ポール・トーマス、MD- ワクチンフレンドリープラン (Paul Thomas, MD- Vaccine Friendly Plan)

字幕表動画を再生する

Something else we do in my practice is, if you start to see developmental delays, you
stop all further vaccination.
I've had so many patients join my practice who their pediatrician says, "Oh, no.
There's no link.
Just do them all."
Even when the child's starting to show signs of a problem neurologically, they're continuing
on.
It's reckless.
We had, in our group 1, who followed the vaccine friendly plan, 3 kids who were starting to
look headed down that autism road.
They weren't quite severe enough to have a label or a diagnosis.
By stopping, they ended up being completely normal.
Kids are hurting.
People are hurting out there.
When you over-vaccinate, and you over-tax the immune system at a very young age, you
shift people towards allergy and autoimmunity.
The chronic diseases we're seeing today are partially due to that very issue.
We've got to change what we're doing.
We've got to individualize medicine.
We can not do one size fits all medicine anymore.
My son says, "Dad, you've got a lot to say.
We ought to get you on YouTube."
Yeah.
Let's get this stuff out there.
I'm going, "I don't think so, son."
He's like, "Come on, please.
It'll help me.
I'm just trying to learn how to do this."
I did it as a favor for him.
We had a couple of videos that were doing well, a wart video, and then my wife walked
in.
I told you that story.
It was a Saturday.
She said, "I've got something in my ear.
I think it's wax."
My son was here.
He says, "Wait, wait.
We're going to film this."
"Okay, whatever."
We were kidding around, and it was this sort of combination of cute and gross, and that
thing's got twenty million views.
That's incredible.
On YouTube, you can just put "ear wax" and it pops up in the top five.
Well, Dr. Paul, before we start, I just want to have a moment of gratitude, because when
I first met you in 2011, my wife, we were talking about having a baby, right?
You gave me this sheet.
It had a lot of sense to it.
A lot of science.
You said, "You know what?
This vaccine has a lot of aluminum.
I wouldn't do this.
I wouldn't do this."
Now, you have this wonderful book out that comes out by the time folks watch this.
The Vaccine-Friendly Plan.
I want to commend you and also, again, extend gratitude, because without that sheet, I would
have been lost.
There's not a lot of science.
There's not a lot of practitioners out there that understand this.
First of all, thank you for giving that to me way back then, and now congratulations
on the book.
Thanks.
I appreciate that.
As you probably know, since 2011 when I gave you that sheet, there's been a huge change
from the CDC with regards to a recommendation for pregnancy, which is the Tdap.
I would have put on that sheet a very big "No Tdap."
I'll tell you why, in case you wanted to know.
Yeah, let's talk about it.
Since you brought up pregnancy.
It's a pet peeve of mine.
Every day in my office, almost every day, I have a new couple sitting there excited
they're about to have a baby.
Mom's just ready to pop, you know?
They want to do what's right for their kid, and they're wondering about this vaccine issue.
In pregnancy, if you go back a couple of decades, it was a sacred time.
The womb, you don't put toxins in your body, right?
I mean, you eat organic, you avoid medications, you don't drink, a lot of things we would
do to keep the unborn child protected from toxins.
In 2013, and big push in 2014, the CDC came out with the recommendation we're going to
inject a Tdap vaccine, mainly because of the pertussis component, to every pregnant woman
in America, so almost 4 million unborn children are getting exposed to a huge dose of aluminum,
at a neuro-toxic dose.
The FDA has a document that's live today that says, "Don't exceed 5 micrograms per kilogram,
especially in premature infants," because they found studies showed it caused developmental
delays and brain problems.
Somehow, that information is being ignored.
I'll tell you why they're ignoring it.
The theory is, we inject mom.
She's going to develop antibodies against pertussis, give it to her baby, who's born
with protection.
It's probably a true theory, and it might reduce the risk from 5 to 10 deaths per year
to something lower than that, out of those 4 million births.
In my way of thinking, however, is it worth poisoning four million unborn babies to potentially
save 2, 3, 4, 5 lives?
I don't know.
I don't want to make that decision for anybody, but if it was my kid, if my wife was pregnant,
there's no way I'm guaranteeing a poisoning for that 1 in a million chance it might help
my baby.
Right, because 600 micrograms of aluminum, and you said the adult daily maximum is 5
or 25?
Adult daily max is 50.
The per kilo dose is 5 micrograms per kilo.
That unborn child is definitely, like, less than a kilo.
You shouldn't give more than 5 micrograms.
The vaccine has 250 to 330, depending on the brand.
It's a ridiculously toxic dose.
The thinking must be, by the manufacturer or the regulatory body, is that, "Well, that
mercury's not crossing the placental barrier," which we know that a lot of things, heavy
metals and so forth cross, right?
Right.
Aluminum, in this case.
They got the mercury out.
This is aluminum.
We just don't have long term studies, so what we would need to do, and of course the American
population is the study, is have a huge group that's not getting this vaccine, and a huge
group that is, and follow those kids over a 5, 10, 15 year period, because it takes
time to see chronic problems from low dose toxicity.
The studies haven't been done.
Each mom in America is part of the study, if you elect to have that vaccine.
Let's talk about that.
The dearth of studies.
The lack of data.
It's really surprising.
I mean, a lot of folks, when we think about drugs that are prescribed through physicians,
we think of randomized, placebo controlled trials.
What's really interesting is the filing, and I learned this from watching the movie Vaxxed,
which I would encourage folks to recommend no matter what side of the spectrum they're
on, vaccines have this little loophole where they're kind of, there's recommendations and
there's not a lot of safety studies or data.
Can you talk about that?
Well, there's lots of studies, but what's missing are the randomized controlled studies,
as you mentioned.
Vaccines sort of get a special privilege and kind of a fast track.
We really need to do proper placebo controlled studies.
The classic one that's just very upsetting to me is the HPV Gardasil vaccine that's being
given to teenagers to prevent cervical cancer in women.
The package insert from the company that makes that vaccine, it's all laid out for you.
They used, except for one tiny subset, they used aluminum at very high doses, the same
high doses that are in the vaccine, as their control.
There is no control.
Then, of course, their outcomes were the same.
Well, of course.
You injected the same amount of a huge toxin to both groups.
To make matters worse, in that particular study, they stopped it at 3 and a half years,
long before you could ever determine whether it was actually going to prevent cervical
cancer.
It's a hypothesis.
That's what's missing.
Long term, good, placebo controlled studies.
What we need for vaccines is what we did with tobacco.
I was born in 1957, the year the US government started the huge, millions of people, nonsmokers
versus smokers, and they followed these people for decades.
Well, we all know, right?
Tobacco's not a really good thing to be doing.
You're going to increase your cancer risk.
We need that same sort of dedication and commitment from the government, from the CDC.
Take a huge sample of non-vaccinating, a huge sample of partially vaccinating, and a huge
sample of completely vaccinating, and follow these kids for 10, 15, 20 years.
Look at the outcomes.
There are clues in the literature.
JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association, in 2013, published a study from Norway.
80,000 pregnancies followed for an average of 6 years, half the kids the moms took folate,
half didn't.
The autism rate if you took folate was 1 in 1,000.
1 in 500 if you didn't.
Now, this is at a time when the US, the autism rate was 1 in 100.
1 in 1,000 in Norway.
1 in 100 here.
Why?
Well, the study wasn't designed to address that.
It's just, I throw that out to the viewers.
If you're a thinking person, you're going to go, "Hmm.
I wonder what could that be."
Since I think it's really an issue of toxins, toxins, toxins, I'm thinking, "Okay.
What toxins do we have in the US that they don't have in Norway?"
Well, GMO is banned in most of Europe, so there's 1 exposure.
The other one was the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns, which we've been doing in this
country for almost 20 years.
They don't do that in Norway.
In fact, in most other industrialized countries, you only give the hepatitis B to babies who
need it.
If the mother has it, for example, right?
Exactly.
You catch hepatitis B from sex and IV drug use.
Babies don't do that.
Babies can get hepatitis B if their mom has it.
Those babies should definitely get the vaccine, and HBIG as far as that goes.
In the US, the CDC says 1 in 100 moms have hepatitis B. I've read other studies where
it's more like 1 in 1,000.
That means we're injecting a 250 microgram toxic dose of aluminum to either 99 out of
100 or 999 out of 1,000 infants for a disease they're not at risk for, and it just flies
against common sense.
Last time, during our autism intensive interview, you talked about the immunity that's conferred
through that early life vaccination only affects like 20, or the antibody level, it was something
to the effect as 25% of 17 year olds.
You want to talk about ...? There's several studies now, because we've
been doing this for 20 years, 15 to 20 years depending on where you are in the country.
20 year olds, only 24% have immunity.
A recent study just showed that if you give those teenagers a booster, it works.
Expect there will be a recommendation soon for adding a booster for hepatitis B, when
really all we need to do is change it back to the teenagers who are about to be sexually
active, for example.
Then, they have lasting immunity because their immune system is more developed.
Makes complete sense.
You're a big enough person that that 250 micrograms of aluminum is not as toxic, either.
Right.
There's enough neuro development there that you're not going to affect these pathways.
Neuro development is well along its way.
I remember when I was 9 years old, that's when hep A, hep B, hep C came in.
When I was 9, 10, 11, we had to always go to the doctor for that.
That newborn, I didn't realize that amount of aluminum was in that as an adjument.
Let's kind of talk about this personalized approach.
You like vaccines.
We'll talk about Hib, one of your favorite vaccines from last time, and so forth.
What we're seeing in medicine in general with adults and so forth is personalized approach,
where we're looking at genomics, environmental susceptibility, genetics and so forth, and
trying to figure out the best plan, whether it's lifestyle, medicine, whatever, but then
when it comes to infants, it's like there's the cookie cutter, one size fits all approach,
which you talk about in the book and on your YouTube channel, is not the right way to go.
How do we customize the vaccine approach so that we're helping folks that have high risk,
that have parents with autoimmunity and so forth?
Let's kind of talk about that.
This is the area that we sorely lack good studies.
You have to really dig and find them.
There are studies that show there's an increased risk of autism if you have inflammation in
the womb.
One can extrapolate, and there's another study that shows there's increased inflammation
in the womb for those who get a flu shot.
Just add 1 plus 1 equals 2.
If the flu shot causes inflammation, one study, if inflammation triggers autism increased
risk, another study.
Perhaps we shouldn't be doing flu shots to pregnant moms.
Now, they should do a bigger study, but that is an example of how you need to take the
data and individualize it.
To speak to genomics, I'll just use one example.
There are thousands, hundreds of thousands of single nucleotide polymorphisms, and a
lot of people doing some good work in that area.
I know you've worked with Ben Lynch.
He's just come out with an amazing program that will help people get their 23 and Me
analyzed.
What I really like about what he's doing is, he's not ignoring the fact that there's a
major factor that comes from your environment, from your food, from the toxins you're exposed
to.
Of course, as my book outlines, we need to also take into consideration the toxins that
are in vaccines.
The elephant in the room that we call autism, it's not just autism.
There's no one autism.
There's toxicity that's affecting actual brain development.
There's toxicity that's affecting your immune system.
There's this new condition, or relatively new syndrome called ASIA: Autoimmune syndrome
induced by adjuvants.
The main adjuvant in vaccines is aluminum.
Lots of studies in the last 5, 10 years showing that aluminum triggers autoimmunity, and there's
a connection between autoimmunity and brain problems.
MS is one that we're very familiar with, but autism might be ... There's a subset where
there might be an immune mechanism going on.
It's time to get away from one size fits all, as you were pointing out, and allow families
to individualize the approach.
Parents know best what their risk factors are.
I mean, obviously they want to share these with their doctor.
Let's say you're a parent, and you come to me and you say, "Dr. Paul, I'm a homozygous
for the MTHFR defect, and my wife's a carrier, so our kids are 50-50 going to be homozygous."
Just that defect alone tells me we have extremely higher risk for toxin damage, and I probably
wouldn't give a child like that, if it were me, any vaccines.
At least not until I'm sure that this child's going to be okay.
That's a crazy statement, right?
It's like, "What do you mean?"
Let's just say you already have an autistic child.
You understand if your next child is a boy, their risk is about 1 in 5.
It's at least 1 in 20, compared to the going rate, which sadly is 1 in 45 or 1 in 67, depending
on the study.
The risk doesn't have to be that high.
I present in my book some data.
The research was approved by Western Institutional Review Board, because it was a retrospective
look at our experience in my practice.
It's very interesting.
Family history is a huge risk factor.
We've known that.
Not vaccinating at all, especially when you have risk factors, reduces your risk.
The main part of my study broke my practice ... The group that we were looking at was
kids who were the age that entered my practice when I started integrative pediatrics, which
was in 2008.
We picked kids who were at least 2 years old, and up to the time of the cut-off of the data
bank, they would have been 7.
They were ages 2 to 7.
Average age of about 4 and a half.
Most of the severe autistic kids would have shown up by then.
Group 1 was those kids who vaccinated in the vaccine-friendly plan manner, the selective
approach where you don't do the hep B if you don't need it.
You only do one aluminum-containing vaccine at a time.
You wait until age 3 for the MMR.
You wait on polio, and you don't do the rotovirus.
That's sort of in a nutshell.
We had no new cases of autism or autism spectrum out of over 1,000 kids who vaccinated that
way.
In the unvaccinated group, which was 238 kids, we had no new autism or autism spectrum.
In the third group, now, this was a bit of a hodge podge group, so you can't extrapolate
too much from it, because these were kids who, some of them joined my practice because
they were starting to get nervous about seeing some little glitches.
Some of them got the hep B as newborns, which isn't something I recommend.
That threw them into group 3.
We had 15 cases of autism or autism spectrum out of almost 900 kids.
It was a rate of 1 in 60.
Pretty close to the going rate out there.
By the way, the significance for group 1, doing the vaccine-friendly plan way of vaccinating,
had a P value of .00001.
You don't get much more power than that.
That means for people who are not statisticians, which actually I'm not.
I got help with my statistics.
That means the chance that that could have happened just by random chance was 1 in 100,000.\\
Wow.
That's amazing.
Fairly significant.
Now, for our listeners that may not be familiar with your practice, you have ... I would say
a higher risk population, right?
People are seeking you out because of your different approach.
They might know internally or have some hunch that, you know ... They were referred by a
friend or what have you, so that's really unique in the sense that it's that statistically
significant that the vaccine-friendly plan ... Again, it makes a lot of sense.
You're using informed consent and so forth.
For your viewers, the reason I even started this practice was I had a last straw incident
in November of 2007.
I walked into an exam room, and right in front of me was supposed to be a healthy 2 year
old visit.
A well child visit.
I had a little fellow, I'll call him Jack, and he's in his stroller just looking like
this.
There was just no ... I'm like, "Jack.
Jack."
I can get kids to interact.
"Jack.
Jack.
Jack."
There was no one home.
He was gone.
I looked back through the chart and he'd been normal at 1.
He was starting to talk.
He was normal in every sense of development.
He had lost his eye contact, lost his language.
He was gone.
That was the fourth kid in 4 years in my practice who had gone from normal at 1 to severe autism
by 2.
It was the last straw for me.
I knew better.
You know, when you know better, you can do better.
I think, sadly, a lot of people just have their blinders on, and it's one size fits
all, like we were talking about.
They just don't know better.
I'm hoping that this book will kind of open people's eyes.
I mean, this is a well-referenced, over 300 peer review references that are talking about
all the issues.
This isn't an anti-vaccine book.
I do vaccines every day in my office.
No, not at all.
One thing that I noticed in my study, when we did our chart reviews, we looked at every
single visit in the chart.
This was a very labor intensive, took over a year, of 3 different medical students spending
summers and evenings.
I mean, we really pored through these charts.
Something else we do in my practice is, if you start to see developmental delays, you
stop all further vaccination.
I've had so many patients join my practice who, their pediatrician says, "Oh, no.
There's no link.
Just do them all."
Even when the child's starting to show signs of a problem neurologically, they're continuing
on.
It's reckless.
We had, in our group 1, who followed the vaccine-friendly plan, 3 kids who were starting to look headed
down that autism road.
They weren't quite severe enough to have a label or a diagnosis.
By stopping, they ended up being completely normal.
In our smaller group that were more heavily vaccinated, we had 5 such kids who ended up
fine.\\ These are kids who I have no doubt would have
progressed on to autism if we just kept hammering our way, dosing them with more toxins.
That's an example of individualized medicine in the simplest of forms.
You have to take each child in front of you as an individual, and tailor what you're doing
to what you're seeing.
Examine the patient.
It's good medicine.
Examine the patient.
It really makes me sad that we seem to be losing informed consent.
When I was in medical school, back in the age of the dinosaurs in the early 80s, we
were hammered by our professors about informed consent.
You do nothing to a patient until you have explained explicitly the risks and the benefits
of the procedure.
You also need to explain the alternatives, and in the case of vaccines, which is a procedure,
you're injecting something that can have ill effect, right?
Potential benefit.
Potential side effects.
One of the options has to be not doing them.
Well, when you have mandates, your viewers probably understand that in California this
year, July 1, 2016, if you live in California, and you don't do all the CDC vaccines, you
can't go to school, daycare, whether it's private or public.
California just released a study last week.
They have 97,000 children with an autism diagnosis in the public school.
They have a 7 times, 600% rise in autism since 2001.
They have kindergartners this year, compared to last year, 17% more autistic kids.
The crisis is just exploding.
It just baffles me that people aren't willing to look at all the science and use some common
sense.
There's so many variables, from environmental toxins, GMO foods and so forth.
We know we have control over this variable, being the vaccine, and the toxins in the vaccines,
so why not minimize exposure?
I have 2 questions.
The first one is for the people that are into the herd immunity, and when they hear, "Oh
my gosh.
You're not vaccinating?"
They get really reactive.
I notice this particularly online.
Talk about this, like the rates of polio, and stuff like that.
Herd immunity is this concept that if we vaccinate enough in the herd, in this case, the human
herd, then if the disease is introduced into the herd, it can't take hold.
It actually has some validity.
If you think about measles.
That's the one that scares everybody, right?
We had the Disneyland measles epidemic.
That was the whole rationale for mandating vaccines in California.
There were less than 200 cases of measles tied to that epidemic, but in the whole country,
there were less than 800 cases if I'm not mistaken, in 2014, when we had this epidemic.
The usual flux of measles in this country is 200 to 800 over the last decade plus.
There have been no deaths in the United States.
That's an example of herd immunity working.
In Oregon, there was one man who caught measles from Disneyland.
He was 40 years old, approximately.
Lived in one of the bigger towns in Oregon.
Not a single person caught measles from him.
That speaks to how well the measles vaccine works.
People are going to say, "Well, Dr. Paul, you clearly have disregard for the public
if you're going to be anti-vaccine."
No.
I'm not anti-vaccine.
In our vaccine-friendly plan, we do the MMR after age 3, as long as it's safe to do so.
There are families who have, it's just too risky.
There's some interesting data.
In fact, the data that was presented by Dr. William Thompson, the whistle blower for the
CDC, actually showed it was safer to give the MMR after age 3.
When I opened my practice in 2008, I picked 3 as a probably safer age, not knowing this
data.
That data was hidden.
I did it for this reason.
I had seen with my own eyes, in my own practice, 4 kids deteriorate after the MMR.
The rationale I thought was, "Well, if the neural networks are established, which is
usually by age 3, kids are talking.
They're very connected with their world.
Maybe ..." I was just hoping that if the MMR is causing mischief, it won't be as bad.
The brain is all well set.
It seems to have worked out.
I'm not saying that we don't need more studies.
We definitely do, but I have a feeling that it'll be safer to give that vaccine at age
3.
You still maintain herd immunity, so if a case of measles comes in to the population,
people are still vaccinated.
You might say, "Well, what about those who are under 3?"
Well, what about autism?
You know what I mean?
You have to somehow use science and common sense.
You mentioned polio.
There hasn't been a case of polio since 1979 that was acquired here in the United States.
Basically, polio is transmitted through drinking water that was contaminated.
The lack of good water.
That's not a problem anymore in the United States.
It's not going to be a problem.
We don't need to worry about polio.
You have to take each vaccine one at a time, and that's what this book does.
This book will take you from chapter 1, which is all about toxins, because really it's not
just vaccines.
I think people get, when they hear the vaccine anything, people are polarized, right?
Pro or anti.
Let's get rid of this polarization and just be scientific.
We start with pregnancy after dealing with toxins, and in pregnancy, keep it sacred,
including minimizing stress.
Then, the books walks you through each age that you would see a pediatrician, so that
you know and you're armed with what to do.
When you go in to the pediatrician, you're going to know what they're expecting you to
do, as far as vaccines, but everything else.
All the normal growth and development is covered.
The common childhood illnesses are covered.
In the vaccine arena, we address each disease, the risks, the benefits of doing the vaccines,
and try to make common sense decisions based on all the literature that's out there.\\
This is really a primer for parents, of all ... It's what to get after you get What to
Expect When You're Expecting.
It's, like, the follow up book, really.
I was telling Sam in the car, because it goes through everything, from colic, and "My baby
has a rough throat when they're breathing."
All these things, for new parents, it kind of freaks you out.
At least, the first go around.
The second go around, you're like, "They're going to be fine."
That's really fantastic.
Now, one thing that I remember from the book was, pediatricians, generally, like to follow
the CDC rules, and so forth.
If a pediatrician gives a parent a hard time for wanting to go follow this vaccine-friendly
plan, your advice is find a new pediatrician.
Talk about that empowerment.
A lot of people are scared by their health care practitioner.
Just talking to one of my staff members who has a friend who just went through this very
thing.
Being threatened about kicked out of the practice.
She's vaccinated her previous 4 kids completely on the CDC schedule.
Her fifth kid is having some problems, and she wants to slow it down, and she's being
threatened with being kicked out.
I get patients every week who have been kicked out of somebody else's practice, because they
won't follow guidelines.
Why are pediatricians doing this?
Risk, probably, right?
Liability?
There's a number of things.
The biggest driver I think is ignorance and misinformation.
However, pediatricians are good people.
They really care about people.
I went into the practice of pediatrics for that reason.
I loved all the pediatricians I saw.
They were family men, women, they love kids.
They're trying to do what's right.
When I was a new pediatrician, I figured, "Well, how could I know more than the CDC?"
No way.
All the smartest doctors are there at the CDC.
What's become apparent is that there's some conflicts of interest at the level of the
CDC.
As a result, you really have to think independently.
You can't just rely on CDC guidelines.
The hepatitis B is that perfect example.
They have the information.
It is long past time that we're still injecting newborns with hepatitis B vaccine who don't
need it.
Clearly, there's something going on.
Conflicts of interest.
Time for pediatricians to think for themselves.
Well, then why are they still doing this?
It turns out, there's a lot of pressure to follow guidelines.
This pressure is now coming forth in the form of quality measures.
You see, a health plan will say, "We're going to be looking at your rate of vaccination,
and we're going to look at 2 year olds, and see how many of your patients have gotten
all their vaccines that they're supposed to have by age 2."
If you don't meet a certain standard, let's say it's 70% or 80%, you're a bad doctor.
You're going to actually lose your bonus, or we're going to cut your pay, your reimbursement
rate, because you're a bad doctor.
Now, it's hitting doctors in their pocketbook, and office overhead has gone through the roof.
Now, it's actually survival.
You'll have office managers pushing.
"We've got to do this," and setting up office policies to make sure everybody's getting
vaccinated.
There's all this pressure, and I think people, pediatricians, they're just not paying attention
to the fact that, "Hmm.
Wait a minute.
Why are we giving hepatitis B to newborns?"
It's complicated.
I don't think there are bad people out there.
I think they're just under all this pressure to do what's right in the name of public health.
You know, it sounds so good.
"We're going to have a public health and quality measure improvement process in our office.
We're going to make sure we're the best we can be."
The number 1 thing for a pediatrician to look at is their vaccine rate.
Is this pressure from insurance companies?
Reimbursements?
Yes, at times.
At times, it's from insurance companies.
The other thing that's happening in California, for example, the only way to get an exemption
is if you get a medical exemption.
What they're doing there with their new law is there's a real pressure, any doctor that's
giving a lot of exemptions, they're feeling the scrutiny of the system.
Even the schools are not wanting to follow through with medical exemptions unless they
are per CDC guidelines.
Now, big brother, CDC and government, is not only behind making the rules that you can
only have a medical exemption, they're going to tell you what kind of a medical exemption.
If I'm your doctor, and I know your MTHFR status, and I know you have 2 kids with autism,
your risk is through the ceiling.
You should not give the one size fits all vaccine plan.
The CDC doesn't see that.
The only thing that qualifies in their mind is allergic reaction, severe autoimmune issues,
right?
It's complicated.
What tips do you have for a pediatrician listening right now?
Hopefully, folks listening would share this with their pediatrician.
If they want to use a sensible approach like you've laid out in your book, what do they
do?
Like you said, there's pressure coming from all angles here.
You know, pediatricians, it's time to stand up.
We have got to return to informed consent.
We've got to be science based.
We can't just follow guidelines without really thinking about what we're doing.
You know, I would urge you to avoid contempt prior to investigation.
I was once just like every pediatrician.
I totally believed everything that came out of the CDC.
When I started doing a little deeper digging, wow, there's a lot of information out there,
on the toxicity of mercury, the toxicity of aluminum.
ASIA, the new autoimmune syndrome induced by adjuvants.
The list just goes on and on.
Then, to find out, for example, what was in Vaxxed, that the CDC knew in 2002, when they
were charged to do the study that looked at the MMR vaccine and autism by congress, they
found data that showed there was a link.
Well, they couldn't publish that.
They did some maneuvers to get rid of that finding, and they published a study in Pediatrics
in 2004 that showed no link, using the very data set that had a link.\\
Now, that, that should be criminal.
Of course, I don't have privy to the 1,000 pages that have been submitted to congress,
so, for pediatricians, before you pass judgment, and I'm not passing judgment either, let's
get Dr. William Thompson subpoenaed in front of congress.
He said he wants to testify.
Let's let him testify.
This is bigger than Watergate.
I mean, this is huge.
If there's a link between vaccines and autism that's been hidden from the population while
the autism rate skyrockets, we have over a million autistic kids in the last decade.
Almost 100,000 in California public schools now.
They weren't there.
When I was in medical school in 1981 to 1985, guess how many cases of autism I saw?
None.
You've interviewed me before.
There were none.
In residency, I saw a handful of mild cases of PDD-NOS, pervasive development disorder
not otherwise specified, which is what we would call autism spectrum today.
Today, it's just out of control.
It's really scary stuff.
That would open Pandora's box, you know?
You know, we've got to do it.
We've got to do it.
I mean, at some point, we've got to stand up for real science and not allow ... There's
a lot of research being done that's sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, and their interests
are to show benefit.
You do little tiny studies, and when you get one that shows benefit, you publish it.
Think about if we looked at tobacco that way, and we compared a pack a day smoker to a 2
pack a day smoker, and we looked at them 6 months and a year out and looked for lung
cancer.
We wouldn't have found anything.
See?
Smoking's safe.
It doesn't work that way.
We need better design of our studies.
Yeah.
Absolutely.
Just to kind of summarize as we finish off here, for folks, this is a really personalized
and customizable plan that you can kind of piecemeal together, that you've laid out in
this book here, The Vaccine-Friendly Plan.
Basically, what I heard you say, there, Dr. Paul, and correct me if I'm wrong, that if
your child is high risk, autoimmunity, and you see some developmental delays, slow things
down and personalize the approach.
If you go off, don't vaccinate at all, especially the aluminum containing vaccines, there's
enough herd immunity that you're at very low risk, and look at each vaccine and which disease
it confers benefit against individually, and look at the risk-reward benefit.
In a nutshell, you're right.
In the appendix, we actually have The Vaccine-Friendly Plan outlined, that we've used in my practice.
We have, in this particular study and data, over 2,000 patients who have done very well
with this.
I think there's a lot of nuance that's written into this book as well, so you can't just
take a prescription from an appendix.
You really ought to read it, because there's situations where I think it's very clear you
should avoid this particular vaccine ingredient, or this particular vaccine.
I did my best to bring that research forward, and we need more.
Well, speaking of research, I know you spend a lot of personal time ... I remember, like
on Sundays, we would talk about other things, and you were diving into the research.
A couple of final questions here is morning routines.
That's the first question, and we know that busy practitioners and influencers in our
community have a morning routine.
This is more we're getting personal here, Dr. Paul.
What do you do in the first couple of hours of your day that's special or unique?
You are getting personal, aren't you?
I have a new kitten, and the damn thing ... Oh, sorry.
You can't say that on video.
It's all good.
Wakes me up way too early.
No, that was just recent.
I start my day every day going through the world literature.
I have a few listservs that I subscribe to, where I get all this data, and I scan the
abstracts, and if it looks like, "Oh, this is important ..." I'm not saying that other
things aren't important, but I'm saying, important for the world of preventative health, pediatrics,
having babies safely, avoiding toxins, vaccines, in that arena.
I will save the abstracts that I need to read the full article and go through that later.
This year, I wrote my book, and so I've got over 1,000 saved articles that I have to get
to, but I read the abstracts.
That's the first thing I do.
Then, starting real soon, I'm purchasing an enclosed bicycle.
We live in the northwest where it rains.
I'm anticipating the rains coming.
I'm going to leave extra early and pedal to work.
I'm going to ride my bike.
It's about 6 miles, but a lot of start and stop because it's city.
I'm going to get a workout, because this bike is heavy.
It's covered, so when it's raining, then you're not going to get wet.
No matter what.
Wow.
Is this a new bicycle?
I haven't seen this.
It's called an ELF I'll have to check it out.
Look it up online, yeah.
Because I've been too busy, first with raising 10 kids, and then with my huge practice and
writing a book, I've neglected exercise a bit more than I wished I had, so I'm going
to add that in.
I think that's important, and then a little bit of meditation would be good.
I'm a little weak in that department.
I need to add a little spiritual and meditation component for sure.
That's awesome.
The research is a big component every morning, it sounds like.
Very much so.
I don't feel like I started my day off right if I breeze past that.
I just don't want to miss anything.
I'm sure I do miss things.
You can't keep up.
There's so much information.
I think a lot of times, busy physicians in the trenches seeing patients, I mean, my practice
has over 13,000 patients, sure, we're a team, but they're my patients.
We don't get a lot of time to read.
We end up relying on the CDC to sort of encapsulate for us, or the Academy of Pediatrics, and
they do a pretty good job in some areas, but when it comes to the particular issue here
with the vaccine-friendly plan, where you're looking at neurological issues, autism, and
vaccines, and toxins, there's a lot out there, folks, that you just miss.
It's not being brought to your attention.
What I've noticed, doing consulting work in the doctor space for the past 10 years, what
really separates the integrative functional medicine practitioners from the general insurance-based,
Medicare type folks is that self-study.
That wanting to sharpen the saw and look deeper.
It's really unique, in that, like you mentioned, a lot of practitioners just don't have time.
If you don't make time to study, you're not going to get the time.
I would encourage other practitioners, when you're just following guidelines like I used
to, medicine can get pretty boring, really.
It's cookie cutter.
Anybody could do it.
When you delve into the research and you become integrative, you become a functional medicine
type doctor or an integrative medicine, you incorporate other practices, naturopathic,
et cetera, it gets exciting.
Not only are you now addressing root cause, instead of just treating symptoms, but you're
helping people get better.
I mean, every day I'm getting stories where people have seen all the specialists, mainstream,
they're not getting anywhere.
They come and we start figuring it out.
It's exciting.
That really is exciting.
There's computers and robots that can do this algorithm-based medicine, so if you're practicing
that model, it's obsolete.
You'd better start doing more functional based.
Speaking of functional medicine, what's your favorite herb, nutrient, botanical, or whole
food?
You're going to go live on a desert island, vitamin D and omega 3s are covered.
You can only take 1 thing with you.
What would it be?
You hit my 2 favorites, vitamin D and omega 3s.
You've got to have those.
What other nutrient?
Well, I would say, if you have the genetics that too many people have in this country,
which is the MTHFR defect, you've got to have methylfolate.
I don't know.
There's so many antioxidants that are so important.
You know, vitamin C, There's a lot.
You personally, because you've shared this before, you have the MTHFR snip, so for you
personally, folate would be up there.
It needs to be methylfolate, though, for the most part.
For parents listening, for kids, I know you probably do injectable methylfolate.
Efficacy, or the effectiveness of oral versus injectable?
What have you found for children?
Actually, I have not delved into the injectable methylfolate a lot.
I've done some injectable b12.
I have found that if you push the methylfolate high enough, it often works, but there's folate
trapping.
It's a complicated issue, and I'm not really an expert, per se.
Not like, say, someone like Ben Lynch, who really understands all those pathways.
This is a really important area of research and study.
If folks want to learn, we've done a couple interviews with Dr. Ben Lynch, so they can
find that on the link below this video.
Dr. Paul, final question here, if you were to bump shoulders with someone from the World
Health Organization, or a future president, and just had 30 seconds to bend their ear
in an elevator perhaps, what would you want them to know, and why?
I would ask them to read this book, to be open minded to the fact that the current direction
we've been on with the World Health Organization and the CDC is very myopic.
I mean, it's basically, "Vaccines are safe and effective, period."
We're ignoring all the potential side effects.
I love vaccines, but we have got to change this one size fits all, because we're doing
more harm than good, I believe.
If you can't change ... I can not un-see what I've seen.
I can't un-know what I know.
I can un-learn bad information, and this is what we need.
We need to start learning what's really going on, and start getting rid of some of the bad
information that we've accepted.
Paradigm shifts are hard.
I think especially for the World Health Organization and the CDC, their whole basis of existence
is preventing infectious diseases, right?
It's like, so you go to war to prevent infection diseases, you use vaccines.
That's your weapon.
Weapon of choice.
Nothing wrong with the weapon, for certain particular fights, but we've overused this
weapon to such an extent that the collateral damage is just ridiculous.
I would just ask you, as a person in power, whether you're the president, or somebody
in a high level at the CDC or the World Health Organization, you know, kids are hurting.
People are hurting out there.
When you over-vaccinate, and you over-tax the immune system at a very young age, you
shift people towards allergy and autoimmunity.
The chronic diseases we're seeing today are partially due to that very issue.
We've got to change what we're doing.
We've got to individualize medicine.
We can not do one size fits all medicine anymore.
This kind of just came up, right?
If the vaccines didn't contain the adjevents like aluminum, for example, would you be more
open to, say, MMR perhaps or other vaccines?
Well, MMR doesn't have aluminum.
Its challenge is complex.
I think very potent, 3 live viruses, all in one, for one thing.
Let's just take the Tdap.
Diptheria, tetanus, pertussis.
It has a pretty high dose of aluminum.
For a number of reasons, that vaccine isn't very effective anymore.
There's the protactin protein.
We're finding that the organism has mutated and shifted so that the vaccine doesn't even
work a lot of the time.
On top of that, it has all that aluminum.
There's a couple problems with it.
Let's rework it.
I really think, for the vaccines to become safe and effective, that little clich\\'e9,
we have got to put liability back into the equation.
If insurance companies were liable for the damage their products are causing, they're
going to improve their products.
Unfortunately, a long time ago, we did a misguided thing by removing liability.
I understand why it was done.
It was felt to be in the interest of the safety of the country, but it's backfired.
We need to put liability back where it belongs.
Go to individualized medicine.
Get rid of mandates.
Return to informed consent, and it's going to be okay.
This is the problem.
Everybody, "The sky is going to fall.
We're going to have all these diseases return."
No, they won't.
They won't.
I mean, there might be a little case of measles here or there, right?
An occasional death.
I'm not saying that's nothing for that family that loses somebody, but if you're looking
at public health, you've got to look at the whole picture.
What's the damage, the collateral damage, compared to what we're preventing?
And the long-term damage, in terms of care, in terms of, yeah.
Our world is in a crisis with cancer.
What's that about?
That's immunity.
It's our immune system that prevents cancer, and if you're affecting your immune system
negatively through toxins, toxins, toxins, and vaccines are a piece of the toxic puzzle,
as well as too many, too soon, too fast against an immature immune system, triggers shifts,
maybe we've got something there as well.
I would love to see the CDC and the World Health Organization take their focus off of
just preventing infectious diseases.
That was a century ago.
Shift it to health and wellness.
If we shift our focus to health and wellness, we can change the world.
Thankfully, we now have a tool to do that.
Your book, The Vaccine-Friendly Plan.
Dr. Paul Thomas, as I mentioned before, it's really an honor to sit here and speak with
you, and it's so great to see this manifest over years of working and knowing you.
I commend you.
Keep up the great work.
As we kind of part ways here, you have a wonderful YouTube channel, which we'll have below this
video if people are watching this, and in the show notes on iTunes.
People want to connect with you.
What website should they connect with you on?
I have a website, DrPaulApproved.com.
It's relatively new, but this is the website I'm going to grow to be able to connect with
patients, and just people who are interested.
I'm already putting up the references from this book, will be available in as much as
I'm able to do so legally, so that people can actually read the abstracts that are referenced
in this book, and in my reference section, will have tabs developed for each disease
that can be possibly prevented by vaccines.
There will be tabs on aluminum, on mercury, HPV, any vaccine.
I'm going to work real hard to keep those up to date, and they'll have the most recent
articles at the top, going all the way down through the literature.
That will be a free resource available, and there will be other resources available on
that website as we develop it.
I'd say that's probably your best bet.
For people who are just curious about my practice, and please, I am not looking for patients,
we're slammed, but DrPaul.md is my regular practice, and there's just a boatload of information
there as well.
DrPaulApproved, and I think there's, what, 50 pages of references here?
It's over 407 pages, I counted.
Over 400 pages.
Yup.
Over 300 references, most of them peer reviewed studies.
I think this could be a very important book.
Keep up the great work.
It was an honor to speak with you again.
Thank you so much.
It's an honor to be able to talk with you.
Fantastic Take care