called Dr. Pam Popper. So let’s start with just the very basics of who you are and how you came to do this work.

[00:06:47] Dr. Pam Popper: Yeah, so I came to this from an outside position. Alright, so I didn’t get interested in health at all, until I was in my mid-30s. And quite accidentally, I mean, I wasn’t very health conscious, I came from a business background, I was in direct sales, and I was a trainer, sales trainer. And sometimes when you come from the outside into something, it gives you a different perspective. And I think that’s what healthcare needs is a completely different perspective and approach. So I got interested in eating better. I mean, you know, this is people don’t realize, but back then I was fat. I was unhealthy. I was sedentary. And health was about number 29 on my list. So it all started like it does with a lot of people. I’m going to get myself in some kind of shape, which I did. And then that got me interested. But I made an interesting discovery early in my career, very early. And that was the problem was the way in which conclusions are reached in healthcare. That was like my ‘Aha’ moment. And so I thought, “Gosh, I’ve been misled on almost everything I thought I understood about health my whole life. How did that happen? And everybody else appears to be equally misled. How does that happen and how you solve it?” So that’s where the concept of Informed Medical Decision Making came from. I have an alternative education. And it was frankly, not very good. But there are people who have Harvard degrees, Yale degrees, Stanford degrees, Cornell University degrees, Mr. Fauci graduated first in his class. And they’re a totally incompetent. So it’s not about credentials. So I came up with this idea that really should not be so outside the box. And it’s remarkable to me that I’ve been using it in my business for 27 years, and nobody pays any attention to it and here it is. I hope you’re sitting down. This is good, because it’s groundbreaking. How about if instead of just talking about the science and evidence and scientific, how about if we have rules for filtering scientific information? What if we have pre-established rules like the way we play football? So you could say, “Well, how do you play football?” Well, a couple groups of people get together, they run up and down the field for an hour. And then at the end, we try to figure out who won. That’s the way we do science. So we don’t play football that way. The quarters are 15 minutes, there’s a set number of people on each team. A first down is always 10 yards. A field goal always goes through the posts. And we know what a touchdown instead at the end of playing thousands of football games every year, we have five plays, we fasten argue about maybe 10. And we all know who won the games. So what if you came up with those rules for looking at health, and then it doesn’t really matter? Who arrives at the conclusions using the rules? In other words, you could have an eighth grade education. And if you knew how to use the rules, your conclusions would be reliable without any medical education at all, which makes whatever you call me irrelevant. Okay, so what are our rules? My rules go through all 19, but I’ll just give you three or four. And who’s going to argue with us? Should we look at conflicts of interest? I don’t know any sensible person here would say, “Now that doesn’t make any difference.” Well, how about things that are statistically significant but clinically meaningless. So a statin drug for primary prevention reduces your risk of heart attack by seven tenths of a percent, statistically significant, meaningless to a person. Okay, how about this one? Correlation does not mean cause and effect. Here’s a correlation. People, women in countries where they’re getting more driver’s licenses have a higher risk of breast cancer. So if we’re going to use correlation, all women should surrender their driver’s license tomorrow, because clearly driving causes breast cancer. Now we know that’s crazy, right? But we use that type of thinking every day to arrive at a conclusion. So we don’t need to go through all of them. But basically, my argument has been, I don’t care what you call me. And I’ve been called some pretty unsavory things. Tell me the flaw in the thinking, tell me which rule you want to pull out. And I’ve never had anybody want to debate me on these things to write an article that refutes what I say. And the reason is, because they don’t want to put themselves in the position of publicly saying, “I really think things that are meaningless to patient outcomes should be considered as viable scientific discovery.” Now who is going to say that, you think Mr. Fauci would ever get on TV and say, “I disagree with Pam Popper, because conflicts of interest really shouldn’t be filtered into our decision making at all.” So you shut up your critics. I mean, I have them out there. They’re like little background noise. They don’t really make any difference to me, I don’t call myself a doctor anymore. Notice on COVID Operation, I didn’t put my credentials or anything. I stopped that a long time ago, to take that out of the equation. Let’s focus on the evidence and how we reached a conclusion about it. And you tell me where you want to take this apart? And everybody just goes strangely silent.

[00:11:57] Alex Tsakiris: I think that’s awesome. It’s discouraging, though. It’s discouraging on a number of fronts. And a number of ways. We just did a show where are we really dug into the latest, Yale, Stanford largest study, ever unmask effectiveness nail in the coffin. This is the quote from the guy at Yale, this should put an end to any scientific debate. Now, you can’t get much more unscientific than that. But the same kind of thing, it is a null result. It is a huge lie. It’s a big lie. And big lies are easier to hide than small lies. But the point of it was, here they are Washington Post New York Times a pre-peer reviewed paper. I mean, this is just like it peer review has all the problems associated with it. But I kind of hate when people even jump on peer review and go, “Oh, peer review is meaningless.” Well, it’s not maybe what it used to be. But we still need some, what you’re really talking about? I guess I’m jumping around a little bit. But I think the common sense rules that you’re talking about, were there, at some point, some reasonably, well, I

[00:13:20] Dr. Pam Popper: [unclear 13:20] never happened. And peer review has always been a problem. And the reason is, …

[00:13:25] Alex Tsakiris: But it has, at its core, it’s an attempt to get towards something that we want to get towards which is that we should have a means we should have some it is that playing field are referees to a certain extent.

[00:13:39] Dr. Pam Popper: No, they’re not. And the problem is that the peer review process, first of all, you’ve got anymore, most of what’s in the scientific literature is prepared by people with conflicts of interest. And what we found out during COVID, what I’ve known for 25~30 years, and everybody else who’s paying attention found out during COVID is, most of the people signing off on these articles have never even seen the data, they just sign off. You have another problem with peer review. And that is that the experts, I’ve argued for years that what you need is peer review from people who aren’t in that industry. So get a bunch of dentists to review virology, because dentist can understand virology. And if the findings are different than what the virologists in charge of research centers and the funding, are saying the dentist would be more likely to call him out on it that virologists that have an interest in retaining the status quo. So the conflicted nature of the peer review process makes it meaningless, which is why our rules for filtering have to be there. Because the peer review itself doesn’t mean anything at all. You’re just at 95% of what’s in medical journals that’s peer reviewed is absolutely an accurate I can prove it. If we just wanted to take one issue of one journal, we can go through and apply my rules and again, tell me which ones you want to take out. And I’ll show you that people at the best academic centers are all funded by the same people. They’re all working for the same people, and it is garbage, absolute, unmitigated garbage. And if you don’t know how to do that as a consumer, then you’re going to do what people tell you. And they are conflicted, and they are following the conflicted information, and you’re going to get hurt. And that’s how people get hurt every day. And what I’ve heard for 27 years, if I knew then what I know now, I never would have done this, whatever this is, I wouldn’t have eaten this God awful diet that made me get sick, I wouldn’t have taken this drug that made me have cancer, I wouldn’t have had this procedure that rendered me an invalid, I wouldn’t have had this vaccine that made me have seizures 24 hours a day. If I know then what I know now and my argument all along is if you’re going to be a consumer, you understand the need to look into things in every other aspect of your life. And it really doesn’t even have anything to do with respect for the doctors or whatever. I respect my landlord. But my last lease renewal was for a million dollars’ worth of rent, and I read the document before I signed it, because it’s a million dollars for crying out loud. It has nothing to do with, do I like the guy or do I trust real estate people? It has to do with sensible people look into these things before they do. And that’s what I’ve been advocating for a long time. The stakes are higher in medicine, my landlords not going to kill me but a wrong decision. I mean, I could end up bankrupt but my landlord is not going to kill me, a wrong decision in healthcare could end your life early.

[00:16:24] Alex Tsakiris: You know, I can’t really put up an argument against what you’re saying. I do try and find a path through this that I don’t know seems reasonably likely to happen. I kind of cut my teeth on this whole issue with Parapsychology because of the area of science that I cared about in terms of answering kind of the big picture, “Who are we? Why are we here kind of thing?” And what I found is that here was a group of people that were doing science more rigorously, more correctly than almost any other branch of science, because they were always under attack. And some of the journals that they published in, like the Journal of scientific exploration, top scientists, major universities, peer review, open peer review, where you can read who the reviewers are, what their comments are, and you can say, that’s legitimate criticism, or whether it’s hidden. So I guess what I found in them in that group, is a way that science really can function and move forward. And I understand where it fails in so many other ways. I just don’t know. This battle seems so big. And I guess that’s where we ought to talk next is about let’s skip right past the science thing, because I think we handled it in terms of how bad it is. Lawsuits versus legislation. I really learned something when I heard your kind of take on why legislation does it work, especially in this situation, and why lawsuits might be a better path forward.

[00:18:09] Dr. Pam Popper: Yeah, the only path forward, it’s the only branch of government we have that somewhat functions. And notice I use the qualifier somewhat. So let me just give you some background. Let’s talk about this, because I’m in it to win it, we’re gonna win it, we are winning it. So I’ll clarify all that. But when I started my business 27 years ago, it was I think, maybe four months before I got state agency calling on me. And that was my introduction to how corrupt all this stuff was really.

[00:18:39] Alex Tsakiris: Can you tell that story a little bit?

[00:18:41] Dr. Pam Popper: I was accused of practicing dietetics without a license. And so it goes to the licensure scheme, which is all about tariffs and title protection. And I won that case, it took five years, I spent a lot of money. And that’s what got me involved in advocacy. I’m not a neophyte at this. And I’ll skip over, like 10 years of it was longer than that, actually, maybe 10 years of advocacy, 12 years. And in 2008, I had gotten some things done, but also spent an enormous amount of money and effort, I really didn’t think that what we got out of it was what we should have gotten out of it based on that. And the economy crashed in 2008. And so I just decided, no legislatures are going to consider anything. Anyway, during this time, everybody’s worried about the housing crisis and all that. And then I got hired to work on a film that became a blockbuster. And I co-authored the companion book and my life just went in another direction, you know, which was good, gave me a chance to make back some of the money I’d spent on all of this. But I said to myself at the time, if I ever do this again, it will be different. I will not do it under the same circumstances. And so when this whole thing happened, and I work with people who I respect a great deal and who depend on me to make good decisions because their mortgage payments and their kids’ tuition and all that counts on our business doing well. So when we started talking about doing something this time, everybody was on board for doing it with the risks associated with it, including that I could get assassinated, which at one point in time was a very real risk. One point, it’s not so much now, because getting rid of me wouldn’t help, you got too many other people doing the same thing. But the one caveat was we’re with you. But we got to do it differently than we did the last time or we’re not with you because we’re that’s not a pathway to fix this. So, basically, we looked at we said, we’re going to take a practical view of this, we’re going to look at it tactically. And we did it. We have two three branches of government. Alright, the executive branch has just completely gone off the deep end, you have a couple of people like Ron DeSantis, who has some clue about his role in government. And the rest of them like this criminal in charge of my state, he is just nothing but a criminal have gone rogue, they’ve declared themselves emperors and empresses. The legislators are useless if during this entire time one state legislature has passed one law that meaningfully helps people. And part of the problem we have in messaging is this is that people don’t pay attention.

[00:21:16] Alex Tsakiris: Tell folks a little bit about Ohio, where you live. The governor who he is, what is his background? Is this guy, he’s not a…?

[00:21:25] Dr. Pam Popper: I know, he’s a little guy. And he’s not very smart. I dealt with him before he was governor when he was on the state legislature. He’s not the brightest lamp and the chandelier. And he certainly is not the brains behind this. I don’t think he’s better than the brains behind anything and his whole life. And he peaks over the podium. I make fun of him a little bit. He keeps getting smaller, because I think that’s what happens when the soul leaves the body. You just shrink.

[00:21:48] Alex Tsakiris: It is Republican, right?

[00:21:49] Dr. Pam Popper: Yeah, he’s a Republican governor. Well, that’s what he calls it.

[00:21:52] Alex Tsakiris: He likes kind of being around all the big guys and getting a little bit of cheese thrown in his …

[00:21:59] Dr. Pam Popper: Well, I don’t know about that. I think that there are two types of people in the executive branch who got involved in this. I think there are some people who were offered something spectacular. And I think there were other people who were bright, who were blackmailed. And I don’t see this little man getting anything spectacular. I think they’ve got something on him. That’s my personal opinion. And it’s just an opinion and an instinct that I have. And if you go back and watch all 200 videos, I created since this started, you will find out that my instincts are pretty darn good. Because every single thing I’ve said that was going to happen, has happened. And I wish I weren’t so good at predicting because it hasn’t been very good, what’s happened. So he’s typical at the executive branch, he just does whatever he wants, he doesn’t care what’s constitutional. In fact, the only thing that’s random is our lawsuit that kept him from locking the state down a second time and modified his behavior quite a bit. Because he was concerned, he knew what he was doing was wrong and so wrong, that in fact, there was a case that was one against a restaurant in a county about 35~45 minutes north of here, where they didn’t even show up, the prosecution didn’t show up. And you know why? Because they knew they couldn’t win and whoever is telling our law firm for what to do, said you just leave that alone, we can’t afford to show up in court and lose. So just let them have this right. So that’s the executive branch. And then you’ve got the legislative branch, which is useless. And a good example of useless is when the Florida Legislature passed a law saying you can’t have a backs passport for COVID vaccines. They left on the books, a law from 2002 that says that the Department of Health can force test, forced quarantine and force vaccinate anybody as long as there’s an emergency in the state. So tell me how the citizens of Florida are in terms of security? You’re one election away from ending up with a little criminal like ours in charge. Who decides to do whatever he wants to do? So you can’t use the legislative branch. So you’re left with the courts? And people say, well, some of the courts aren’t so good, and you’re right. But some of the courts are good. And understand the way that I think with my business background. Alright, so what we really need is discovery, and we’re getting it from whistleblowers, but we need big document done. So we need to depose the criminals like Fauci and our little emperor and those kinds of people. But you only need one judge to give you discovery the whole country, because we don’t need to depose Fauci 36 times one time for four days, we’ll be fine. And we don’t need the CDC documents to be delivered to 14 locations one and we’ll share it with everybody. So when you file …

[00:24:43] Alex Tsakiris: Explain that. I say, I save right because I listened to your interview, and THC and you really but it was news to me, Pam, I’m not. I think I thought I was pretty clued in. But then you also talked about like the OxyContin case which is thought was great analogy, how this stuff works so take people through how that works, what discovery is how it could work in this case, and the power of that of finding that one judge who’s willing to stand up?

[00:25:15] Dr. Pam Popper: So, very good point you bring up. So the connection to Oxy and Purdue Pharma. So when we filed our first lawsuit in Ohio, you have to be 100% successful to get discovery. You filed two lawsuits, you only have to be 50% successful. You file 20 lawsuits. You only have to be 5% successful. If you follow 101%. Blind squirrels find acorns, we will be lucky, we will be, if it just as pure luck numbers work for you. Okay. And so that’s the lawsuit strategy. And by the way, that’s what ultimately brought down the Sackler family. And what they had done for years was they had given their attorneys, their very highly paid attorneys, blank cheque to go out to every place in the country where they were in trouble, like some prosecutor over here about the opiate epidemic and somebody over there, and or some unhappy family, whatever it was, and they would seal the record, here’s 25 million, and then we seal the record. So you could never make a case against the Sacklers. Because everything’s buried, and at a certain point in time when things started turning against the Sacklers. And by the way, it’s like turning the Titanic around in the middle of the ocean, you’ve got a multi-billion-dollar family, with unlimited resources and attorneys that is out doing and getting the best of everybody out there until you get enough of everybody out there to turn the tables. And one judge in northeastern Ohio, Dan Pollster is the person who started turning the Sackler thing around, and the Sackler should be in prison. But they’re not going to go there, by the way, but I’ll tell you I read a lot about the Sackler family including a great book about him called Empire Pain. And the Sacklers are mostly into prestige. And when everybody started disowning them and taking their name off of the Metropolitan Museum of Art wing, that they paid for an element that’s actually more painful for them than prison. And not being invited to it. And one of them, they’re so toned up, they actually one of them sat in front of a congressional hearing. I don’t think people realize how hard this has been on our family, really. Well, I don’t think you realize how hard it’s been all a half million people, you killed it with your product. So that’s been our strategy. And we will win this. And sometimes, you win when you file. We’re not the only people who have said this, you change the behavior of the criminals, and you put them on notice. And they’re at Ohio, our little guy was very compromised by our litigation. And in fact, two days before we were due to file an abbreviated complaint, because our judge who we think might have been compromised, said that what we filed was too much for him to read. Let that sink in for a minute. So they in the accommodating people that we are our attorney said, “Well, no problem. I’m going to condense it into 20 pages for you. And two days.” And this is just tells you how much you can accomplish just by filing. So our guy cancel around for cancels the Ohio State Fair. It’s going to be virtual. He cancels every downtown Arts Festival, everything’s canceled for the summer. So does this sound like he wants to let us go free? Not to me. Two days before we’re doing court to deliver our abbreviated brief. He goes into his press conference peers over the lectern and goes go free. We’re free. Everybody go out and go free. Well, I think it’s because what was gonna happen when we fight? Yeah, you can’t complain about the size of the documents we file. We survived all the 12 B motions to get it thrown out. Now we’re actually going to go to a hearing. So we did not get discovery. But again, life in Ohio since we started going after this guy on August 31, last year has been significantly better. There’s been virtually no enforcement. I mean, he stands up there and says, we’re going to do this, we’re going to do that. We went out of our way to try to get people arrested last year, and couldn’t get it done. We sent crews of people, he had a curfew in place. We sent people driving around Ohio, crews of people and we instructed them we want you to go through the parking lots of police stations and honk your horn, wave your arms out the window and scream and the whole nine yards. We couldn’t even get pulled over. We tried. And the reason is because he knew it was an unlawful order. And you could never enforced it. And by the way, word got out and it got to the place where you could not tell the difference between when we were under a curfew and when we weren’t in terms of traffic on the road. So, anyway, that’s the litigation strategy. And it’s really the only hope we have for getting out of this in addition to massive non-compliance.

[00:29:56] Alex Tsakiris: So then, I mean, the question that brings where are we at on that, what’s really the path forward in terms of that, getting us towards that progress, because they have a lot of cards to play. And like you said, I mean, you’ve put a great spin on that story, but the other spin is they managed to kind of dodge you in court there and get you to that next goal blind into the end of the red zone where you could potentially score.

[00:30:26] Pam Popper: Right. Well, but this is where they’re making big mistakes.

I watch them all the time. I don’t sleep. So it gives me a lot of time to watch what’s going on and think about it. Right? So if you go back there, I’m a world war II, but up front, I have a personal interest in this for a lot of reasons. But if you take a look at what Hitler did and what everybody liked and just done in the past, they’re very skilled and they’re very disciplined about very gradually doing things to people.

So if you notice last year, They were going to stay home for two weeks and then we’re going to do this and we’re going to do that. It wasn’t until the middle of the summer that the masks are starting to be mandated and little by little, by little, they were very gradual in the way that they went about doing this.

Right. And then all of a sudden we get into a big problem. This year. These people promised somebody that they were going to get 75 or 80% of this country vaccinated. And I put out a video in the summertime and here’s how I arrived at my numbers. Less than 40% of the country was vaccinated. Forget about their numbers and what they report.

It’s all fake news. So where did I get my numbers? Well, the feds have been bragging about how many doses they bought. That’s a public number. None they’d been bragging about how many doses they sent overseas. That’s a public number. Then all the states started complaining about all the doses they were throwing out.

That’s a pub, those are public numbers. And so if you got down to how many people, how many doses were actually used less than 40%. One week afterwards, I get absolute confirmation on, right? Because the Kaiser family foundation did a survey of all the counties in the country and what they reported. They wanted to make Trump look bad, which I don’t want to get into that.

Cause that doesn’t really have much to do with what we’re doing, except that what they said was in counties that Trump carried 35% vaccination rate and counties that Biden carried at 28% vaccinated or 35% for Biden, 28% for Trump. Well, I think that they got confused at the federal level and they added those two numbers together instead of averaging them out.

Right. But it’s under 40%. So now panic ensues and they try the vaccine lotteries. They’ve tried all that stuff, doughnuts and nothing would make it work. So Biden gets up there and he says, every employer over a hundred has to, with over a hundred employees has to. There has never been a better recruiting day and the history of make Americans free again, then the day of that announcement, which is exactly the opposite of what they wanted.

And you saw the real digging into the heels started after that, because what happens when you make an alarming announcement like that, you go from you’re very measured, um, very gradual descent into hell. If you will, to all of a sudden this guy gets on TV and it turns the whole thing into chaos. And that immediately the governors start saying, we’re not doing.

And then because the 10th amendment is alive and well, and you can’t control much from the feds. And then companies say, we know many companies that are acting like they’re complying, but they’re not because they can’t, they’ll go out of business. And so I threw it all into chaos and, and I started getting emails from people who said, I voted for this guy and this is insane.

I mean, just sign me up, I’ll start a group. I had people I’ve asked people to start these Thursday groups and some people have gleefully done it. And some people just so hard. And I don’t know me, Bonnie. I had one person who used to whine and cry about it so hard. And I don’t know anybody. She had 80 people in her group in three weeks.

So, so now they’re doing. Stupid things that are alarming to people because they’re desperate. And, um, I don’t know where that’s going to take us, but it’s the beginning of the end. And I know if I had to give an analogy of where we are right now, it’s going to get worse. I’ve been saying this, it will get worse from here.

So don’t misunderstand that. I think it’s all around wine and roses. It’s not, but we are in where we were in the world, war two at 1944, when everybody knew Hitler was going to lose. And there’s some very good evidence from firsthand accounts of people who were in Auschwitz and survived. For example, that even some of the Nazis were talking to prisoners, they particularly liked who were privileged and worked in the court, their offices and that sort of thing.

Some of the SS officers were saying it’s over in fact, one guy who escaped and then got caught, um, friends of his survived. He was put to death and said that an SS officer had told him to wait. He said, if you’ll just wait a while, the Germans are going to lose him, then you know, everybody gets to go free and you won’t have to worry about escape.

So that’s where we are right now. We know what the end of the story is going to be. What we don’t know is how much, how in grief and got awful, the in-depths and everything else is going to happen before it starts turning, you know, before we actually get to the other side what’s happening though, which is the most interesting to me is I’m 65 years old.

Right? And as long as I’ve been an adult, people talk about education reform, healthcare reform, government reform, anybody seen any of that? Nope. Well, you start doing what they’re doing and the schools, and this is where they’ve really been stupid. You want to control people through dumbing them down through public education.

So you create a program where 25% of all kids have been withdrawn from school. You want to control people through healthcare. You create a program where a significant, you know, half a million people get out there closing emergency rooms and the home. And you end up with this network of people in private practice, you know?

So, so the whole narrative it’s just coming on, glued all around. And, um, it’s not going to be fun for the next several months, but we are winning. We, I said, I’m in it to win it. We’re going to win. We have begun to way, and we already have won in some situations. And so that’s my assessment of where we are.

Right.

[00:36:01] Alex Tsakiris: Yeah, I think there’s a, I I’m with you and I want to be with you. And I think there’s a real truth to the don’t fuck with moms kind of thing like that. That’s one thing that they learned. If you look at the false flag operations, you know, it’s like, you don’t want to, you don’t want to fuck with moms.

Cause moms will protect those kids and they will, their political alliances and all that will quickly fall apart. If they see that damage is being done to their kids and you’re right, I think they’ve overplayed their hand. But one of the things that weighs on us all, I think a little bit to curb that enthusiasm is the global nature of this.

And it’s, it’s, it’s both informative of what we’re up against and it’s also. Kind of depressing little bit, they rolled this thing out globally at a scale that I think we all thought was unimaginable. I mean, the level of coordination that they showed in that is what do you make of that? What do you think of

[00:37:08] Pam Popper: that?

Well, I think you’re right. It was ruled out. It was coordinated. And in my book, I talk about how they, we know, we know for sure they’ve been planning it since 2010. All right. And I don’t know if you’ve read my book or not, but all this stuff that’s breaking news right now. It’s all in my book that was published last September, including the French.

[00:37:29] Alex Tsakiris: I was just going to say, you know, the other thing I got from the book and I wasn’t able to read all of it. Uh, but I thought your parallels to the swine flu in terms of numbers, in terms of method, in terms of rollout that anyone reads it. You’re kidding me. Um, cause I wasn’t aware of that. All that really happened in 2011, the same way, the buying all the vaccines, throwing all the vaccines way, hyping up stuff. And then the final numbers don’t match. Any of that, tell people a little bit about that. I think it’s kind of instructive and then go ahead with the rest it

[00:38:03] Dr. Pam Popper: It happened in 1971, or 1976, by the way, there were five cases of flu. And they had doctors I mean, this would be comical, who wins the series, they actually had doctors sitting in a war room 24/7 and eight hour shifts at the CDC, waiting for reports to come in from the EIS. They’re their medical CIA. They have five cases, and they’re waiting for reports. They’ve been 24/7. They’re showing these doctors and President Ford gets on TV, and he says we’re going to have to allocate $500 million to vaccinate every man, woman and child on the country. I mean, I said, it’s like me saying an ant on the floor and saying the house is infested. We got to evacuate. Yeah, there’s an ant on the floor, right? People would go What the hell’s the matter with you? So they did it in 76. And they did it again in 2009. And this time, it was global. In 1976, it was just here. In 2009 it was global. And in Europe, there was a bigger fuss about it. But essentially what happened, what’s teed me off or clued me in, I should say, that tipped me off is the word I’m looking for. That something was wrong is when the CDC and the World Health Organization said, “Stop testing. Because we’re so overrun with sick people. We can’t take the time to test.” I said, “Something’s wrong with that.” They can’t the numbers aren’t adding up, and then share a lack, [unclear 39:22] CBS, they have a big budget, they did an embed this is when news was honest, 2009, 10. And they did an investigative report of this whole thing. And there was no epidemic. I mean, even people coming from Mexico, which was supposedly the origin of this didn’t have the flu. They were testing everybody that came in. So in Europe, they made a little bit bigger deal out of it. And the most chilling thing of all was that Wolfgang Wardog was part of the committee that looked into his pace committee, and they determined that $18 billion have been squandered worldwide. And in response to that Margaret Chan who was then later director General said that we can’t really lose sight of the fact that epidemics are an opportunity to reform society and for significant societal change. And that’s really what this is all about. And unfortunately, nobody was paying attention to it. But people like me back then. And so here we are right now. The other thing is that in the book, you probably saw that what you have is all the characters uniting back in bed again, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Nazis had collaborated before World War II to do eugenics experiments. Hitler had used the medical profession, there’s a great documentary called The Killing Nurses Of The Third Reich, he was using the medical profession to kill undesirable people in group homes long before the camps were ever established. He escalated he’s like all serial killers escalate over time. Fauci has, Hitler did it since the beginning of time, it’s always been the same thing. And so when this happened, I mean, I knew from all the research I’ve done before exactly what it was, didn’t know how deep and dark it was going to get. But I knew this was going to be a global thing. And if you go back and look at the how the pieces were put into place, even putting Tedros and the World Health Organization, it was a good friend of President Xi of China, and President Xi’s wife, who’s listed as an opera singer. In the World Health Organization’s Goodwill Ambassadors club, she’s actually a general on the people’s army, and she’s in charge of the program where they get the body parts from the wiggers. And we have film of her singing in Tiananmen Square, while they’re machine gunning down protesters, and just this cast of characters. They’re all just nefarious people that you don’t want in charge of anything that has to do with human survival, let alone human health. So, anyway, yes, it was a global initiative. And it’s been planned for a long time. But I’ll tell you something interesting about it. If you look at all the scenario planning that they did, and there was a lot of it during that 10 year 10~11-year period, none of it contemplates what happens if something goes wrong, which is either because they had not planned to do it as soon as they did, or because they’re so arrogant, they thought nothing would go wrong. And from the get go, they had a problem. Not all countries locked down. They couldn’t lock down the whole country here. Trump came out with the warp speed thing. And the plan was keep everybody locked down for two years like, Australia where people would do anything to go outside. Well, that didn’t happen. And then the scrappy group in Ohio started speaking out and starting lawsuits and disobeying because civil disobedience has been a lot of our program, too. So it just hasn’t gone so well for him for all that money and intellect that they claim to bring to the table to control us.

[00:42:45] Alex Tsakiris: Yeah, but to continue with the sports analogies, they get a lot of swings at the plate, you know what I mean? So it ain’t over. It ain’t over it. But you teach them …

[00:42:56] Dr. Pam Popper: But every swing at the plate gets more careless. That’s the thing that to look at, it gets more careless. And it’s less incremental and incremental is the only way you keep this going. So what we’re left with is the stupidest people in the country are the only ones left that are buying into this. So you have people like me who from the get go, when you understood something was wrong. You had people who are stupid beyond comprehension. These are the sheep who are wearing masks in their cars. And we’re not going to do anything for those people. This middle group of people are persuadable. And those are the ones that are going to make the difference and they are coming our way. They’re not picking up anybody. Nobody is going to their side at this point in time.

[00:43:42] Alex Tsakiris: I love it. I have a sense that it’s true, but I’m not totally sure. What do you think you kind of touched on this? What do you think of the great reset, and I want to approach that from a different way than just the kind of charging up the hill thing? I want to approach it from … There is some plan behind this that is bigger and seems to fit into an overall plan that is we’re confronting on a bunch of different levels, whether its economic and global currency, whether its political relationships, geopolitics, arms race, kind of thing. Political in terms of communist versus Western liberalism, all that stuff that we do feel a push towards from the beginning. I mean, they coined the great reset, like the day after, they rolled the thing out, they coined the new normal. I mean, that, it’s one of the things that’s always struck me, it’s like 30 days into this, they’re like new normal. I’m like, why would, what days in are we doing that? So what do you think about the great reset and not just the usual, push back against the Bilderberg. But what does that tell you about, what is really going on that on that level?

[00:45:08] Dr. Pam Popper: Yeah, so that’s where it’s really scary. Because if you read the criminal class Schwab’s book, he says he wants a billion people on the planet, he hopes that most of them are Asian, because they follow directions. And so this is where we get into what’s really going on here. And where I get the most pushback from the other side. They’re trying to kill us people. So when people the reason why this is important to focus on I’m so glad you asked me about it. Is that when people are talking about whether or not to get the vaccine, and they say, Well, I want to travel, I want to I want to strangle them through the phone connection, or the Zoom connection. If you want to travel, and you’re willing to risk your life because if you don’t go to Italy this year, the world’s gonna come to an end. Are you kidding me? It reminds me of again, by World War II analogies. Well, at least if we go into the ghetto, we’ll be able to keep the family together, we’ll have 20,000 people that refuse to go into the ghetto, and you’d have to shoot out in the middle of the street and loads pulling. Well, everybody wouldn’t know what’s going on, it would have started to unravel at that point in time. So this, if my child takes a year off of college, the world will come to an end, because everybody who’s dropped out of college for a year ends up dead or ruined. I mean, the ridiculous justifications for doing something that is so clearly harmful. And I’ve chosen to take a pretty as strange as this might sound based on my rhetoric right now. But I’ve chosen to take a very conservative approach to helping people understand this. So here is what’s going on right now. And then you tell me what you think is behind it. We’ve got a vaccine that has killed 15,000 people, the CDC is willing to admit, all right now we’ve got insiders that are giving us screenshots of how many people from their database, how many people really died, and the only thing anybody’s ever been able to do to refute it as a reporter who claimed on the other side that Medicare doesn’t maintain a database like they’re all sitting there with typewriters, sending out invoices for stop writing, and come along. Alright, but let’s just go with CDC is number about 15,000 people. And 1976 When that swine flu thing happened, 56 people had died when they awarded the plan. 56 All right. 674 end up dying total, because someone didn’t die till after it was looked upon as catastrophic. You could never let something like that happen in the United States again. Alright, so they kill 15,000 people, and the people in charge want to give it to a five-year-old. Now, what does that tell you about what the intentions are? They’re trying to kill us. And I don’t even think the CMS database really reflects how many people have died because you have all these stories coming in. And there’s two ways that they’re killing us, by the way, the vaccines and then boosters, we only kill so many people with the first round, and then boosters after that. And then they’re killing people in the hospitals by providing in appropriate treatment, and withholding the right treatment. And even hospitalizing people who don’t belong there. And this is all starting to come out. Now there’s a very good video of a guy in Chattanooga, Tennessee, who’s whose brother was literally kidnapped by the hospital, it wouldn’t let him leave. Can you imagine being an adult, I’m 65 years old, and the hospital says, “I’m not allowed to get up and walk out of the hospital,” perfectly capable of doing it. I got to be kidnapped back by my family. So this is about killing people. To your point, the great reset is really about killing people.

[00:48:50] Alex Tsakiris: I’m with you a little bit hesitant to just focus on the vaccine numbers. And it’s not like you’re doing that. Because to me, this is not news to anyone. The death rate from the pandemic is 10x. When you look at the peripheral damage, I mean, it just 10x the number of people that don’t get treated for diabetes. Zoom’s …

[00:49:15] Dr. Pam Popper: Starving to death.

[00:49:17] Alex Tsakiris: … mental health, all that stuff. So, the numbers there, but also just, I think we all understand and your analogy with World War II is hard for people to hear. But we can equally have the analogy with North Korea, or China, which really isn’t far behind. And we say, if you have that level of control over the population, and that kind of unbridled, psychopathic kind of thing, well, then vaccines are kind of at least to your worry, they could get rid of. There’s a lot of ways to implement the overall plan, but you keep pointing us towards is this thing, it’s about compliance. It’s not about science. And as long as we comply, then we’re further down the path of the great reset. And do you see any? Do you see any justification for the great reset will play devil’s advocate for a minute, can in any way you see that this kind of somebody needs to rule the world kind of ethos? Because I have to say, I can put myself in that mental space a little bit, because you have to you don’t I mean, there are countries out there that are doing really, really crazy stuff. And we need to oppose that. We just don’t need to oppose it from this crazy psychopathic. People in control things. So doesn’t that, I just like when that comes into play, because we do have a sense of that, we do have a sense of the original, some of the original ideas of this experiment, do make sense in terms of this experiment being America. And our freedom and our Bill of Rights. But our history doesn’t conform with that perfectly, to say the least.

[00:51:15] Dr. Pam Popper: Well, first of all, I think a lot of things. The first thing is, nobody’s history is perfect. And yet, look at us as the beacon of the world. There is no place in the world where people want to come more than here, no place, you’re not flocking to Germany, they’re not beating down the doors to illegally immigrate into Australia, not like here not like everybody wants to be here. Because it is up until recently a free place, it was the beacon of the world. And by the way, I talk to people all over the world. And we have a counterpart in Canada. Now there’s a make Canadians free again, it started by a friend of mine. And so people are watching what happens here is going to determine what happens in other places, because we still are the leaders of the world and the leader of the free world, in terms of our country, not in terms of anybody in Washington, DC, and we are going to set this right. And that will have a big ripple effect. But if you go back and read through history, when there were 5 billion people on the planet, people said, if we go to 6 billion, the planet’s gonna blow up. And then it’s 7 billion planted this scare tactic about the world’s coming to an end and look at how the narrative changes. We used to talk about global warming and New York was going to be flooded by the year 2002. And then it didn’t flood and then we’ll clap. Climate change is what we talk about now, because the ice caps are expanding not. So the predictions have all been wrong. All right, they’ve just all been wrong. And so here’s what I think. I think that the world has a lot of problems, I think the United States has a lot of problems. And the way that you solve that is through winning ideas that people are interested in. And if you take a look at what has happened here, the bottom line is that these criminals could not sell their ideas to people. So they took over by force, which tells you something, nobody likes our ideas. So we have to cheat in elections, we have to take over by force, we have to declare a fake pandemic, we have to lock everybody in their house, we have to bankrupt businesses and destroy children. Because that’s the only way we’re gonna get our way because nobody buys what we’re selling. It’s like Hitler, nobody bought what he was selling, except for dutiful Germans, everybody else was just destroyed in his path. So we’re going to go back to a war of ideas, we’re going to, we’re going to be Americans. So we’re going to scream and holler each other. And that’s healthy. And we’re going to have two political parties that function in some way, shape or form, the radical factions of both, the weak faction of Republicans that are worthless humans are going to be gone by the wayside. And the radical faction of the Democrats who don’t represent anybody anymore, they represent China and despotism, they’re going to be gone. And we’re going to restore America to what it was before. And it’s all of its imperfection. We’re gonna scream and holler at each other. We’re gonna fight and scrap and we’re gonna have wars of ideas. And that is how you solve problems. And we did it. It hasn’t been perfect, and it hasn’t been smooth. And it’s how a lot of bumps and all that kind of stuff. But bottom line, that’s how we functioned up until now. And the world isn’t going to come to an end. If we end up with 8 billion instead of seven and a half billion, it’s going to have its share of problems. But we’ve been pretty good at somehow solving all of that. And what we did in the process of ignoring our history, and the fact that we have solved problems as imperfectly as they’ve been solved as we converted to a theater of the absurd, where a spoiled child from Scandinavia comes and lectures a bunch of the adults at the United Nations and instead of finding it distasteful, you have a bunch of cartoon characters saying we need to learn from her. And [unclear 55:08] parent should have spanked her.

[00:55:11] Alex Tsakiris: Well, I want to get to two more points before we wrap this up, because I do appreciate what you’re saying. And I should add to that, as people point out. The global growth of the population is flattening. There’s no question about that. And so there’s definitely merit in what you’re saying. So I want to hear that. Two really important areas I’m hoping we can get to uncover in the little bit of time we have left. One is, Pam, how can your model be expanded, extended, replicated in these other areas that the battle is going on? And you already mentioned a couple of like in education, it just kind of naturally falls out of that. But I’m thinking in terms of Kancil culture shadow banning deep platforming, all of which you’ve experienced personally, but it’s been under the health umbrella. It also is an issue just more broadly, it from a cultural issue. It ties into the big tech issues ties into the whole issue of AI and myth of progress, and Google and all that kind of stuff. But my specific question is, what advice ideas opinions do you have about how your model can be extended into these other areas?

[00:56:26] Dr. Pam Popper: It’s already happening and not due to me. It’s happening because CNN’s audience is so small right now, I can afford to advertise. I mean, it’s really funny when you think about it. So they’re even self-destructing their, through their ridiculousness. In other words, a little bit of censorship, everybody tolerated, we knew it was going on. But then they went off the deep end, and now nobody’s watching. I mean, a million people in the United States watching a news show is meaningless. It’s a blip.

[00:56:56] Alex Tsakiris: How do we sue Google for their most recent open, open announcement that on YouTube, any videos that contradict the idea that vaccines are safe and effective, any contradiction to that is subject to be banning, somebody needs to sue their ass?

[00:57:16] Dr. Pam Popper: Somebody does, but it’s almost inconsequential from the standpoint that most of us are posting stuff, other places, and our audiences are bigger there. So again, if your idea is you’re going to control the world by controlling the media that only works if there’s no other media. In other words, if everybody had to if it …, in North Korea, at one point in time, everybody had to have a radio in their house, and the radio only had one station and you had to have it on, that would be bad. But right now, there are tons of other media outlets, and that’s where most people went, that the audience isn’t there anymore. And so the influence isn’t there. That’s what I’m talking about, about, they’re screwing themselves in the way that they’re going about it.

[00:58:01] Alex Tsakiris: I totally get that. I just do think we shouldn’t leave those beachheads kind of just alone.

[00:58:09] Dr. Pam Popper: Well, I don’t think we should either. But you have to, you can’t take care of everything at the same time. And this is something that goes to the way that I’m running my organization. And the way that Tom runs is running the legal team. You better focus on what’s important first. And what we’re …, the biggest problem we have for it, frankly, is on our side. And the two things that the people on our side, do that drive me crazy and interfere with getting something done. The first one’s pants on fire, that’s what I call it. This is where everybody’s running around screaming hard guys, sue this person, that person and just they’re violating my rights and spin and theater, we’re going to chase the school board out of the building. Well, you get to be an internet star for 24 hours. But you do know those people are still on the school board the next day. This is kind of crazy behavior. And you know what happens when people do that? George Soros and Bill Gates open up expensive champagne, they say, “We could count on these stupid humans to distract themselves with that nonsense.” And the other thing closely following that is hurry up and file, 5000 failed lawsuits in this country, mainly because everybody thought that what you should do is hurry up and file against everybody. We’re gonna sue Google and we’re gonna sue CNN, and we’re gonna sue the world. We’re gonna sue the government. We had just filed paper the walls with losses. They’re ill conceived, and that sort of thing. So my point is that you’re right, you’re spot on about Sunday, you got to go after them. But you got to pick your battles. And right now, we don’t get ourselves free. That’s the most important battle is to back these people down and to really mitigate the damage and disable their system. In other words, like I said, the thing that they don’t want is 200,000 independent healthcare establishments out there, so that people say, I don’t really care. that Mount Carmel closed its medical center, I’m not going there anyway. What you really want is several million kids being schooled at home and the parents say, “You know what, I don’t care what you do at the school board mask, no mask, you can stand on your head, I’m not even showing up anymore. That’s how irrelevant you are in my life.” That’s what you do right now, you’ve filed lawsuits that count, it’s not how many it’s how effective they are. And then later on, as the thing turns around, you’re going to see a lot of justice. And one of the things we’re going to do, we’ll go after the doctors and the nurses who were involved in some of the inappropriate treatment and hospitals. And then everybody ends up paying for what they did sooner or later. But you have to pick your actions carefully when you don’t have unlimited resources. And when the circumstances are as dire as they are.

[01:00:46] Alex Tsakiris: Awesome answer, what I hear you saying is, you’ve thought it through and you continue to return to that you’re the tip of the spear here, and you’ve already made a little bit of progress. Keep pushing on that rather than diffuse the energy off a million different places. Make sense. I gotta say it makes sense. Okay, so final question, area topic I’m really most interested in. I’m not a religious person. But I’m certainly not an atheist. And I just railed against how atheism has become one of the tactics that’s used here. You’re a biologic robot in meaningless universe. So get on with it, whatever we tell you to do, there is no greater self within you, which we all know, instinctively, is completely ridiculous. But the stuff we’re talking about, can get very spiritual very quickly. What are your thoughts? Do you have any thoughts on the deeper implications of this? I just wrote a book a couple years ago, Why Evil Matters. It’s not about documenting evil in this place. It’s saying, if we don’t have a discussion about evil, that is beyond the kind of atheistic academia institutionalized but why would we ever talk about that there could never possibly be anything? Did you forget, you’re a biologic robot in a meaningless universe? So it’s either that discussion, or it’s, let me pull out my book. And through this book, I will let you in with a lot of good stuff that you want to hear. But at the end of the day, I’m going to kind of control you a little bit with my book. So what I was looking for in that book is Why Evil Matters is like, if you have a forced choice on evil is that it doesn’t exist. Or it only exists the way that my book says it is. You don’t have any chance of looking at like this situation, we’re on and saying, there is something here that is evil beyond …, we’re not even sure what it is. But it’s kind of beyond what we can really wrap our hands around in terms of somebody trying to get rich, or somebody just being on a power trip. Have you given that any thought?

[01:03:01] Dr. Pam Popper: Yeah, I think that what we’re dealing with is people who have no respect or regard for human life, for any life. And I think I don’t come at it. I’m not a devoutly religious person. Although I think there’s a God, there’s something. I think it’s God. And I think that this is a battle between good and evil. It’s not the first time it’s happened. And I am a fan of Victor Frankel’s book Man’s Search for Meaning. And so what are you believing God or not, I think that all people who have character respect other humans, and we respect human life, we respect all life to a certain extent. The animals and the birds and the trees, and we have some respect for everything, and all beings, and regardless of their defects and quirks and furloughs, and all that sort of thing. And so the thing with evil people is that they respect nobody and nothing except for their quest for power. And they come out this from a place I think I have some understanding of the criminals’ mentality. They know what’s best for everybody, because they’re so smart, and they’re so rich, and they grossly underestimated the human spirit. And what I find incredibly interesting is that with all of their might and power and money, some little girl from Columbus, Ohio is interrupted their plan. Think about it. That’s very distressing to them. And I’m not the only person who’s interrupted their plan. They’re about a whole lot of nobodies from various places like Tom *Wren* is the lawyer in Fremont, Ohio. I’m sure it aggravates the heck out of them that Tom *Wren* has interfered with their plan. He’s supposed to be a nobody. So and this happens every time this is not the first good versus evil, it’s just the biggest version of it. And I don’t think you have to come at it from a religious perspective, the Bible, the Torah, or some type of like, you join my religion, and then this is the pathway forward out of this. I think it’s simply what’s right and not right. And most civilized people think killing people’s bad idea. Only criminals think that’s a good idea. So there’s much. I think this has brought a lot of people together from a lot of different backgrounds who would who have made strange bedfellows, and I look at my own Thursday group. It’s about equal Democrats and Republicans. And they’re all coming together saying, killing people’s not right, we share that. Putting people out of business is not right. Controlling people through health is not right, making people get this job is not right. So, they’re actually bringing together people who before had a lot to disagree about. But now they have this common ground that’s very important and fundamental to our survival. And so the criminals actually have developed a plan that works in our favor, not theirs in the long term. It’s just a lot of misery between now in the long term.

[01:06:14] Alex Tsakiris: Awesome. Our guest, again, has been Dr. Pam Popper. You’re going to want to check out wellness forum health, you can still Google her and find her. You can even still find some videos on YouTube, although she’s very careful. But I love that she’s still there, because we can’t let them own that. And then that’ll direct you over to the real videos over on Bit Chute and all the other places that you can find. Pam, it’s been absolutely terrific having you on. You are so inspirational to so many people. I just appreciate what you’re doing.

[01:06:50] Dr. Pam Popper: Thank you for having me.

[01:06:52] Alex Tsakiris: Thanks again to Dr. Pam Popper, for joining me today on Skeptiko. One question I’d have to tee up from this interview is the in it to win it question. Can we really be in it to win it? What are we up against here? I guess that question kind of presupposes that you’ve bought into the pandemic narrative. Then again, if you haven’t bought into the pandemic narrative, I’m not quite sure what you’re doing here. Although if you are here and you haven’t bought into it, that’s great, too. Awesome! Love people who stick around and have different points of view. That’s certainly what Skeptiko is all about. And that’s why I’m encouraging you to share these interviews and grow this community where we can have intelligent bloody knuckle debates about stuff that’s really important in science and spirituality. I got some more of those coming up, by the way. So stay with me for all of that. Until next time. Take care and bye for now. [box]