Like many, I find the American political system extremely disenchanting, as while people will frequently complain about the problems facing us, it’s rare they do anything to fix them—rather the issues simply continue to get worse. As such, it’s fairly rare to find elected Federal officials who stay true to their values throughout their tenure and get things done. Over the years, I’ve become a huge fan of Ron Johnson as his political life has been defined by him wanting to solve problems rather than advance his political career (which he could afford to do as he was a successful CEO) and over the last few years, he’s been willing to go after a variety of issues no one else will touch such as COVID-19 vaccine injuries.
Note: Ron Johnson had planned to retire in 2022 but ran for re-election specifically to help those affected by the vaccine. As he is the only Senator in US history to have actively worked for vaccine safety (something our movement has waited decades for), I’ve prioritized supporting his work throughout the lifespan of this publication. As a result, I’ve had many readers and colleagues reach out to me to share that Ron Johnson deeply cares about doing the right thing, and I can only imagine how frustrating it must have been for someone who genuinely cares to spend years opposing the obstinate Federal COVID bureaucracy. One of the things that’s been the most strike about Ron Johnson’s attempts to stop the COVID vaccines has been just how little power a Senator has to compel the CDC or FDA to do the right thing (e.g., many of the key COVID government documents his office uncovered were never provided by the H.H.S.). Nonetheless, he has been extremely methodical and patient in seeking a way to change the current paradigm. He has now ascended to a very unique position: chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. This committee has long been one of the most powerful and broadest investigative bodies in Congress. In parallel, since RFK Jr. is now directing the H.H.S. and has Trump’s full support to enact the MAHA agenda, rather than stonewall Johnson, the documents he is requesting are now being released. Because of this, he was recently able to hold a pivotal Senate hearing that conclusively showed the Biden Administration, FDA, and CDC were aware the COVID vaccines were causing heart attacks but continually hid that from the public to keep pushing the COVID vaccines on the public.  For those unable to watch the hearings, The Vigilant Fox made an abridged summary of this hearing which received 4 million views, again highlighting how much reach our message has and that the medical industrial complex can no longer cover up its catastrophes with the same playbook it’s used for decades (as it no longer has a monopoly over the mass media). Likewise, a January 2023 survey found 49% surveyed believe it is likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths and 28% personally knew someone whose death may have been caused by side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines and 57% wanted the Congress to investigate the CDC’s conduct with “assessing” COVID vaccine safety. Similarly, a May 2025 poll showed 51% now believe the COVID vaccines caused heart damage (while 21% were unsure and only 28% believed they didn’t). Note: the gaslighting with heart attacks and strokes from the “clot shot” was eye-opening for me as within a week of the vaccines hitting the market, I’d received numerous reports of sudden deaths and heart attacks following vaccination from friends around the country, and within a month, I had a fairly good understanding of how they were killing people. In contrast, every single medical authority, which had access to massive databases the public can never see somehow could never “detect a safety signal” even as the unusual deaths (e.g., in children and athletes who never die suddenly) kept on accumulating and public demand kept increasing for them to do something. Recently, Robert Malone gave an excellent synopsis of the current situation:
Echoing Malone’s points, while it seems as though he’s done very little, numerous conventional colleagues I have are now incredibly distressed and viewing the simple changes RFK has already made (e.g., requiring basic testing for new vaccines or removing the COVID vaccines from the childhood vaccine schedule) to be apocalyptic for our nation’s vaccine program.
As such, we are now seeing public relations campaigns like this being rolled out:
Note: the telltale sign this is a PR campaign Dr. Mike was hired to promote is because this celebrity doctor has never said the sculpted phrases “increasing chaos” or “in shambles” before. Likewise, many other doctors having panic attacks over RFK’s changes are now publishing similar editorials calling for his resignation.1,2 Despite his support, what we want RFK to do is still not viable, as so many other forces are working against him. For example, while many in MAHA wish to ban a myriad of vaccines and there has been a massive and unprecedented drop in public trust in vaccination, as this January survey shows, the majority still supports the CDC schedule (which at the time included the COVID vaccines):
Deficit SpendingRecently, Ron Johnson was interviewed on Tucker Carlson to discuss both the Federal Deficit and the other key issues Johnson has been working on (e.g., investigating what actually happened on 9/11).
As this was an excellent interview, I am including it here for you to watch:  The primary theme Ron Johnson focused on was deficit spending, specifically that: •Since the US government continually spends more than it takes in, more and more of our budget has gone to paying the interest on our debt. In fact, 13% of the entire budget is just interest payments (which now exceeds our military budget).
•Since
we keep on spending more than we take in, this is “paid” for by
printing more dollars. The immediate problem with this is that it
continually devalues the currency, so that while people’s wages stay
more or less the same, everything costs more and more, and many things
that used to be affordable are no longer (e.g., many younger doctors
I know have been unable to buy homes). This dovetails with a
longstanding problem in our society, more and more of the wealth is
being transferred to the upper class, which in turn is forcing the
population into a form of neo-feudalism
where they have no choice except to spend all day working for an
abusive employer (and amongst other things have no choice but to submit
to unconscionable COVID-19 vaccine mandates to feed their families). •When Ron Johnson joined the government in 2010 due to the recent massive and unprecedented increase in deficit spending, his primary focus was to stop federal deficit spending as he could see the longterm consequences it created for the younger generations who were stuck with a devalued dollar. Unfortunately, he instead witnessed the most incredible glut of government inflation in US history due to the trillions that were spent on COVID “relief” and as such, the inflation many have been struggling with kicked into overdrive.
Note: I suspect a key reason Ron Johnson spoke out against the COVID cartel from the start was because he could see the whole thing was a massive grift and that it made much more sense to spend tens of millions of dollars providing effecting COVID-19 treatments to the country than trillions shutting down the economy, keeping shut down businesses on life-support and perpetually testing or vaccinating America. In my (and many others) eyes, the Federal deficit is a result of the following: •There is no accountability for wasteful or unnecessary spending, much of which is due to the process being so complex and obtuse (and easy to stonewall any investigations on) that it is impossible to audit anything that happens. As such, a massive oversupply of unconditional funding always incentivizes finding ways to spend it rather than sensible ways to balance the budget and create a surplus. •For too many of those involved in crafting the budget, making carveouts for themselves in it, which inflate the deficit but provide little benefit to the country (especially as it adds up). Unfortunately, the existing legislative process necessitates this, as many people who want to balance the budget will only sign off on a bill if it includes their grifts, and are only penalized if they fail to deliver for their donors.
•It is much harder to stand up against deficit spending than it is to kick the can down the road (which results in unbalanced budgets with overly optimistic forecasts of deficit reductions appearing in the future). •A key reason for this is that the people looting the treasury normally have a strong lobby or idealistic justification for the spending that they use to crucify anyone who speaks out against it. For example, a major finding from DOGE was that a compelling humanitarian program was often not actually spending its funding on helping people. •Once too many things are going on or things are too far in the past, it’s often quite hard to see what is changing (e.g., in the not to distant past it was easy for a working class couple to buy a house and have a mother who stayed at home to raise it a family whereas now that is a distant dream for much of America). This is analogous to how year by year, there has been a massive spike in chronic illnesses, but except for doctors in practice who saw it occur throughout their career, it’s rarely recognized and instead these costly and crippling diseases are seen as the new normal (and similarly many individuals who’ve had their health gradually be eroded by the medical system over the decades often don’t recognize what happened to them). Medical Deficit SpendingIn my eyes, much of this mirrors the situation with modern medicine as: •Insurance subsidizes much of healthcare spending, but insurance company reimbursement is largely dependent on lobbying rather than the efficacy and cost of the medical intervention. •Insurance inflating the cost of healthcare self-perpetuates because the budget shortfalls it creates simply result in insurance prices rising or government subsidies to cover insurance shortfalls. •Many of the treatments used in medicine do not address the root cause of illnesses, and rather both require lifelong spending on the medication and additional money to be spent on the diseases created by those medical products—all of which eventually cumulates in a greatly diminished life full of chronic illnesses (e.g., dementia) and a series of costly but eventually fatal hospitalizations (something that is analogous to increasing deficit spending and an eventual crash). •Despite
this being generally recognized, very little is done to address it
(particularly since most doctors only have 15 minutes to see a patient
and have a lot of insurance required tasks they need to complete during
that period), so the can is always kicked down the road by renewing
their prescriptions (or adding more) and waiting for a follow-up visit. Much of this was illustrated by a 2007 study where they took a group of elderly patients receiving various degrees of care and then removed the least necessary ones (causing them to go from an average of 7.09 drugs to 4.29 drugs taken). Compared to controls, this caused the 1 year death rate to drop from 45% to 21% and the annual referral rate to acute care facilities (e.g., because they were hospitalized) to go from 30% to 11.8%, hence saving a profound amount of money. Typically when a drug creates a drop of a few percent in mortality, it becomes a block buster, but very few doctors are even aware of this study and rarely will remove a drug another doctor prescribed that harms rather than helps an elderly patient (which is particularly unfortunate as the elderly often lack the ability to advocate for themselves against overmedication). Note: medical spending in the last year of life (e.g., those repeat hospitalizations which are often caused by unnecessary pharmaceutical drugs) is the largest healthcare expense in the United States (e.g, it’s been estimated at 8-14% of total healthcare expenditures and 13-25% of Medicare spending). As such, I do not believe it will ever be possible to balance the Federal budget (of which 27% is spent on healthcare) unless the healthcare system starts subsidizing practices that make people healthy rather than perpetually dependent on medical services that a corporation lobbied for. During his interview, Ron Johnson touched on two key aspects of this. First, he mentioned that through the alternative opinions in this community, he learned that acid-suppressing medications had significant side effects and acid reflux was often caused by a hydrochloric acid deficiency, so he tried instead acidifying his stomach and after years, cured his GERD.  As Senator Johnson’s situation is quite common (approximately 10% of Americans experience chronic acid reflux), it went viral and was quickly viewed by over 10 million people. Likewise, my rationale for putting this message out was because of how many people have their health ruined by these medications (as they block the absorption of numerous critical nutrients, allow the allergens of undigested protein to enter the body, and frequently cause autoimmune disorders). In turn, while I am not the first person to advance it (e.g, Jonathan Wright worked for decades to make people aware of it), because of the unique circumstances we are in, rather than it being unheard, with the right platform, it’s now become possible to reach millions of people with it. For those interested in learning more (e.g., sometimes you have to do things besides take hydrochloric acid to treat GERD), the article discussing all of that can be read here:
Note: the costs of acid reflux not being properly addressed are profound, as beyond tens of millions of Americans requiring perpetual prescriptions, they cause severe and costly chronic illnesses (e.g., osteoporosis) for millions more. Likewise, Ron Johnson mentioned that an article on the danger of statins made him realize that his inexplicable, sudden hearing loss was a statin side effect. As such (presumably because the article made the case that statins also have many other side effects and are generally unnecessary), he stopped taking the medications. He had numerous other chronic issues (e.g., episodes of dizziness) that he’d gotten acclimated to, simply resolve as well.  Johnson’s statin experience highlights a few important points: •Third, because we are exposed to so many different vitality-depleting things, it’s often quite hard to recognize what each one does. Ron Johnson for example, is a reasonably intelligent and awake individual, but until he saw his health improve, he did not connect his “signs of aging” to medications. In
turn, over the years, I and many others have noticed that elderly
individuals who avoided pharmaceuticals tend to be much more alive and
vibrant, and in many cases that a dramatic and sometimes almost
unbelievable improvement in health occurs once they stop their
problematic medication (hence making it quite unfortunate the elderly
often lack the autonomy to refuse prescriptions). Note: for those wishing to learn more about the dangers of statins and alternative treatments for heart disease, that article can be read here. Rebuilding Trust in MedicineTo a large extent, our society revolves around people having trust in societal institutions. However, since the COVID pandemic, due to the immense abuses of power and the implementation of absurd and unconscionable policies, many have lost that trust. For example, a large JAMA study of 443,445 Americans found that in April 2020, 71.5% of them trusted doctors and hospitals, while in January 2024, only 40.1% did. This is a profound and completely unprecedented loss in the trust the medical industry has worked for decades to create (and relies upon), and has grown to the point legislators are regularly calling for things to be done to rebuild trust in science (e.g., at RFK’s hearings he was repeatedly told he needed to endorse vaccination). On the one hand, I think this is wonderful, as I have never trusted medical institutions (and rarely go to the doctor), so it is an immense relief to see, after decades of deception, that much of this is at last being exposed. However, despite that, I’m actually quite worried about what’s happening as: •The
existing medical system does a lot of necessary things right (e.g.,
most of hospital care) that would be incredibly difficult to replace
with anything else. •Most people don’t have a background that allows them to know when medical care is and is not necessary. •The loss of trust in medicine has created an underground market for talented and open-minded doctors that most people simply cannot afford (as this concierge custom care is only available when you directly pay doctors that they aren’t bound by all the current stipulations of the healthcare system, which regularly prevents “normal” doctors from directly helping you). Put differently, when I was younger, I despised many of the corrupt institutions I saw around me and ascribed to an anarchist perspective, but once I saw examples where it played out (e.g., a tyrannical government toppling) what followed was typically much worse and it took years if not decades to create a replacement to the old institution which was at least as functional as the old one. For this reason, I believe there are two key paths going forward. First, as much information as possible needs to be out there on how patients can be informed about the risks and benefits of the therapies they receive and in tandem they need to know how they can treat some of their health issues themselves rather than relying upon a doctor (e.g., this is why I’ve put so much time into the DMSO series). Second, many, like Johnson and RFK Jr., have advocated for returning to the gold standard of science to inform policy. This encapsulates both the sad reality that much of our current scientific “truth” rests upon thoroughly corrupt research which only exists to enrich profiteers (at the expense of everyone else) and the remarkable capacity of our scientific apparatus to advance the interests of humanity if it is allowed to prioritize seeking truth over politics and profit (e.g., most of what I’ve covered in this publication would never have happened if there was basic honesty in science and revolutionary therapies like DMSO would have become the standard of care decades ago). Who Can You Trust?In all of this, the central issue people continue to face is “Who can I trust?” Since answering that question is so complicated, people often default to one emotional strategy, such as “trusting the experts” (which is why so many people were continuously misled during COVID) or not trusting the government on anything (which was a key reason why many people chose not to vaccinate). Regrettably, neither of these is entirely correct, as on the one hand, the government sometimes gets critical things right, or after years of work, manages to distill a complex topic with no right answer into something that provides the best possible universal solution. Conversely, while some individuals in alternative medicine are brave and devoted, who do whatever they can to speak the truth, most of them are human, like the rest of us, and will default to pushing the messages that generate revenue. One of the most disheartening things in my life was realizing how many of the people I looked up to were grifters who weren’t always honest about how they promoted their messages, and just like the conventional system, sometimes took advantage of people to an immense degree. In this, I have a few perspectives which may be helpful: •In general, people tend to copy or mirror whatever their (conventional or alternative) group does (which is the foundational principle for much of propaganda). While I feel that pull as well, for some reason, I’ve always wanted to do the opposite of what a group or individual seeks, and much of my self-growth has come from being around dysfunctional people and trying to understand what drives them to act that way. Because of this, I often spend time with groups from both sides who have strong feelings on the issue, so I can clarify what I disagree with from each side and arrive at a balanced perspective. •With any issue, you can either understand it or have a belief in it. If you only have a belief in it (or a very narrow and filtered understanding of it), it is extremely easy to get misled. For that reason, I believe it is critical to always ask yourself whether your goal is to “seek the truth” (and be willing to admit you are wrong) or to “affirm your existing beliefs.” For this reason, a major focus of this Substack has been to provide you with the information I feel is necessary to understand the most critical topics we now face. •Anytime there is extreme black or white thinking on a topic, it is normally wrong. For example, recently I shared the position that: “We’ve found ivermectin is a helpful cancer treatment, but in most cases, it works best as a complementary therapy to other cancer protocols rather than as a primary one.” As some people have cured their cancers with the anti-parasitic medicines (e.g., ivermectin and FenBen), they felt a less than full-fledged endorsement of them was a covert attack on the drugs designed to discredit them for the benefit of the conventional cancer industry, that post received significant pushback. In
contrast, my perspective was that giving a positive but honest
appraisal of the drugs gives them the best chance to succeed (as if the
benefits are overstated, it gradually poisons the well on them being
used as the treatment failures accumulate—which sadly has blacklisted
many promising alternative cancer therapies—since unlike conventional
therapies, they are always held accountable for their failures).
However, because the issue was made into a polarized topic (you are
either 100% for or 100% against it), my nuanced perspective and lack of a
complete endorsement was taken as an attack on ivermectin (despite
having long promoted it here). •When I was younger, I got immensely frustrated by numerous men who were domineering and were guided by egos that could never admit they were wrong (which left me with a strong disdain for doing the same). In tandem, as I saw more and more of the world, I realized my own happiness and existential fulfillment could only be found in knowing the truth of our (infinitely complex) universe, and I quickly saw that getting pigeonholed into a falsehood by my ego was immensely counterproductive to my real goal. •While
you should always be cynical of individuals whose actions are clearly
financially motivated, that cannot be taken too far, as without funding,
most people will not devote themselves to something that needs steady
and sustained work. Rather, the question should be whether their
incentives align with good actions (e.g., the best alternative doctors I
know structure their practices so that their salary is a result of them
actually improving people's health). As with this newsletter, I’ve
bound myself to the expectation of creating truthful and useful content. Conclusion:Decades ago, one of the world’s top economists at a private Ivy League meeting stated that population growth would stop once having more people no longer translated to more wealth being produced for the upper class (as this would strongly incentivize population reduction). I am now quite worried that we are approaching the situation he predicted, as wealth inequality has grown so much that a growing populist revolt against the upper class is starting to sweep the world and threaten their monopoly on power. Unfortunately, unlike times in the past where the global workforce was needed to sustain their lavish lifestyles, more and more jobs are being shifted into AI (and soon robotics), which is obliviating the need for an increasingly large and expensive workforce. At this point, given the numerous balls in motion, I believe we are very close to a critical point where something is going to break (e.g., our ballooning national debt is starting to enter the upward spiral of hyperinflation). For this reason, now more than ever, I believe it is critical to have the clarity to see things for what they are and to have the ability to both take care of yourself and your own community. Medicine is just one aspect of that, but we can’t “opt out” of healthcare if we are sick, so viable alternatives which can keep us healthy and not reliant upon the system are essential, particularly since more and more people opting out of everything besides its critical essentials, is what will create the economic pressure for the current healthcare system to start delivering real services that promote and build health rather than generating profit treating symptoms. On my end, I am still immensely upset by many of the things I see occurring around us (hence why I put so much time into this newsletter), but at the same time, I am in just in awe of how much better things I previously thought could never be improved have become in such a short period and how many critically important but completely forgotten concepts have suddenly emerged into the public consciousness. Much of that is due to each of you and as we move forward, we must never lose sight of our goal or what we want things to look like when we finally get there. To learn how other readers have benefitted from this publication and the community it has created, their feedback can be viewed here. Additionally, an index of all the articles published in the Forgotten Side of Medicine can be viewed here. You're currently a free subscriber to The Forgotten Side of Medicine. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment