WEBVTT 00:00:01.000 --> 00:00:05.000 Welcome to Politics and Science. I'm your host, John Barkhausen. 00:00:05.000 --> 00:00:12.000 This week, we're having again Ray Peat, physiologist and science historian from Eugene, Oregon. 00:00:12.000 --> 00:00:20.000 We're going to be talking about the unfolding coronavirus crisis here in the United States and around the world. 00:00:20.000 --> 00:00:26.000 And this was recorded on March 31st, 2020. 00:00:26.000 --> 00:00:31.000 It's not intended as medical advice, just an independent analysis of the situation. 00:00:31.000 --> 00:00:35.000 Also, the following show presents the viewpoints of its producers and participants 00:00:35.000 --> 00:00:41.000 and does not necessarily represent the viewpoints of any other person or organization. 00:00:41.000 --> 00:00:43.000 Here we go. 00:00:43.000 --> 00:00:49.000 Once again, I'm really happy to have Dr. Raymond Peat on my show, Politics and Science. 00:00:49.000 --> 00:00:57.000 And Ray has a PhD from the University of Oregon, and he specialized in physiology. 00:00:57.000 --> 00:01:00.000 And you also worked in hormones, is that correct, Ray? 00:01:00.000 --> 00:01:02.000 Right. 00:01:02.000 --> 00:01:05.000 Interrelated reproductive hormones. 00:01:05.000 --> 00:01:15.000 And we've been having a conversation the past few weeks about the ongoing coronavirus, so-called pandemic, 00:01:15.000 --> 00:01:22.000 swept the globe and is scaring everybody, especially in the United States, 00:01:22.000 --> 00:01:27.000 where the news reporting is particularly sensational. 00:01:27.000 --> 00:01:33.000 Do you watch mainstream news, Ray? I don't usually, but I've been checking it out lately. 00:01:33.000 --> 00:01:41.000 It's just plain scary, you know, talking about bodies piling up in the backs of trucks in New York City. 00:01:41.000 --> 00:01:47.000 And it sounds horrendous. But today we're going to talk about the actual data about this disease. 00:01:47.000 --> 00:01:52.000 And we've been tracking it over the last couple of weeks. 00:01:52.000 --> 00:02:00.000 They've been predicting, you know, huge numbers of mortalities. And do you see that yet, Ray? 00:02:00.000 --> 00:02:10.000 No, no, I haven't seen any numbers that convince me that anything is unusual is happening. 00:02:10.000 --> 00:02:14.000 According to the virus mortality. 00:02:14.000 --> 00:02:18.000 Can I ask you, where do you go for data? 00:02:18.000 --> 00:02:24.000 Google, mostly, and somewhat on PubMed. 00:02:24.000 --> 00:02:34.000 When something on Google isn't available, I often find backup material on PubMed. 00:02:34.000 --> 00:02:45.000 And so where are we in the figures of maybe first give us what a normal flu year would bring again and where we are now. 00:02:45.000 --> 00:02:59.000 A little over a year ago, the CDC announced that the 2017 to 18 flu year had killed at least 80,000 people. 00:02:59.000 --> 00:03:17.000 But then several months later, they revised it down to a little over 60,000, which it's interesting because it shows how wildly approximate their estimates of the deaths are. 00:03:17.000 --> 00:03:25.000 But they say that the average has been a little over 40,000 for the last 10 years or so. 00:03:25.000 --> 00:03:35.000 I just saw an article on HuffPost from 2014 by I think Lawrence Solomon was his name, 00:03:35.000 --> 00:03:50.000 quoting CDC people in 2004 saying that they had had contact from the vaccine industry worrying about their weak sales, 00:03:50.000 --> 00:04:05.000 that they had decided to rouse the public by convincing them that something dangerous was happening, that they should get vaccinated. 00:04:05.000 --> 00:04:22.000 That follows long after the 1976 swine flu fiasco where they supposedly had a pandemic but only one person died in the US. 00:04:22.000 --> 00:04:36.000 But in this program they started in 2004, it was to get media excitement going on the number of flu deaths. 00:04:36.000 --> 00:04:57.000 So even though the verified actual immunological evidence from people dying of respiratory diseases and showing that there was an influenza virus or particular other viruses present, 00:04:57.000 --> 00:05:08.000 that showed very, very few documented cases of flu just because they weren't doing many tests. 00:05:08.000 --> 00:05:27.000 But despite that, the national statistics based on death certificates showed several hundred people recorded as dying of influenza. 00:05:27.000 --> 00:05:43.000 But with those on the order of maybe a couple dozen documented and several hundred with doctors' statements on a death certificate 00:05:43.000 --> 00:05:57.000 without expressing whether they had tested for the virus, with those very small numbers they didn't have a good case for mass vaccinations. 00:05:57.000 --> 00:06:11.000 So they started including pneumonia deaths with influenza, so they called it influenza-like diseases. 00:06:11.000 --> 00:06:19.000 And that's how they managed to get up in the tens of thousands of deaths every flu season. 00:06:19.000 --> 00:06:27.000 So they started including a broader category of illnesses and put it under the heading of flu. 00:06:27.000 --> 00:06:44.000 Yeah, that way they could get approximately 10% of everyone dying, well 6% on the average year was closer to everyone dying during the four months of the flu season. 00:06:44.000 --> 00:07:00.000 They could classify it as flu, but the old people, that's probably just about the normal proportion of very old people dying. 00:07:00.000 --> 00:07:11.000 They'll get respiratory problems, their breathing and circulation are failing, and so the lungs fail to work, and so they accumulate water. 00:07:11.000 --> 00:07:19.000 And so they can put down pneumonia as a cause of death or respiratory problems. 00:07:19.000 --> 00:07:26.000 And when the lungs are slowing down from old age and circulatory and other diseases, 00:07:26.000 --> 00:07:38.000 the flow of mucus, which normally runs up the tubes and to the area of the mouth and mucus gets swallowed, 00:07:38.000 --> 00:07:49.000 that flow of mucus slows down, and so the bacteria that are always falling into the bronchial tubes from the air, 00:07:49.000 --> 00:07:56.000 they stay in place longer just because the cilia aren't sweeping them out quickly. 00:07:56.000 --> 00:08:09.000 And so as you're dying from heart failure, liver and lung failure and so on, the mucus allows bacteria to accumulate, 00:08:09.000 --> 00:08:18.000 and so you'll very likely have an infection, superimposed bacterial infection on top of whatever is happening. 00:08:18.000 --> 00:08:28.000 And a viral infection also slows the cilia movement and lets the mucus and aerial bacteria accumulate. 00:08:28.000 --> 00:08:43.000 So a typical viral infection also ends up with a bacterial infection, which the bacteria can cause all kinds of damage 00:08:43.000 --> 00:08:55.000 and are pretty sure to kill a person off if they aren't getting antibacterial antibiotics. 00:08:55.000 --> 00:09:06.000 But that doesn't mean that the bacteria was the cause of the infection or even that the virus added to a bacteria, 00:09:06.000 --> 00:09:13.000 added to circulatory problems, then you can choose any one of those to blame it on. 00:09:13.000 --> 00:09:20.000 Sure, yeah, so basically their body was shutting down to begin with and that's why they got infected. 00:09:20.000 --> 00:09:21.000 Yeah. 00:09:21.000 --> 00:09:27.000 So with the new improved statistics where they went from several hundred people dying of, actually dying of the flu, 00:09:27.000 --> 00:09:35.000 to 40 to 60,000, if I have that right, per year, which is an extraordinary increase. 00:09:35.000 --> 00:09:41.000 Considering those numbers, how many now have actually died officially of coronavirus? 00:09:41.000 --> 00:09:45.000 Where we stand today on the 31st of March? 00:09:45.000 --> 00:09:53.000 I think it was probably yesterday that I looked at it and it was about 2,400 at that time. 00:09:53.000 --> 00:09:58.000 Within just a day it had gone, just about doubled. 00:09:58.000 --> 00:10:10.000 So it was going up fast, but since about 10% of the people dying of flu, you would expect to have the coronavirus, 00:10:10.000 --> 00:10:16.000 because when they were doing the samples of people with respiratory diseases, 00:10:16.000 --> 00:10:21.000 they would see about half the people had no identifiable cause. 00:10:21.000 --> 00:10:28.000 And then the rhinovirus would be maybe 30%, the flu virus maybe 15%, 00:10:28.000 --> 00:10:33.000 and the coronavirus maybe another 15%, something like that. 00:10:33.000 --> 00:10:39.000 So just on the basis of samples from previous years, 00:10:39.000 --> 00:10:49.000 you would expect maybe 10% of the dead people to have an identifiable coronavirus in them. 00:10:49.000 --> 00:10:57.000 And so if 45 people are expected to die, 00:10:57.000 --> 00:11:13.000 then 10% of those you could say, anywhere from 5 to 15%, but 10% would be 4,500 expected dead people containing the coronavirus. 00:11:13.000 --> 00:11:21.000 Not that it killed them, but it was identifiably present as they were sick with respiratory disease. 00:11:21.000 --> 00:11:24.000 I see. And they actually got tested. 00:11:24.000 --> 00:11:30.000 So if of all the people who die of the flu and they say 50% of those are of unknown flu causes, 00:11:30.000 --> 00:11:34.000 does that mean they haven't tested them or they just can't identify the strain? 00:11:34.000 --> 00:11:40.000 Couldn't identify it. It could have been bacteria or just simple heart disease. 00:11:40.000 --> 00:11:44.000 So what you're saying, and I think what you said in the previous shows, 00:11:44.000 --> 00:11:49.000 was that people are dying, they're testing them for coronavirus, 00:11:49.000 --> 00:11:54.000 which they come up positive, but it's not necessarily what killed them. 00:11:54.000 --> 00:12:05.000 True. If you have a limited number of tests and you use them mostly in hospitals at first, 00:12:05.000 --> 00:12:17.000 people who come in, I don't know why they bother testing sick people coming in as if they had something special with which to treat the coronavirus. 00:12:17.000 --> 00:12:27.000 But most of the tests people have said are really for any coronavirus, not this particular strain. 00:12:27.000 --> 00:12:32.000 But since they don't really have anything effective for coronavirus, 00:12:32.000 --> 00:12:41.000 why they should be testing sick people coming into the hospital isn't very clear. 00:12:41.000 --> 00:12:53.000 But when you test only sick people, then you're going to have a very high percentage of the tests showing positive. 00:12:53.000 --> 00:12:59.000 Just because of that known figure from previous years, 00:12:59.000 --> 00:13:04.000 that 10% of the respiratory infections averaged coronavirus. 00:13:04.000 --> 00:13:12.000 And therefore, of the people who die, there is also going to be a very high percentage, 00:13:12.000 --> 00:13:15.000 because you're testing primarily the sick people. 00:13:15.000 --> 00:13:22.000 Then as you go out into a broader part of the population and start testing healthy people, 00:13:22.000 --> 00:13:26.000 the mortality rate per infection shrinks. 00:13:26.000 --> 00:13:35.000 That happened in China from something like three and a half or 4% shrank down to around 1%. 00:13:35.000 --> 00:13:45.000 And South Korea had a very big testing program and so they had only a 6/10 percent mortality. 00:13:45.000 --> 00:13:52.000 And I don't know if that's the situation in New York, Spain and Italy, 00:13:52.000 --> 00:13:56.000 where they're having a high percentage of mortality. 00:13:56.000 --> 00:14:03.000 But you can't know at all what the numbers mean unless you know who they're picking out to test. 00:14:03.000 --> 00:14:07.000 Yeah, that makes sense. 00:14:07.000 --> 00:14:17.000 But I think the reason they're testing the people who come in is because they're worried about the disease being such a fatal one. 00:14:17.000 --> 00:14:22.000 And they're trying to determine whether these people need to be isolated or not. 00:14:22.000 --> 00:14:30.000 Except they didn't have any meaningful figures on which to assume it would be fatal. 00:14:30.000 --> 00:14:31.000 Right. 00:14:31.000 --> 00:14:36.000 Since they're talking about these preliminary tests on sick people. 00:14:36.000 --> 00:14:37.000 I see. 00:14:37.000 --> 00:14:45.000 But it seems we're operating on the assumption that it is fatal right out of the box because of what the... 00:14:45.000 --> 00:14:46.000 Go ahead. 00:14:46.000 --> 00:15:00.000 It looks very much as if they were inclined towards that presumption by the fact that the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation and Johns Hopkins University 00:15:00.000 --> 00:15:07.000 organized this pretend pandemic in October of last year. 00:15:07.000 --> 00:15:22.000 What to do, how to prepare the government and hospitals to respond if a deadly coronavirus were imported and threatened to kill tens of millions of people. 00:15:22.000 --> 00:15:34.000 So they had this in everyone's consciousness and invited people who were in influential positions politically and economically around the world 00:15:34.000 --> 00:15:41.000 and had them run through this program in October of last year. 00:15:41.000 --> 00:15:46.000 So everyone had this implanted fear. 00:15:46.000 --> 00:16:05.000 And so at the first meaningless numbers that I think inclined people to jump to the fear that this was that imaginary virus that they had proposed could be imported from South America. 00:16:05.000 --> 00:16:11.000 So basically they had a dry run for this back in October. 00:16:11.000 --> 00:16:24.000 And maybe you could explain to me what the Gates Foundation, what is its relationship to the World Health Organization, which I thought was a multi-country, 00:16:24.000 --> 00:16:31.000 basically all the countries in the world where they get together and decide mutually on how to approach health issues. 00:16:31.000 --> 00:16:43.000 The foundation is pouring a lot of money into reorganizing the world, for example, African agricultural programs. 00:16:43.000 --> 00:16:53.000 I read that I think it was compared to the United Kingdom donations to that United Nations fund. 00:16:53.000 --> 00:17:01.000 The Gates Foundation was giving 14 times as much money as the whole United Kingdom. 00:17:01.000 --> 00:17:19.000 And so they're pouring money into changing the economy, focusing on Africa, privatizing the economy, the economics, farming and such, and the health care system. 00:17:19.000 --> 00:17:27.000 So they're not just pouring money into the WHO. You're talking about actually pouring money into specific countries in Africa? 00:17:27.000 --> 00:17:28.000 Yeah. 00:17:28.000 --> 00:17:29.000 Okay. 00:17:29.000 --> 00:17:41.000 And so their vision of what should happen in the world, they were also – I've heard that at the last meeting of the World Economic Forum, 00:17:41.000 --> 00:17:50.000 there was also a discussion of this program, what to do in response to a pandemic. 00:17:50.000 --> 00:17:53.000 They discussed that at Davos. 00:17:53.000 --> 00:18:03.000 That's what I've heard as well as the same people at this New York dry run. 00:18:03.000 --> 00:18:14.000 I did read something about the WHO never used to take money from private persons or organizations before, but now they are. 00:18:14.000 --> 00:18:21.000 I guess that's just a few years ago they started accepting money, and I think they've increased their budget or their income anyway, 00:18:21.000 --> 00:18:26.000 or revenue because they're supposed to be non-profit, by a large percentage. 00:18:26.000 --> 00:18:28.000 But I don't know what that is. Do you know that? 00:18:28.000 --> 00:18:31.000 I read that, but I forgot the numbers. 00:18:31.000 --> 00:18:42.000 Yeah. Anyway, so they're now open to private funding, and does that mean that basically they're open to funding from the pharmaceuticals as well as NGOs? 00:18:42.000 --> 00:18:48.000 Yeah. I think the pharmaceuticals are probably the biggest source of money. 00:18:48.000 --> 00:18:51.000 And do you have any specific worries about that? 00:18:51.000 --> 00:19:05.000 Yeah. The drug companies would be happy if everyone took a flu vaccine, but the trouble is the flu vaccines contain multiple antigens besides influenza, 00:19:05.000 --> 00:19:13.000 or if they get a coronavirus antigen, they contain adjuvants and junk antigens, 00:19:13.000 --> 00:19:21.000 such as what they grew the virus in, the cells they were using in their culture process. 00:19:21.000 --> 00:19:35.000 So it's a very complex and highly inflammatory material that they use just to promote the immune reaction for whatever the vaccine is. 00:19:35.000 --> 00:19:42.000 And the trouble is that the viruses mutate so quickly. 00:19:42.000 --> 00:19:51.000 After one or two or three years, they are very likely to have disappeared and might never come back. 00:19:51.000 --> 00:19:58.000 But it takes a year and a half or two, typically, to make a vaccine. 00:19:58.000 --> 00:20:24.000 And in 1975 and 76, the CDC's man in charge of overseeing flu vaccines kept telling his bosses that it was futile to try to get a vaccine in time to catch these rapidly mutating viruses. 00:20:24.000 --> 00:20:31.000 And they ignored him and went on with the program. 00:20:31.000 --> 00:20:37.000 And finally, he went on television and got fired for it. 00:20:37.000 --> 00:20:52.000 But he exposed the basically fraudulent idea that you could have an effective, not only effective, but harmless flu virus. 00:20:52.000 --> 00:21:03.000 He was emphasizing the uselessness of it, but there's also the harmfulness of it. 00:21:03.000 --> 00:21:05.000 The potential damage. 00:21:05.000 --> 00:21:32.000 Only one person died of documented swine flu, supposedly. There was about 300 deaths reported to the government and thousands of paralysis cases were reported following the flu vaccine injection. 00:21:32.000 --> 00:21:46.000 Yeah, so the flu vaccine shot that everybody gets every year, I mean, I know a lot of people would just go get it as a matter of course, and they recommend it for older people now because you're more at risk if you're old for the flu. 00:21:46.000 --> 00:21:49.000 That's considered a vaccine, is it? 00:21:49.000 --> 00:22:13.000 Yeah, I looked at the annual, I think it was the flu deaths per year, and there were dips, of course, occasionally in 2004, 2012, and I think 2016, there were noticeable decreases from the previous year. 00:22:13.000 --> 00:22:21.000 I looked at the vaccine supply and I saw that there was a big shortage of vaccine in 2004. 00:22:21.000 --> 00:22:43.000 The biggest surge of vaccine production and distribution was preceding the 2017 to 2018 flu season, and that was the season that they first estimated 80,000 deaths from. 00:22:43.000 --> 00:22:58.000 So it was interesting to see the historic peak in sending vaccines around the country and the number of people dying, even though they revised it down a little bit. 00:22:58.000 --> 00:23:03.000 Still the correlation between more vaccine and more deaths. 00:23:03.000 --> 00:23:09.000 Now that's interesting. Is there any way to judge the efficacy of a flu shot? 00:23:09.000 --> 00:23:12.000 I mean, does anybody try to do that? 00:23:12.000 --> 00:23:34.000 Yeah, they're supposed to test it first on animals, which now they're trying to bypass the process, but they aim to get an antibody produced in first the animals and then the people. 00:23:34.000 --> 00:24:03.000 They test it and validate that they're producing specific antibodies, and the trouble is that the antibodies have some generality and overlap, but they are fairly specific for a particular strain, so they're not much good for the next strain that comes in around the time that the flu vaccine becomes available. 00:24:03.000 --> 00:24:22.000 The real part of the immune system, which is really prior to the vaccines and is, I think, a more important part of the immune system, is the so-called innate immune system. 00:24:22.000 --> 00:24:36.000 But it has been known for at least 20 or 30 years to be trainable or educable the same way the adaptive antibody system is. 00:24:36.000 --> 00:25:03.000 So the fundamental whole body processes that catch viruses in many ways and reduce the harm they do, this just isn't attended to because the vaccine companies can demonstrate that they're producing antibodies, 00:25:03.000 --> 00:25:18.000 but they can't really clearly show what's happening in the innate system because it involves changes in the whole body, 00:25:18.000 --> 00:25:40.000 starting with, for example, the surfactant protein in the air sacs of the lungs and the nature of the composition of the mucus and the surface of the cells, and that applies to the nose and the intestine as well. 00:25:40.000 --> 00:25:58.000 And the coronavirus, when they've looked for where in the body it ends up, it seems to be equally distributed between the small intestine and the lungs and bronchial. 00:25:58.000 --> 00:26:10.000 So it really gets pretty dispersed. And those are all surfaces where surfactant is supposed to be present to protect you. 00:26:10.000 --> 00:26:28.000 Yeah, many factors on the surface. The healthy mucus is a very powerful protector, especially if the mucus is being swept constantly out of your lungs. 00:26:28.000 --> 00:26:48.000 And then once in the cell, there are many layers of other innate protectors. And since the viruses, the coronavirus in particular, is known to activate all of the inflammatory processes, 00:26:48.000 --> 00:27:04.000 including tending to stop the flow of mucus out of your tubes and changing the circulatory pattern, releasing histamine, serotonin, androtensin. 00:27:04.000 --> 00:27:22.000 Everything that is harmful is activated by these infectious things. And that's fairly general for viruses, but coronavirus is very powerful at activating immunity. 00:27:22.000 --> 00:27:23.000 I see. 00:27:23.000 --> 00:27:26.000 Activating inflammation. 00:27:26.000 --> 00:27:36.000 I see. And this particular coronavirus is supposed to be more transmissible than others. Do you think that's true? 00:27:36.000 --> 00:27:42.000 I don't think there have been any good situations for accurately judging that. 00:27:42.000 --> 00:27:54.000 I mean, it sounds like a lot of these viruses, these flu viruses, they come and go every year, and a lot of people have them and never even know they had it. 00:27:54.000 --> 00:28:12.000 That's the same with this. When they've tested a broader section of people, not just the sick ones, they find that something like 85% didn't know they had anything or anything serious. 00:28:12.000 --> 00:28:20.000 Maybe we could talk about how, as a country, we can move forward, you know, approach this problem rationally. 00:28:20.000 --> 00:28:35.000 I think that's the important thing because they're deliberately getting people scared so that they will, next season, be ready to get vaccinated. 00:28:35.000 --> 00:28:51.000 But that panic that they're creating, our whole generation, going back at least 50 years, has been heavily indoctrinated to go to the doctor. 00:28:51.000 --> 00:29:08.000 Like in 1950, they were putting out instructions on how to identify cancer at an early stage and training people to recognize the signs of cancer. 00:29:08.000 --> 00:29:18.000 There are these various programs designed to get people to go to their doctors regularly for checkups. 00:29:18.000 --> 00:29:26.000 If you're having a regular checkup for heart disease, for example, that's supposed to be protective. 00:29:26.000 --> 00:29:42.000 So people are trained to think of the medical profession as protective, but there's really no objective evidence that that protects against anything. 00:29:42.000 --> 00:29:57.000 In fact, when you look at the studies that try to be objective, there are two publications I know of that looked at the hospital deaths alone. 00:29:57.000 --> 00:30:10.000 One group said at least 220,000 deaths are caused by accidents caused by the medical staff. 00:30:10.000 --> 00:30:17.000 Another group said 440,000 deaths per year are caused by medical mistakes. 00:30:17.000 --> 00:30:30.000 Still, there were surveys asking doctors whether they had seen deadly mistakes made in the hospital without reporting them. 00:30:30.000 --> 00:30:48.000 That's another reason that the numbers might be bigger than 220,000 or 440,000, because many doctors said they saw the accidents and didn't report them. 00:30:48.000 --> 00:31:01.000 Then there are the mistaken things that doctors do because they're taught to do them that have no valid scientific basis. 00:31:01.000 --> 00:31:21.000 My next newsletter is going to be on some of those points that probably will make the hospital mortality caused by medical mistakes of various kinds bigger than those numbers that have been published. 00:31:21.000 --> 00:31:32.000 But those numbers already put deaths caused by medical mistakes in third place behind heart disease and cancer deaths. 00:31:32.000 --> 00:31:44.000 That wasn't including hospital-acquired infections, which amount to around 100,000 deaths per year. 00:31:44.000 --> 00:31:54.000 When you look at just those numbers, going to the hospital should be a very last resort, 00:31:54.000 --> 00:32:09.000 like when you want some repair that you know there's an appropriate treatment for a broken bone or a cut blood vessel or something. 00:32:09.000 --> 00:32:26.000 Since there's nothing safe and effective against the virus, people are going in the hospitals with very little examination or putting them on ventilators. 00:32:26.000 --> 00:32:42.000 One of the common practices when people come in with respiratory infections, even before they go on a ventilator, they might get aerosolized antiviral, such as ribavirin, 00:32:42.000 --> 00:32:57.000 even though there's no published evidence showing that that reduces mortality. Since they know it works in vitro, it'll reduce the virus in cells in a culture dish. 00:32:57.000 --> 00:33:05.000 But there's no proven evidence that it protects the person against the virus in the living state. 00:33:05.000 --> 00:33:12.000 That's still a common practice in hospitals, that or several other viruses. 00:33:12.000 --> 00:33:15.000 And these viruses or hydroxyquinoline... 00:33:15.000 --> 00:33:18.000 Is this antivirals you mean? 00:33:18.000 --> 00:33:19.000 Yeah. 00:33:19.000 --> 00:33:33.000 So-called, yeah. They're classified. Hydroxyquinoline is classified as an anti-malarial and anti-inflammatory for rheumatoid arthritis and such. 00:33:33.000 --> 00:33:55.000 But these, the nucleoside analogs or nucleotide analogs or the hydroxyquinoline categories, these are all recognized as hazardous, mutagenic, possibly carcinogenic drugs. 00:33:55.000 --> 00:34:06.000 They damage the RNA or DNA of the virus, but they also damage the human DNA and RNA. 00:34:06.000 --> 00:34:25.000 So they're known to be very toxic. And if they are figuring that the person is beyond reproductive age, then they minimize the effects of mutating their DNA. 00:34:25.000 --> 00:34:35.000 But especially in people who might still reproduce, it's not good to give them mutagens. 00:34:35.000 --> 00:34:52.000 And the ventilation itself, if they have to stick a tube down your windpipe, that tends to activate inflammation just by the mechanical damage it does. 00:34:52.000 --> 00:35:00.000 And they are typically using 40 to 60% oxygen supplements. 00:35:00.000 --> 00:35:10.000 Sometimes it's just air, but if you speed the respiration with just ordinary air, 00:35:10.000 --> 00:35:24.000 and especially if you double or triple the amount of oxygen in the air, you're necessarily going to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in their lungs and bloodstream in general. 00:35:24.000 --> 00:35:34.000 And carbon dioxide is a major anti-inflammatory defense against the damage that the viruses are doing. 00:35:34.000 --> 00:35:46.000 So scientifically, there's a lot of evidence to show that what they're doing very quickly when someone gets to the hospital panicked over the coronavirus, 00:35:46.000 --> 00:35:53.000 what they're doing is very, very dangerous. And you would assume that it's increasing the speed of... 00:35:53.000 --> 00:35:58.000 Yeah, not what they're intending to do, but possibly what's happening. 00:35:58.000 --> 00:36:02.000 They're telling us not to go to the hospital unless you're extremely sick, so you're... 00:36:02.000 --> 00:36:04.000 That's the best advice there is. 00:36:04.000 --> 00:36:08.000 Yeah, that's very good advice, turns out. 00:36:08.000 --> 00:36:17.000 And I was just wondering if you do have some respiratory problem and you're having trouble getting enough oxygen or having trouble breathing, 00:36:17.000 --> 00:36:24.000 just going off what you just said, it seems like that would naturally increase your CO2 as a response to that. 00:36:24.000 --> 00:36:35.000 If they would more generally use carbogen, which is 5% carbon dioxide added to oxygen, 00:36:35.000 --> 00:36:44.000 that will give you more oxygen actually than just hyperventilating a person with an ordinary ventilator. 00:36:44.000 --> 00:36:54.000 The carbon dioxide is anti-inflammatory and has many pro-respiratory effects. 00:36:54.000 --> 00:37:07.000 It helps to deliver the oxygen into moving it from the blood into the energy-producing cells, 00:37:07.000 --> 00:37:17.000 and it opens up capillaries that have been constricted by such things as angiotensin produced by infections. 00:37:17.000 --> 00:37:26.000 And so if you wanted to instruct somebody how to do it, you'd say, you know, if you had to do the ventilator, you'd do... 00:37:26.000 --> 00:37:29.000 Or a breathing tent probably is less invasive than a ventilator. 00:37:29.000 --> 00:37:35.000 Would it be 35% oxygen and 5% CO2, or what would you suggest? 00:37:35.000 --> 00:37:41.000 With 30%, I think even 1% CO2 would be a big help. 00:37:41.000 --> 00:37:45.000 And then it would not be so dangerous, you think? 00:37:45.000 --> 00:37:46.000 Yeah. 00:37:46.000 --> 00:37:52.000 All right, that's good to know. And are you isolating at home, Ray, or are you going out? 00:37:52.000 --> 00:37:59.000 Oh, I pretty much always stay at home. Just go out to buy milk and gasoline. 00:37:59.000 --> 00:38:06.000 Yeah, well, it's kind of the same here. We haven't noticed too much difference, except I did notice going to the grocery store, 00:38:06.000 --> 00:38:11.000 which I did yesterday, people actually seem quite traumatized. 00:38:11.000 --> 00:38:20.000 A lot of people have masks on, and, you know, they look furtive, and nobody's stopping to chat, at least not for very long. 00:38:20.000 --> 00:38:27.000 Yeah, I think infected people, it's good if they wear masks when they go out in public, 00:38:27.000 --> 00:38:33.000 but I don't think masks are helping people who are not infected, 00:38:33.000 --> 00:38:43.000 because if it's floating in some microscopic particles, they'll get around the mask. 00:38:43.000 --> 00:38:49.000 I was wondering, do masks increase your CO2 levels? I feel like it's like breathing into a bag. 00:38:49.000 --> 00:38:51.000 Not very much. 00:38:51.000 --> 00:38:52.000 Oh, they don't? 00:38:52.000 --> 00:38:55.000 Yeah, the carbon dioxide doesn't stay in place. 00:38:55.000 --> 00:38:59.000 Oh, I see. So breathing into a bag is much more effective. 00:38:59.000 --> 00:39:00.000 Yeah. 00:39:00.000 --> 00:39:04.000 Yeah, because you're just recirculating it over and over again. 00:39:04.000 --> 00:39:08.000 That brings me to the subject of anti-inflammatories. 00:39:08.000 --> 00:39:14.000 On our radio station here, we carry a show that I think is carried on a lot of community radio stations. 00:39:14.000 --> 00:39:23.000 It's called Time of Useful Consciousness Radio with Moriah Gillardin, and in my opinion, it's usually an excellent show. 00:39:23.000 --> 00:39:32.000 This last week, she carried an English doctor named, I think his name was John Campbell. 00:39:32.000 --> 00:39:37.000 Most of his show was talking about how important isolation is, 00:39:37.000 --> 00:39:48.000 but he concluded the show by saying that there's a reason that we get a fever, and it's important, especially with coronavirus. 00:39:48.000 --> 00:39:56.000 He quoted some French medical ministers as confirmation of this, that with the fever of coronavirus, 00:39:56.000 --> 00:40:06.000 it can cause a lot of negative complications if you use anti-inflammatories of any kind, non-steroidal and steroidal. 00:40:06.000 --> 00:40:09.000 I was wondering what your opinion about that is. 00:40:09.000 --> 00:40:19.000 I saw that, but I also saw his video on vitamin D. The vitamin D talk is very good. 00:40:19.000 --> 00:40:28.000 What vitamin D is doing is profoundly anti-inflammatory, but he recommends vitamin D. 00:40:28.000 --> 00:40:46.000 Vitamin D and aspirin and vitamin B1 and progesterone, their benefit is in this situation largely by lowering the antitensin receptor, 00:40:46.000 --> 00:40:54.000 a very central basic thing in anti-inflammatory protection. 00:40:54.000 --> 00:41:09.000 So vitamin D is one of our central anti-inflammatory things and very protective against all kinds of viral infections and other infections as well. 00:41:09.000 --> 00:41:18.000 I would be curious to know if the coronavirus has a hard time surviving in humans in sunny places then, where there's more vitamin D. 00:41:18.000 --> 00:41:33.000 I think that would be, yeah, the trouble with that correlation is that, for example, in the Islamic countries, women in particular cover up. 00:41:33.000 --> 00:41:47.000 I've had friends in Mexico who, even though it's high altitude and very sunny, they had very low vitamin D levels because they don't want to get over suntanned. 00:41:47.000 --> 00:41:55.000 So women in particular go out in the sun with parasols or hats and long sleeves. 00:41:55.000 --> 00:42:05.000 So surprisingly, living in a very sunny climate, a lot of people, especially women, are deficient in vitamin D. 00:42:05.000 --> 00:42:22.000 Yeah, good point. And going back to John Campbell's talk about fever being important and not getting in the way of the fever's work to kill off the coronavirus, 00:42:22.000 --> 00:42:28.000 do you feel like aspirin would interfere with the fever or what's your feeling about fever in general? 00:42:28.000 --> 00:42:39.000 Aspirin can often increase your thyroid function and cell respiration so much that it doesn't affect your fever, 00:42:39.000 --> 00:42:54.000 but it can lower the need for a fever since antitensin overproduction is a basic harm factor of any infection that you have. 00:42:54.000 --> 00:43:02.000 You're stopping the mechanism of the harm and that is what is lowering the fever. 00:43:02.000 --> 00:43:15.000 It isn't just mechanically turning off heat production. It actually increases oxidative metabolism and, at least temporarily, will increase thyroid function. 00:43:15.000 --> 00:43:28.000 So when it reduces a fever, I think it's most often because it's remedying the thing that is causing the fever. 00:43:28.000 --> 00:43:38.000 So the fever basically hinges on the inflammation. If aspirin lowers the inflammation, then the fever is no longer necessary. 00:43:38.000 --> 00:43:59.000 And it happens to be an antiviral agent in itself. It's been tested against four or five major viruses, all of which I think ranks up with the toxic chemicals that they sell for the purpose of killing viruses, 00:43:59.000 --> 00:44:07.000 but it happens that just as a side effect, aspirin itself interferes with the reproduction of viruses. 00:44:07.000 --> 00:44:13.000 Yeah, well, why use something cheap like aspirin when you can use something actually that's exciting and dangerous? 00:44:13.000 --> 00:44:30.000 Yeah, the idea of something really strong to kill the pathogen and virus, aspirin, even though there's evidence that it is very effective at stopping viruses, 00:44:30.000 --> 00:44:50.000 people don't think of it as a deadly toxic agent. Same with cancer. The ideology is that you have to kill cancer cells, but in fact, cancer cells are weak and defective and don't live very long. 00:44:50.000 --> 00:45:03.000 The problem is they're being replaced so fast. If you just work on slowing whatever it is causing their replacement, then you don't have to worry about killing them because they just naturally die because they're defective. 00:45:03.000 --> 00:45:12.000 Yeah, and going back to the fever from the coronavirus, does the fever actually, is it capable of killing the virus? 00:45:12.000 --> 00:45:24.000 It activates various parts of your immune reaction. So I'm not sure whether there have been studies on this particular kind of virus, 00:45:24.000 --> 00:45:38.000 but the ability to produce antibodies, for example, is increased with fever and white blood cells can eat faster at a higher temperature. 00:45:38.000 --> 00:45:43.000 So in general, your resistance is increased with the fever. 00:45:43.000 --> 00:45:54.000 I've always associated that the fever is basically, you know, you're getting hot and miserable and having hallucinations, but it's killing off the bug inside of you. 00:45:54.000 --> 00:45:58.000 So in a way it is because it's enabling your immune system to rev up. 00:45:58.000 --> 00:46:22.000 Yeah, it's revving up your whole system. It might even make some germs more energetic too, but the thing is it gives your body a greater advantage more than it does for the speed of replication of the germs. 00:46:22.000 --> 00:46:28.000 I mean, how hot can you get before you can't survive anymore? Isn't it like 106? 00:46:28.000 --> 00:46:44.000 Yeah, 106 is when they treat people with cancer, sometimes they keep them at more than 106, up around 107 for a few hours. And people seem to tolerate that. 00:46:44.000 --> 00:46:47.000 You mean they give them something to raise their body temperature? 00:46:47.000 --> 00:46:58.000 No, put them in a hot tub or a box with heat lamps, just their head sticking out. 00:46:58.000 --> 00:47:17.000 And they put thermometers, now that they have thermometers that you can swallow, but they used to just give a rectal thermometer and oral thermometers and take care not to go over 107. 00:47:17.000 --> 00:47:30.000 They found that several major types of cancer would die after multiple treatments of maybe 5 to 10 hours at a time. 00:47:30.000 --> 00:47:34.000 Is there anything we didn't cover that you wanted to? 00:47:34.000 --> 00:47:58.000 A lot of places warning about anti-inflammatory drugs, they're extending it to aspirin and they're generally getting confused thinking that the ACE2 enzyme that is the target of the coronavirus, 00:47:58.000 --> 00:48:14.000 thinking that that shouldn't be increased because it would increase the chance of catching the coronavirus and they're even confusing it as a cause of hypertension and so on. 00:48:14.000 --> 00:48:26.000 It's complicated enough that it's hard to explain it even to doctors because they get fixed ideas. 00:48:26.000 --> 00:48:29.000 Yeah, it is hard to understand. 00:48:29.000 --> 00:48:36.000 So maybe that's what John Campbell was talking about and that's what the – he was quoting those French. 00:48:36.000 --> 00:48:51.000 Yeah, and there was an article in Lancet that said basically the same thing, stop taking anti-inflammatories because they'll increase your ACE2 enzyme and make a bigger target. 00:48:51.000 --> 00:49:17.000 But there had already been half a dozen very clear papers saying that the virus decreases your ACE2 enzyme, increasing the pro-inflammatory and so what you need to do is get your ACE2 back in production to destroy the inflammatory mediator. 00:49:17.000 --> 00:49:22.000 Okay, well, that's great to know. 00:49:22.000 --> 00:49:36.000 I was reading an opinion piece by Scott Atlas and he was working off of the statistics or the epidemiological analysis by Dr. John Ioannidis. 00:49:36.000 --> 00:49:38.000 Is that how you say his name? 00:49:38.000 --> 00:49:39.000 Oh, yeah. 00:49:39.000 --> 00:49:52.000 And he was saying it doesn't make much sense to lock everybody up forever in terms of physical distancing during this pandemic. 00:49:52.000 --> 00:50:07.000 He thought it would make much more sense to only try to isolate those who are most vulnerable and let the rest of the population build up immunity because 99% of everybody's symptoms will be just minor. 00:50:07.000 --> 00:50:13.000 They'll get sniffles or nothing at all. 00:50:13.000 --> 00:50:16.000 Yeah, that's very reasonable. 00:50:16.000 --> 00:50:24.000 Sweden has basically done nothing resembling the United States program. 00:50:24.000 --> 00:50:41.000 The government there so far has told old people and sick people to stay home and everyone to wash their hands and basically just behave sensibly and not shutting down businesses. 00:50:41.000 --> 00:50:45.000 Yeah, that does seem to make a lot of sense. 00:50:45.000 --> 00:50:52.000 But I think we're operating on the premise that this is a deadly disease that even 30-year-olds are dying. 00:50:52.000 --> 00:51:00.000 And I have heard reports of 30-year-old nurses or 50-year-old nurses who are in hospitals. 00:51:00.000 --> 00:51:08.000 And the explanation is that they're just, even though they're wearing some protective gear, they're just getting exposed over and over again. 00:51:08.000 --> 00:51:19.000 And finally, they're succumbing and a couple of them have died, even though they're not old and with no known existing conditions, pre-existing conditions. 00:51:19.000 --> 00:51:23.000 And what do you make of that? 00:51:23.000 --> 00:51:44.000 First, I would have to see what drugs they were being given and whether they were being respirated. But it's possible that the virus actually is more deadly than previous ones, but there's just no statistical evidence of that. 00:51:44.000 --> 00:51:57.000 Yeah. So we started this show talking about the statistics and we, let me find that. 00:51:57.000 --> 00:52:07.000 So an average year of deaths, the way the CDC is now counting deaths, has been 40,000 average year. 00:52:07.000 --> 00:52:17.000 And do you know, what is the four-month flu months? Is it December through April? 00:52:17.000 --> 00:52:19.000 That's five months. 00:52:19.000 --> 00:52:44.000 Well, it really starts halfway through November and usually ends in March, but it's variable every year, slightly different. December, January, February, and March are the most, historically, have the most respiratory infections. 00:52:44.000 --> 00:53:00.000 But with small, very small, relatively, sicknesses, even starting in November and October and going through April and tailing off very faintly in June. 00:53:00.000 --> 00:53:10.000 And do you know what the current total is for flu deaths in the United States for this season? 00:53:10.000 --> 00:53:28.000 What I saw yesterday was, oh, total so far, no, I haven't seen it. In the case of two years ago, it took them about a year or two to revise that 80,000 estimate down to 61,000. 00:53:28.000 --> 00:53:39.000 So I don't think they'll even come out with their general estimate, which will include all kinds of pneumonia. 00:53:39.000 --> 00:53:51.000 Yeah, I was just wondering if we could tell where we were on the, you know, compared to the average at this point. But there's no way to know that. 00:53:51.000 --> 00:54:10.000 No. Well, the number that they are blaming on on coronavirus is less than what you would expect if it's normally 10% of the flu deaths. 00:54:10.000 --> 00:54:34.000 So, for example, if it was in the 60 to 80,000 range as in 2017 and '18, and if the variation was 15% instead of the average 10% coronavirus, 00:54:34.000 --> 00:54:48.000 then you could say that just a statistical fluctuation based on the last five years could be 15,000 deaths this year from coronavirus. 00:54:48.000 --> 00:55:07.000 So I just went to the CDC page about flu and so for this year, they're estimating 24 to 62,000, which sounds like what you're saying is, you know, a light year range to a slightly more than normal year range. 00:55:07.000 --> 00:55:12.000 Yeah. So that's a little puzzling. 00:55:12.000 --> 00:55:27.000 And the figures that Wolfgang Wodarg gave showed a range from 5 to 14% of the respiratory diseases being a coronavirus. 00:55:27.000 --> 00:55:40.000 So if this year the coronavirus happened to be a larger percent, then that could be about one seventh of 50,000, for example. 00:55:40.000 --> 00:55:49.000 So 7,000 would still be not outside the recent history figures. 00:55:49.000 --> 00:56:02.000 All right. Well, I guess we'll see what happens. And I very much appreciate your analysis of the situation. 00:56:02.000 --> 00:56:09.000 You had a quote in one of your newsletters, the recent one, in fact, "Contexts for Vaccinations." 00:56:09.000 --> 00:56:21.000 And I think it was "Fear of Terrorism and Fear of Disease are Marketing Tools." And it does seem like at least the media is certainly hyping the fear factor. 00:56:21.000 --> 00:56:31.000 And another thing to take note of is that the biggest advertiser in the United States and maybe around the world are the pharmaceuticals. 00:56:31.000 --> 00:56:38.000 They advertise more through the media than any other type of business. 00:56:38.000 --> 00:56:49.000 Yeah. And the CDC is being their most cooperative spreader of their ideology, advertising ideology. 00:56:49.000 --> 00:56:54.000 Yeah. They do seem to work hand in hand. 00:56:54.000 --> 00:57:06.000 Just to sum up, Ray, if you wouldn't mind going over again all the things one can do to keep themselves healthy and keep an innate immune system working well, sleep would be one of those, isn't it? 00:57:06.000 --> 00:57:17.000 Yeah. And a good diet is necessary for sleep. Vitamin D and the associated calcium work together. 00:57:17.000 --> 00:57:24.000 Vitamin D is anti-inflammatory, but it works by lowering parathyroid hormone. 00:57:24.000 --> 00:57:30.000 And it can't do that if your phosphate intake is very high relative to calcium. 00:57:30.000 --> 00:57:56.000 So cutting down on your beans, nuts, and meat, and fish, and increasing cooked green leaves, cheese, and milk will improve the function of the anti-inflammatory, anti-infective vitamin D, lowering the parathyroid hormone and all of the associated pro-inflammatory things that it does. 00:57:56.000 --> 00:58:08.000 Well, that sounds good. Let's see if we can work on that. And even if it is a worse flu year than other years, we'll beat that back and make it to summer and get our country back online again. 00:58:08.000 --> 00:58:09.000 Yeah. 00:58:09.000 --> 00:58:16.000 Okay. Well, Dr. Raymond Peat, thanks so much for being on the show today. And I really appreciate getting your analysis. 00:58:16.000 --> 00:58:17.000 Okay. 00:58:17.000 --> 00:58:20.000 Okay. Take care of yourself. 00:58:20.000 --> 00:58:21.000 Thanks. 00:58:21.000 --> 00:58:22.000 Okay. Bye-bye. 00:58:22.000 --> 00:58:23.000 Bye-bye. 00:58:23.000 --> 00:58:30.000 Thank you for listening to an interview with Dr. Raymond Peat, a Ph.D. physiologist from Eugene, Oregon. 00:58:30.000 --> 00:58:40.000 If you want to know more about Raymond Peat, you can go to his website, RayPeat.com. That's R-A-Y-P-E-A-T dot com. 00:58:40.000 --> 00:58:53.000 The preceding program presented the views of its participants and producers and did not necessarily reflect an official opinion of any other person or organization, and it was not intended as medical advice. 00:58:53.000 --> 00:59:02.000 You've been listening to Politics and Science. I've been your host, John Barkhausen. And please tune in again next week for another edition of Politics and Science.