Vaccine refusal, Doctor Suneel Dhand

Hello, a warm welcome to this video and like me, for a few years now, you have probably been listening to Dr. Sunil Dan from the United States and he is with us today, so Sunil, welcome and thank you for coming to the channel, Thanks John. It's a pleasure to join you today. I have been particularly anxious about this conversation because he has been practicing medicine. In fact, he is a

doctor

in the United States. I think he would call himself an internal medicine

doctor

, uh, doctor. I think we call those doctors in the UK, I guess it's pretty much the same, but you're right, yeah, yeah, yeah, you've been working throughout the pandemic so I'd be fascinated.

Could you give us a rough timeline of your activities during the pandemic year, perhaps starting from early 2020? Yes, as you have alluded to, I am an internal medicine doctor. I did my internal medicine residency in the United States and went to college in the great city of Cardiff in the United Kingdom, so I jumped across the pond. I did my residency. I worked all over the east coast and then found myself really into things at the beginning of the pandemic, so I practice Internal Medicine in the hospital and I also have a great passion for lifestyle and preventative medicine and I work a lot in the stage of Wellness and lifestyle training, those were my two main activities when the pandemic hit and when March 2020 hit, I was very focused on the hospital work that I was called to do, in fact I worked in several different hospitals in different states, eh, sure. since the beginning of covid-19 now, at the beginning of the pandemic, why were people actually admitted to the hospital? getting people into hospital, so we were watching the news as if we were in the UK from the beginning, when the first cases emerged from China, then it started to spread westwards to other countries, Italy, Europe, and we heard stories that this was going on. the path of a respiratory infection perhaps with certain unique characteristics and usually the symptoms would start with feeling a little unwell, having some discomfort in the upper respiratory tract and then in a certain group of people and we knew the risk factors since the beginning. the infection could progress and really affect the lungs, the alveoli, which would become very inflamed and that would cause people to need oxygen, so that would be the main reason from the beginning that would put people in the hospital, it wouldn't be fevers.

There wouldn't be any associated gastrointestinal symptoms, it would be more the fact that they were in respiratory failure, they needed oxygen, and even a low dose of oxygen would put people in the hospital initially. Is this what we call acute respiratory distress syndrome? Sunil where the alveoli fill with inflammatory fluid, so that would be a more advanced stage and typically when that happens, we're seeing a patient being transferred to the Intensive Care Unit. I'm a General Internal Medicine doctor, so I was seeing patients in the Stage before that where they clearly had classic changes on the X-ray images, bilateral changes, what we call a ground-glass infiltrate type of inflammation pattern in the lungs and normally entered with a nasal oxygen cannula.

Initially there was a lot of push towards ventilation. These patients, if they deteriorated further, then we realized that this was not the right thing to do. I was actually initially one of the few people who made a video on this topic where this rush to vent people may not have been fully thought out. and we could end up doing more damage by being so aggressive, so we switched to a philosophy where we would keep people on oxygen, if they were struggling, they were dropping their saturations, we would switch them to oxygen with high airflow, but we would do everything we could. . to prevent them from going into respiratory failure with fluoride, but your point about acute respiratory distress syndrome, which has very classic imaging findings in a classic clinical presentation scenario, would be a very advanced stage before a patient would end up in the ICU , but what I was actually treating was At a level of what we would call pulmonary consolidation, there was a buildup of fluid in the lungs that was preventing gas exchange, preventing oxygen from entering the blood, and therefore patients became They were becoming hypoxic.

That is correct, yes, and we would treat them with our treatment. The protocols have evolved a lot since those early days, obviously, but yes, we would be dealing with that primarily, that's what was causing people to end up in the hospital and those inflammatory changes in the lungs and the fear of impending respiratory failure, so than the people who really were. Unfortunately, dying from Covid in those early days, they were dying from acute respiratory failure, they just couldn't get the oxygen in and the carbon dioxide out, which was the cause of death, essentially yes, people initially, all with very comorbidities. defined. and very skewed, almost 100, skewed towards the elderly population, yes, that is what would happen in those who are unlucky enough to suffer from severe respiratory distress.

It is important to emphasize that even from the beginning, with the original Wuhan strains, we were admitting elderly patients and many were doing so. Okay, and we were discharging them pretty quickly. I had patients in their 90s, even hundreds, who were discharged fairly quickly, but I remember seeing some very early statistics. This was from the British medical journal, if I remember correctly, about mortality rates and risks of hospitalization. Very early on they said that the overall mortality rate was 0.66 percent and that would vary enormously depending on age, so in a person over 80 that was clearly closer to eight percent and in a young child It was something like 0.001 something percent. so it was very low and we knew that from the beginning and one of my main problems with the way we dealt with the pandemic.

I have a lot of problems and things I think we did wrong. We don't emphasize this enough and really put more attention on protecting the vulnerable. Nursing homes were hit hard at first. Many of these patients died tragically in nursing homes. I know you had a similar situation in the UK, but it was certainly happening in my region. from the northeastern US and they weren't even getting to the hospital, we weren't doing enough to protect them and us as a society, if we look at all our energies since the beginning of 2020, I would say it's very possible that We spent more time discussing and debating what to do with people under 30 than with older people who really needed that protection from the beginning and, in fact, there was a lot of publicity in the UK and in Australia, which I can remember quite clearly.

He implied that this disease was affecting many middle-aged and younger people, but in reality that was a misrepresentation of what was happening and, while one could argue that it was good to warn that young people could suffer from this disease, in fact, Maybe that took a lot of emphasis away from protecting people who really had a good chance of dying from this disease, and that's what it has been. I agree with you that that resulted in what I think are a lot of unnecessary deaths. Yes. We should have emphasized this even more from the beginning and not put so much effort into preying on younger, healthier people.

What could happen is scare large sections of the population, divert attention from the people who really matter, of course some younger people did get in. that first wave, but again, the risk factors were so clear from the beginning, massively skewed towards the elderly, the comorbidities that we knew about diabetes, lung disease, heart disease, obesity, I can tell you, John, and this is obviously my area of ​​passion, lifestyle, medicine, metabolic health, I have treated hundreds. of Covid-19 patients in different hospitals in different states in the United States, almost all of the patients under the age of 50 that I have seen and who have been admitted have been obese.

Has it been emphasized enough in the media? We knew from the beginning but we didn't have the right people talking about it, people like me who worked in community hospitals and who were on the front lines all the time were able to see what was happening compared to those TV experts who barely put on They stepped foot in a hospital and didn't see what was actually happening, but they had the credentials behind their names, they had all the right connections to end up being talking heads on TV, and doctors like me were getting more and more frustrated since the beginning because these people were deciding how we should deal with this. this pandemic and not the people who were actually working on the front lines like me and in terms of management, I mean, were you free to use your medical discretion in terms of patient management or did you feel like you had to follow established protocols with the potential risk of litigation if established protocols and established treatment strategies were not followed.

I would say from the beginning we were all chasing our tail, we didn't know what to do, obviously we know the standard protocol for t to treat any viral syndrome that comes to the hospital, we have been doing it for years and I can tell you from the beginning in the hospitals that I was working in, if we take the standard treatment, we know that you need oxygen, supportive therapy for fever and initially from the beginning. the hospitals that I worked in hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin were used at the discretion of the Department of Infectious Diseases because we had nothing else to offer very quickly, as you know, in the United States that became politicized, so we stopped using them, that generated a lot of initially , it is very difficult to treat any viral infection, but I was disappointed how it became so politicized when very distinguished infectious disease doctors that I was working with at the time told me: let's try it, we have nothing else and then we will progress.

In my opinion, spring to early summer, without a doubt, the biggest change for us in Frontline covid-19 treatment was dexamethasone steroids, the old steroids, you know the rule, the old rule in medicine never let a patient die without giving him steroids and we had it. The result of the trial came out saying that the dose that we used six milligrams of dexamethasone is very useful, so we started with that and I would say that I noticed a big difference from that moment and this is taking into account with the original strain how the illness and speed of recovery.

Etc. we were using other severe REM medications. I'm not a particular fan. I know they don't use it as much in the UK, but it's standard protocol here. It is an antiviral. I don't think that made much of a difference and I'm not very impressed with the results of the study. Other modes of treatment. Monoclonal antibodies. Etc. We have tried many, but I would say that to this day intravenous dexamethasone has made the biggest difference for hospitalized patients who come in with oxygen needs. Did you decide when to give dexamethasone because presumably you don't want to give it in the early stages of acute viral infection?

That's a very good point because steroids are an immunosuppressant. Basically, we started treating anyone who came into the hospital and needed it. oxygen who had the classic findings of covid-19, we would immediately administer dexamethasone and it is a 10-day treatment that is recommended according to studies. Sometimes we stop it early, if patients are well, we switch to oral dosing, but we would start it immediately. as soon as they arrived at the hospital, we still do, the people who entered the hospital had presumably already been suffering from the viral infection for a few days before that, exactly yes, before they ended up in the emergency room and were admitted at the time In fact, it was not the virus itself that was causing the problem, but rather the body's inflammatory reaction to the virus that was causing the pathology that required admission.

Absolutely an important point to remember with any infection is often how your body is doing. When reacting to it and to the cascade of inflammation that is activated in the case of covid-19, it is your alveoli that become inflamed and filled with fluid that causes the problem. Your body is actually trying to fight off a foreign invader and that's what's causing the problems rather than the actual infection and the depth of the six milligrams a day IV methods itself is that it's still exactly the protocol you're using. , yes it is still a protocol and typically we would continue it for 10 days if possible, when patients are stabilized we switch to oral dosing instead, yes one thing I am interested in Sunil is the change indifferent waves, so basically we had the original Wuhan strain, then we had the Alpha strain, then the Delta strain, and then the Omicron strain.

Did you see much difference in the clinical presentation between the original Wuhan strain, the Alpha strain and the Delta strain, or if they presented quite similar forms in terms of clinical presentation in terms of patients who needed hospitalization, they would all come only when they needed oxygen, but there was certainly a gradual decrease in the severity of illness, whereas initially patients who were really affected by covid-19 would have had these bilateral ground-glass fluoride changes on x-rays and then would take longer to recover now, what we're seeing with patients coming in, this is obviously post Omicron now. much milder changes much milder disease oxygen requirement for a short period of time many patients who now come in have a positive test covered incidentally, which is a completely different issue if we were testing patients with no symptoms and they arrived at the hospital with something different and end up in a covidAs a result, there is space, but yes, each wave different, as expected, although this is not a natural virus, that is another story here, it is still progressing like a typical pandemic of the past and please note that It is not in the best interest of the virus to kill its host, they want evolutionary progress would mean that the virus itself wants to continue to replicate and if they kill the host they will not be able to do so, so it is best for the virus to simply progress and evolve to this low level. . -low potency pathogen dose and that's exactly what we've seen, so you're seeing a definite reduction in symptom severity now that we're in the Omicron time period.

Oh, definitely, yes, without a doubt, and I would say all the doctors in the world. We'll probably see that in no way does this compare to what we were seeing three years ago and everyone who gets infected with Omicron will develop natural immunity, mucosal compartment immunity, systemic immunity, so Omicron exposure is one of the and I guess We've all been pretty well in the world now have been exposed to Omicron. I imagine it is, do you think it stimulated natural immunity massively globally? I think a lot of people already had natural immunity before Omicron came along and Omicron was kind of a game changer and it was a game changer.

I really think it was a blessing in terms of giving more people natural immunity, like letting a quote-unquote pandemic fade away, obviously there are unfortunate people who are still very vulnerable people who a minor cold can knock over. It's important to always remember that, but in terms of the general population, yes, I think Omicron was a blessing and it also eliminated everything else that we were seeing in terms of pandemic madness in terms of thinking that humanity has the power to control a easily transmissible virus thinking that

vaccine

passports were a job, etc., all that came out.

Omicron really taught everyone a lesson about who's in charge. You can try to have

vaccine

passports. You can try to block it, but it will eventually catch you. because this is what viruses do and humans will mix and viruses will spread look at what happened in China more recently. I agree that there is a profound commentary on human humility or even the lack thereof in the face of the amazing natural immunity we have. has the potential to raise a specific question here's Neil um before the vaccines came out and this doesn't say anything about the vaccines at all, but before the vaccines came out in the early days of the Wuhan Alpha wave of course not we had no vaccine.

You see patients who developed complications of myocarditis and pericarditis. I didn't, personally, I didn't see complicated cardiac complications from Covid-19, um, not to say there weren't any, but I've treated hundreds of patients and I really didn't see any. I saw other complications. I saw people suffering from kidney failure. Renal insufficiency. They became dehydrated. Hopefully, it wasn't any of the medications we gave them that did that. And I also saw thromboembolism. Blood clots. That's something that people with covid-19 suffered from but not as much myocarditis and I have another thought about that, the whole debate about myocarditis, which I'm very surprised that more people haven't bought hasn't raised the huge logical problem with the debate. about vaccine-induced myocarditis and infection-induced myocarditis and I'm sure you know that, John, and that's this, we know the denominator of the vaccines, we know how many vaccines have been given and how many cases of me there have been, but let's think what we think.

The number of concealed cases is multiplied by three or four. How many people had an asymptomatic infection? How many people had a cold day and never bothered to get tested? How many people are there in countries where you can't even get covered testing? The big shots say it's the rate because you asked me about covert infection myocarditis. You could probably divide that by three or four and get an infinitely smaller number because it's completely impossible to know how many people had Covid-19 and I can't. I think more people haven't brought up this point that it's a useless debate even because you don't know the denominator, but you do know it for vaccine-induced myocarditis, yes, but now we're seeing myocarditis, pericarditis, and even brain inflammation.

Encephalitis in some people, um, you didn't see that at the beginning of the first waves of the pandemic, that's correct, yes, you're seeing Casey, you mean cases associated with covid-19, well, cases at all, I mean in the early days when there were a lot of severe covid codes, there wasn't much immunity, you personally weren't seeing cases of covert induced myocarditis, whereas now unfortunately we have cases, yes, absolutely, yes, no, that's an important point , thank you, now it is clear, it is clear to me why the patients were admitted covertly 19. in the early stages, why are patients admitted now?

Because we are not seeing severe lung inflammatory conditions, so the patients who are being admitted for covid now in March 2023, why are they actually being admitted well as I already mentioned? There are quite a few people who are incidentally diagnosed with COVID-19 and then obviously diagnosed with COVID-19, but it's important to remember that in Western countries, especially, we have an aging population and there are some extremely vulnerable people right now. It is where our focus should have been on vulnerable people, whether they are elderly or whether they have other comorbidities that are literally colds. A simple cold that would be a cold to someone else will push them over the edge and into an admission so that While these people are there, keep this in mind that Covid, no matter how low its potency, can still cause admissions. hospitalists and that is what we have seen, personally, over the last few weeks, some months, that the people who arrive with genuine covid-19, you look at their list of comorbidities, you look at their list of medications, which is as long as my arm, These are very, very vulnerable people whose bodies won't tolerate even a minor infection, so the infection is essentially stimulating pre-existing comorbidities rather than causing an independent pathophysiological change on its own, it will still cause them a lower respiratory tract infection, but it's just They don't have the reserve to even tolerate that because their bodies are weak, for example, they may have end-stage COPD, chronic airway disease, and they were already on oxygen, so that adds a little bit of inflammation and their need for oxygen. increases and they become seriously ill and we still see this mainly in people with obesity. is that it continues to be the main risk factor.

I would say that the main risk factor remains age, without a doubt. As one ages each decade, the chances of being adversely affected by Covid increase by multiples, but after age, doctors debate this. My own opinion is that obesity is the second most important risk factor for being hospitalized with Covid-19. We have more problems with this in the US than in the UK, then you get to all the other diseases, diabetes, chronic lung disease, heart disease, even. Being men since the beginning of the pandemic, we have seen more men hospitalized than women. I have my own ideas about why that is, but that was cited very early in data from China that we were seeing very skewed infection risks. of serious disease in men versus women and this is the same as in the UK age is the biggest risk factor so obesity we know obesity is definitely a bigger risk factor you better tell us why you think that men and more men are more at risk than women because men are weaker than women we know no it's not as simple as that no it's because I would have my own hypothesis on this if you look even at the animal studies on the strength of the immune system consistently when they have done so.

The evidence and studies that females of any given species seem to have stronger immune systems than males and my own thinking in terms of the first principle is that this is a protective mechanism for any species because you have a pandemic or whatever, It's very obvious why. It is a bigger problem for any species for pure survival to lose females instead of males, so females, in addition to the problem of having children, also have a naturally stronger immune system than men on average, you don't need as many men to maintain the tribe. really, just a few of us would probably be enough, but you can't reproduce too much without women exactly in a crude evolutionary survival in the most appropriate way that things often revert to because we've been developing for millions of years. um, I suspect that's why in all species females naturally have a stronger immune system than males.

Having said that we like to make our small contribution to the gene pool and, uh, it increases the diversity of the gene pool, which of course This is a good thing, exactly, let's stand up, man, yeah, yeah, I know, I know that you have revealed that you were also personally infected with the SARS coronavirus in February 2020, so in the first few days you contracted it at work and what? What characteristics did you suffer? I actually have no idea where I got it from. I live in a large urban area in the United States. I travel between big cities, including New York, so I could have gotten it anywhere except my own personal story which I told on my own channel.

I contracted an infection in February 2020, when we were all watching the news. We knew Covid-19 was there when I started having symptoms we didn't have. I knew it had gotten to the point where it had because realistically it was already spreading like wildfire across our countries, the UK, the US in January and February, but I got this infection and I thought I was feeling sick. little bad, that's that strange and slight sore. throat and then I took a day off work which I don't usually do again, it wasn't terrible, I've had worse flus but I thought I'd take a day off work and then I felt better the next day and then strangely .

About 4, four or five days later, I again had a day where I felt a little bad and then I got better. I was doing my normal activities. I felt fine within a few days, but I had this weird persistent dry cough and I was only coughing intermittently, but it was a very dry cough and then as we were hearing the news about Covid symptoms, I put two and two together in my mind and thought, well, first of all, I rarely take time off work, I did and then the dry cough is a very distinctive feature of um covid-19 and I've rarely had it before when I've had other respiratory infections, so I continued, obviously I was working on the front line in different hospitals and then I thought about April. let me check my own antibodies, my IGG antibodies and I checked them and sure enough, they were through the roof, so I concluded that yes, I had had Covid-19, a mild case, fortunately, although it depends how you look at it because there were other people around. around me. at that time and we know that there has been a high rate of asymptomatic from the beginning, maybe I was unlucky to have some symptoms if a lot of people didn't have them, so it depends how you look at it, but obviously I'm grateful to have had them.

I had nothing but feeling a little unwell and then, apart from that persistent dry cough for a couple of weeks, I was fine, I was able to return to my normal activities and then for the rest of the year I continued to work during the pandemic and, interestingly enough , at one of the places I worked we would have to do this finger prick test and it would test for both IGM and IGG antibodies and for viewers who don't understand thedifference IGM is what you would get if you had an acute infection IGG is what you get if you've already had an infection and my IGG kept coming back very high negative IGM and other people around me were not IGG positive and of course we were developing all these tests at that time and time continued. working and then when the vaccines came out, I was sure, based on my own knowledge, that I wouldn't need the Covid-19 vaccine.

I didn't see any evidence, when I weighed the pros and cons, the risks and benefits I would need. I need it, we went through 2021 and then of course everything else happened with the mandates. I'll stop there initially if in case you want to ask me any questions about what I've said so far before we get to the topic of the vaccine mandate and what happened. To me, you know, I think it's interesting that immunoglobulin G is the one that lasts for weeks, months, for a long period of time where it's in the blood, the fact that you had immunoglobulin G in the blood and you didn't have it. .

Not having been vaccinated also means that you would have immunoglobulin type A in your mucus because you acquired the infection through natural immunity, so you would have mucosal immunity and you would have systemic immunity at the same time, so I think your inferences were very precise, but surely why didn't you want to benefit from this hybrid immunity that was discussed so well at the time, hybrid immunity, the term that no one had heard of before 2021. I mean, I've heard about hybrid cars like you. but what is hybrid immunity? It's one of many terms invented by The Establishment, of which there are many, but I knew I had had a very mild case of Covid-19.

I knew this because I had actually read these studies, the study that was published in the New England Journal on the Pfizer vaccine, which was a leaky vaccine that was not sterilizing, progress would still be made, it had a very low absolute risk reduction, there were multiple flaws. in the study, including groups that were perhaps excludedabout one of the few within the medical profession who actually read the study and knew that things would probably turn out the way they did now that there was some effectiveness there. I'm not saying there was zero effectiveness and okay, you can get a vaccine.

With the program you can encourage people to get vaccinated, but based on everything I was seeing and within a few months we knew that not only were people still getting coverage, but we also had all these reports about the adverse consequences of blood clots, we had the problem with the J. vaccine and the J vaccine in the United States we saw reports about the AstraZeneca vaccine in the United Kingdom, then the myocarditis problem with modern, which other countries took action on in the United States, no. I was seeing everything and I also knew that I was working on the front line. nice touch of wood uh Initial metabolic health and I just didn't see what an additional vaccine would give me.

He was already exposed to covid-19. I hadn't had it again and the first time it was very mild anyway, so what exactly? Would an additional vaccine prevent me? Surely the goal was, as we were told, that it is there to prevent serious illness and death and I want to see some evidence that people can get COVID-19 again, other than maybe a rare abnormality and it suddenly disappears. of the blue would get worse with another strain. I wasn't seeing that evidence and I made a personal decision that for me the benefits don't outweigh the risks, which John, as you know, is a very basic foundation of any medical decision and I was dismayed. how things progressed from there, I didn't think we were going to have mandates, I really didn't, and when the mandates came out and we started hearing that our jobs would be threatened, very few doctors spoke out against it, it was like that.

For me, an ethical red line from the beginning because you cannot require a vaccine that is not sterilizing, you cannot do that ethically. I think we should say that the Johnson and Johnson vaccine and the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine are both adenovirus Vector vaccines. and I guess the Johnson Johnson vaccine was quietly phased out in the US a long time ago, just like the AstraZeneca vaccine in the UK, it was just quietly discontinued and what happened in the states, as I understand it, Johnson and Johnson has not been formally discontinued, but I think almost no one is accepting it.

I saw a report on Johnson and Johnson's quarterly sales, which of course is what this is about, and they were reporting that there was very low uptake and We weren't making a huge amount of money on that vaccine, but yeah, I would say that when That report came out, the Johnson Johnson vaccine, which was a single-dose vaccine, which is why a lot of people took it, was effectively doomed from that point on. but we do know that it was associated with these blood clot thromboembolic type adverse reactions. I think so, it is now March 2023. What is the difference in the risk-reward analysis between let's say March 2023 now and let's say March 2020?

In terms of someone's covert contracting and risk-benefit analysis for vaccination, how do you think it has changed? I think a lot has changed initially, when the vaccines came out, you could see that there were more reasons, especially for vulnerable groups who took up the offer. for the vaccine, I still don't think it should ever have been mandatory, however, the benefits outweighed the risks for certain groups and then time moved on and we were learning more about the side effects, the adverse reactions and every step of the way, The authorities moved on. Increasingly, I mean my own thinking at the beginning was okay, let's encourage the vulnerable to get that vaccine and then whoever wants can take it and then go back to normal life, but they kept pushing harder and harder for it to be that way.

It got to the under 50s, then the under 30s, then the under 18s, and then the toddlers, and it just kept going further and further all the time, so I don't think the US authorities thought in this. I think there are other huge problems going on in America that don't exist in the UK, we have a merry-go-round at the top of people who are all friends, friends with each other in the regulatory agencies, the pharmaceutical industry, they often jump between each other. another and there are huge conflicts of The interest also continues, yes, maybe not to the same extent, but we certainly have one, yes, absolutely and, for me, personally, the benefit did not outweigh the risk and that does not mean that, as a doctor , be speaking against all vaccines or anyone who gets it I believe in medical freedom, personal choice and in fact, that summer of 2021, a couple of places where I worked as a doctor told me I could no longer work there, so obviously I had to not be in those institutions. more and keep in mind that at least one of them was working with covid patients just a few weeks before and that's what happened to me luckily at a couple of other places I worked and we found a rational solution to everything, um, but uh, I was so disappointed in how every disappointment isn't even a strong enough word with this person.

I would use the word reckless in the United States. He has been a reckless person, even now they are pushing, pushing, pushing even younger people to get reinforcements. and we simply don't have the evidence, there is no data, these people have already had covid, why are there signs everywhere telling younger people to get vaccinated, why are there television advertisements? It doesn't make any sense, especially for a country like In the United States there is no this problem in the United Kingdom, but in the United States we have a huge uninsured population, millions of people cannot get health care.

Up to 70 of all bankruptcies in this country are for medical bills, so does that make sense? that a country that doesn't even provide its citizens with basic healthcare out of nowhere in 2021 decides that they care so much that they are pushing for this medicine there is so much more to this I don't think it's just about health and wellness because if it were, these people would actually be looking at studies and looking at data and they would be more reasonable and rational and it's reckless what's happening, you can sit down with someone, you can give them the data, let them make decisions. an informed choice for themselves, but this push, push, push, doesn't make any sense.

Going back to your basic question, the benefits, risks, I would say even in vulnerable groups are not overwhelming right now with such low potency through the virus that is circulating and of course, no one is saying that this is happening because certain interests created are earning up to billions of dollars from the sale of vaccines. We're not saying that, of course, no, that has nothing to do with it. There is another logical question here that I would like to answer. To introduce, uh, no one has ever explained this to me, you have these hardcore vaccine promoters who insist that vaccine-induced immunity is more than infection-induced immunity and Dr.

Fauci himself, Lord Fauci, as some call him, He said before the pandemic that an immunity induced by a natural infection is nature's best vaccine and everyone knew that everyone who went to medical school this was simple common sense, now that is not an argument for one to go and contract the infection deliberately, but many people like me, through no fault of their own, happen to contract the infection and then we are forced to take a vaccine and no one has explained it in a logical way, traditionally, what a vaccine is, it is a substance, a chemical compound, traditionally it was an inactivated virus or a dead virus into which it was injected. for someone to produce an immune response so that they are then immune to the disease, if that's what a vaccine does, how could actual infection ever produce less immunity than a vaccine?

Logically speaking, that doesn't make sense to me, how could it be the low power version? stronger than the actual infection, but yet you have all these top doctors who still insist on this and it defies all science and I don't understand how they can keep pushing this narrative that doesn't make any sense. I mean, I taught all my seconds. This year's nursing students initially talked about this in about the first half of their second year, so everyone knew about this. You know that an antigen is something that stimulates the body to produce an antibody and the basics of immunity.

If we just take let's just take SARS coronavirus 2, for example. I mean, I think there are about two antigens in the vaccine, but there are at least 20 different antigens in the natural virus and the idea that humans have become smarter than the immune system. that the human immune system that can recognize nine billion different types of foreign antigens, it's just that if you believe that it's incredibly arrogant and if you don't believe it, then why something that goes against one of the basic axioms? human physiology is very difficult to explain exactly yes these people are almost worth worse than flat earthers because natural immunity is a very basic foundation of evolutionary biology literally no animal species would exist if natural immunity did not exist and Once again, I will emphasize again that this is not an argument that says all vaccines are bad, but the very fact that you have these people at the top of medicine and clients who completely deny natural immunity and I took one fundamental decision.

About this, a director Stan John and was actually prepared at one point. I was preparing to leave my state. I would have left the United States because this is a huge violation, John, if the authorities can force someone with medical knowledge on me as a doctor. someone who has been treating covid-19 patients go against their better judgment and take a vaccine than what comes next if my body can be raped like that with something that I know is not going to be good for me, what? I'm saying I would have done it? They gave me an mRNA vaccine and I dropped dead the next day or I went to the Maya University.

No, I'm not saying that, but I am saying that I know that the benefits, the doubt, do not outweigh the risk, so no. I was going to do it, end of story, so I was prepared to do something drastic, maybe I would have gone back to England, who knows, because I think you had a much more ethical stance on the UK. I'm tremendously proud to be British because I remember I know you had a robust vaccination programme, but a number of Royal Colleges came out and said you can have a vaccination program but you can't force it, you can't require it and in the end the Mandate was not met for the NHS there.

There were no mandates for workplaces like the United States, but it was an eye-opener for me as someone who has worked in the United States for the last 10 or 15 years to see that all my medical colleagues and all the medical societies take no stance. major. about something that is obviously completely wrong has exposed them and I think they have been cowards and when the time came to actually defend theReal ethical medicine were not brave enough to do it, so they failed as far as I believe. I'm worried and there's another basic scientific point here, Sunil, I mean, given that you've been at work for the last three years, let's say you've worked 300 days a year for the last three years, that's at least in my opinion 900 times been exposed to the South Carolina virus two, you've been repeatedly exposed and repeatedly exposed and yet today, fortunately, you look pretty healthy, I think, but, again, you've been repeatedly exposed to a thousand other viruses that you and I could probably name a couple dozen, but there are thousands more that we are continually exposed to again, we just don't even think about it because the natural immune system takes care of it for us, why should this be any different?

Absolutely and uh the notion that we all have to become germaphobes afraid of each other, but ultimately if it took hold it would be the downfall of humanity because we have to have exposures, especially when you're young. I mean, I really fear for the younger ones. generation and I think some of the things we've seen, including strep hepatitis infections, as a result of children not mixing with each other, there's no way around you having to be exposed to have an immune system, that's how your immunity is obtained. strength, so yeah, I mean exposures are needed now.

I wonder what effect it will have that we are all masked in the hospital now, so technically, although we are not 100 protected by any means, we will have few exposures and would generally, even in healthcare, healthcare situations and, of course, this is called the hygiene hypothesis, isn't it that people need to be exposed to all kinds of insects to prevent allergies to, to prevent reinfections with other viruses, the whole idea of ​​cross-breeding immunity and probably even some protection against cancer due to constant re-exposure to viruses exactly yes no, I firmly believe in that and again I would like to do it if I thought the vaccine would be good for me I would have taken it I mean.

My specialty is metabolic health and lifestyle medicine. I am meticulous about what I eat. I am very big on really taking care of one's own health and well-being. Of course, I would do something that I believed would benefit my health, but I didn't believe it. that would be the same with exposure to germs. I'm not saying you shouldn't be careful around vulnerable people, but the average person can't live a life where they're afraid of being exposed to germs that will come back and bite. very, very difficult, absolutely, um, um, Sunil, thank you very much for coming.

I've been waiting for this talk for years and I'm not disappointed, I'm absolutely delighted with the first-hand information we have there. This video will be on my channel with links to the exact same video on Sunil's channel, so watch it wherever you want, share it with your friends and let's get this combination of practical experience with good theory and patient preferences, let's spread the word because that's what we call evidence-based medicine, so Sunil, thank you very much and I suspect there will be Morphers to talk about in the future, it's a great pleasure. to join you John thank you