
Watch/Listen:
RumbleYouTubeSpotifyApple Podcasts
#102 – The Cholesterol Myth And The Dangers Of Statins And More With Dr Zoe Harcombe
In this conversation with Zoe, we explore the journey to discovering optimal health through diet and lifestyle choices. We highlight the importance of avoiding processed foods, restricting eating windows, prioritizing sleep, and following a high animal fat and protein diet.
The conversation challenges the conventional calorie theory and exposes the lack of evidence behind dietary guidelines. Zoe also debunks the cholesterol myth and talks about the dangers of statins.
Dr Zoë Harcombe is a Cambridge University graduate with a BA and MA in economics/maths. Zoë enjoyed a successful career in global blue chip organisations (including big food and big pharma) before leaving corporate life in 2008 to pursue her passion – diet and health.
Zoë was awarded a PhD in public health nutrition in 2016. Her thesis was a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence for the introduction of dietary fat restrictions. She has over 20 peer-reviewed publications challenging government dietary guidelines.
This is a fascinating conversation and I hope you enjoy it.
Chapters
00:00
Discovering the Journey to Health
02:24
Food as Medicine
03:20
The Flawed Calorie Theory
06:43
The Origins of Dietary Guidelines
09:05
The Lack of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines
12:24
The Influence of the Food Industry
16:31
Conflicts of Interest in Dietary Advice
19:36
The Manipulation of Food Choices
25:10
The Role of Deficiency in Disease
31:11
The Influence of the Fake Food Industry
36:20
The Manipulation of Dietary Guidelines
41:04
Conflicts of Interest in Healthcare
45:07
The Dangers of Convenience Foods
45:37
The Impact of Conflicts of Interest
46:06
Corruption and Conflict of Interest
47:01
Honesty in Corruption
48:20
Blind Trust in Government
49:16
Finding Your Tribe
49:46
Conflicts of Interest in COVID-19 Response
51:31
Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Committees
52:27
Outsourcing and Regulatory Capture
56:24
Manipulation of Data and Numbers
58:20
Long-Term Consequences of Lockdowns
01:00:13
Digital Vaccine Passports
01:01:32
Influence of Pharmaceutical Companies
01:02:59
Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Committees (JCVI)
01:04:53
Composition of Vaccine Committees
01:07:07
Flaws in Vaccine Trials
01:08:49
Manipulation of Crime Scene
01:13:01
Flawed Vaccine Efficacy
01:17:16
Rushed Vaccine Rollout
01:20:29
Impact of Vaccines on Virus Mutations
01:22:53
Flawed Vaccine Studies
01:25:35
Manipulation of Data and Risk-Benefit Analysis
01:30:18
Adverse Effects and Gaslighting
01:31:47
Questioning the Need for Vaccines
01:32:43
Indoctrination in the Medical Field
01:33:14
The Concerns about Lockdowns and Vaccines
01:34:37
The Influence of the Pharmaceutical Industry
01:35:37
The Mislabeling of Vaccines
01:36:03
The Importance of Proper Studies and Trials
01:36:30
The Shift in Vaccine Skepticism
01:37:00
The Role of Social Media in Vaccine Propaganda
01:37:30
The Lack of Accountability in the Medical Field
01:38:55
The Flawed Concept of Cholesterol and Statins
01:41:16
The Importance of Questioning Everything
01:43:05
The Origins of the Cholesterol Myth
01:44:47
The Role of Cholesterol in the Body
01:46:41
The Influence of Ancel Keys and the Fat Myth
01:49:50
Understanding Lipoproteins and Cholesterol Transport
01:51:44
The Impact of Statins on the Body
01:54:00
The Sinister Side of Statins and the Pharmaceutical Industry
01:55:26
The Indoctrination of Doctors and Medical Students
01:56:15
The Importance of Questioning Medical Advice
01:57:42
The Need for Critical Thinking and Skepticism
01:58:42
The Manipulation of Information by the Media
02:00:34
The Importance of Remembering the Madness of COVID-19
02:02:57
The Lack of Accountability in the Medical Field
02:05:13
The Need to Diagnose and Address Societal Problems
02:08:05
The Importance of Trusting Your Own Judgment
02:09:01
Advice for Future Generations
Website Zoe Harcombe
X Zoe Harcombe X
Books Zoe Harcombe Books
Ahmad (00:00.15)
do it for? Where are we? We can talk two hours easily. I know we could. You see the stuff I sent through. Now there’s stuff to stay away from. There’s no point going into geopolitics or any of that at the moment. Listen, listen, we’re not going to go into geopolitics. I’ve started recording by the way. Okay, okay, brilliant. So basically, look, I’m very late to the party. So we hark them. Very late. You know, I’ve been on this journey of like discovering my health.
in the last five years. But I haven’t really been looking at what other people are saying and doing. My wife and I have kind of like stumbled over things ourselves and just finally kind of figured out what works and what doesn’t. And it’s really quite simple for us. It was just avoid all processed foods, restrict our eating window to, you know, now it’s four hours and fast every day.
and every day, no exception, optimize and prioritize sleep, and have a really high animal fat and protein diet, and minimize processed carbohydrates, and minimize sugar intake. And that has been absolutely fantastic for us, okay? And we’ve just figured it out. And what we’ve been shocked at is that so much of what I was taught in med school, what my wife and I, and she’s a doctor too, have learned.
for the TV, news, media, whatever, is absolute bullshit. And it’s absolutely shocking, you know, how it’s the complete opposite to what actually is good health. And that’s where, you know, then I kind of like stumbled across you and the statins. Now, subsequently, having done some research and looked into what you’ve done, I mean, you’re a legend. Oh, thank you. No, I mean this, you are.
an absolute legend. And the problem is I don’t actually know what to talk about. I’m normally, I have a guest on, I want to talk about a specific thing with you. I could talk to you about almost anything because you’ve covered everything practically. Anything diet and health and particularly the diet aspect of health. That’s what I mean. So don’t talk to me about your field of orthopedics or whatever. No, but I mean exactly about diet and health. But for me, food is medicine. Food is health.
Ahmad (02:24.562)
Everything starts with what you eat and then you’ve got your mind, your body, everything else falls into place. So yeah, I mean, what you cover and what you talk about is pivotal for health. And it’s incredible that you’ve been doing this for such a long time. Like you, you’re like a trailblazer. I feel like I’m just catching up. Like I’m still miles behind you. So it’s a real honor. I mean that. Oh, thank you. Do you know, and I beat myself up for things as well. So
I was a calorie counter when I was a teenager, as most females were of that generation. And I remember when I first worked out that that, do you remember that thing where they say one pound equals three and a half thousand calories? So to lose one pound of fat, you need to create a deficit of three and a half thousand calories, which is seven times 500 calories. So that would lose you a pound a week, or if you cut back by a thousand calories, then you lose two pounds a week. I could have slayed that at the time. And it was about another 15 years before I’m like, hang on a sec.
And then I went looking into it. One pound doesn’t even equal three and a half thousand calories. Yeah. It just doesn’t. And I could go back into some papers from sort of the early 1900s to show that is the case. So first of all, that bit is wrong. And then you will not lose a pound of fat. If you cut back by three and a half thousand calories, you just don’t. And I say at conferences sometimes I say, so if the calorie theory held, I eat quite a lot at the moment. So I could easily cut back by a thousand calories a day and that would lose me two pounds a week.
I weigh, I don’t know, not even 110 pounds. So at the end of the year, I’d be half a stone. And people laugh at the conferences and I’m like, why are you laughing? I’ve just slayed the calorie theory, which you have all been doing. All you women started, particularly women, you started calorie control diet on a Monday, by Tuesday you were so hungry, you wanted to kill yourself. And then you lapsed and we can go into all of why that happens, but it just doesn’t work. The idea that the body goes,
Oh, there you go. I’m just a cash machine for fat. You wanted to lose a pound of fat. You cut back by three and a half thousand calories. There you go. There’s a pound of fat. There are so many reasons why that doesn’t happen. Do you know what? What you’ve just demonstrated to me is you’re really good at math. That was my subject. The way you can count everything and everything is just amazing. But yeah, you’re, uh, you know, an expert in math and research. And you know, you’ve done nutrition as well. I mean, you’ve got the scientific background.
Ahmad (04:49.462)
And one of the reasons why it’s great having you here is, you know, I’m not going to say dumb orthod, but one of my listeners wrote to me and said, please don’t say that you wouldn’t say that to your son, even if it’s just, you know, you’re just saying, and I was a bit of a self kind of like just, you know, it’s taking the mick of myself. I’m not dumb and people know I’m not dumb, but you’re, you’re super smart when it comes to this kind of stuff. And I’ll be honest with you, it’s not my area of expertise, all the, you know, all the stuff that you’re talking about. I know a little bit about a lot of things.
but I don’t know a lot about these specific areas, which is why it’s great having you here. But I’ve been guilty of this. I feel really embarrassed to say, I used to say to people, well, it’s really simple to my patients, what goes in comes out, you know, you just need to like stop eating so much. And I was like, and they’d be like, I don’t eat that much. And I’d be like, yeah, liar in my head. And I was guilty of that. And I should have known better because just looking in the mirror,
and looking at my own labs and my blood results, I was type two diabetic and I was exercising, I thought I was really careful with my food, but I wasn’t. So it was clearly, and I used to say this stupid mantra, eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, dinner like a pauper, have your little snacks, and all this graze all day like a little cat, just garbage, garbage that you’ve been indoctrinated with.
I mean, one of the reasons why I like having guests like you on the show is I’m just so angry. I’m not angry, angry like, like ranting angry, but just like really upset with the government and our health authorities because the evidence is so obvious that what they’re telling us is not right. So the question is why are they giving us this terrible information other than profiting large corporations and making us sick?
because I can’t believe it’s anything other than that. It’s not a simple case of, oh, we didn’t know, and oh, it’s just a bit confusing. It’s pretty closed door, black and white. Like this stuff that they’re recommending for us is not good. I can trace that back. That ended up being my PhD. So my fascination started to be around obesity. And when I was at Cambridge, I mean, I didn’t.
Ahmad (07:12.83)
You can remember one overweight kid in your school. Yeah. Um, and then you get up to Cambridge and pretty much still everyone looking around was all slim and healthy, but it was around the time that obesity started taking off and if you look at the data, you look at the U S and there’s just this amazing NHANES. Where would you say that? Late eighties, early nineties? Yeah. So in the U S it was, you look at the NHANES chart and there’s a little bit between 1976 and 1980.
And obesity was higher in the US than it was in the UK. It was sort of trundling along at a few percent. UK obesity was 2.7% in 1972 for both men and women. So ours was really not off the ground. And then theirs just takes off like an aeroplane. It looks like that inflection on the mic thing there. And so I wanted to understand what happened then, because for something to change, something must change. So what happened then? And the…
A narrative would have you believe that we started eating more and doing less, and that is just not the case. And in fact, if you look at the evidence, we actually did the opposite. So if you look at our confessed calorie intake over the last 30 to 40 years, it’s gone down. And I believe that. I do think people are eating less than our parents generation were. And I do think people are doing more. Nobody ever cycled past you or jogged past you.
when you were kicking around on a street corner when you were younger. They just didn’t. Nobody was going to the gym. Nobody was going to yoga classes, Pilates, aerobics classes. We just didn’t do it. People were doing normal active lives. They were carrying their own shopping. They were moving around their workplace and maybe playing a sport at the weekend. So we have not eaten more and done less. We’ve done quite the opposite. So I was really curious to understand what happened at that time. And my hypothesis, and I then tested this in my PhD,
was that we changed our dietary guidelines at that time, and we did. So the dietary guidelines first changed over in the US in 1977, they were then embedded in the dietary guidelines for Americans, which first came out in 1980, and then they get repeated every five years. So we’re up to the 2025 ones coming in soon. And then the UK followed the US, and so we introduced new dietary guidelines in 1983. And what happened with those dietary guidelines? So I think it was…
Ahmad (09:34.942)
honest, but wrong at the beginning, but I think it’s been conflicted since. So we just quickly cover that off. So in the beginning, Senator McGovern, he’d been asked to, he was a failed presidential candidate and kind of like Al Gore, they then want to make their mark in a different way. So he was doing some research. How could we feed impoverished America because people were not getting the nutrients that they need. So he did that. And then he’s like, Oh, I quite like this, but I now want to look at obesity.
and I want to look at what everybody should be eating, not just people who don’t have access to great food. And he took it upon himself to come up with these dietary guidelines. And he’d just been on a Pritikin bootcamp before he held this very important Senate inquiry in 1977. So he’d been on a low-fat bootcamp and he was probably eating a bit of rubbish before, so he probably felt better. It was probably a Whole Foods low-fat, felt better, and then thought, right, low-fat is the way.
And at that time, and we don’t want to go into the history, but you can trace it back to the early 1900s, the work of Russian pathologists, and Salkis throughout the 1950s, there was a theory emerging that dietary fat and dietary cholesterol were implicated somehow in heart disease. And they’d only looked at men and it was a really weak association. There was no causation, but they had this idea in their head. Now, the way I explain it to people, and this was a penny drop moment for me, imagine a little…
pie in front of your little circle. There’s only three things that we eat, protein, fat, and carbohydrate. Trust me, I can give you the show notes, protein tends to be about 15 to 20% of any natural diet. Vegetarian, it doesn’t matter, it’s about 15 to 20%. And they came up with a guideline around 1977 to 1980 to say you should have no more than 30% of your calories in the form of fat. Now picture your little pie, you’ve got 15% protein, you’ve now got 30% fat.
By definition, you’ve now got 55% carbohydrate. So that’s where the high carbohydrate, low fat diet was born. And at the time they didn’t know that 55% carbohydrate was healthy. They didn’t even know that it was safe, but it was just the consequence of having demonized fat. And that’s the origin basis of our Eat Well plate today, the pyramids, all the stuff that’s got a massive carbohydrate on it, hardly any fat, hardly any animal foods. That’s…
Ahmad (11:59.202)
where its roots come from. And that’s a while. So flawed studies, really weak, poor studies, now dictating decades of health advice. Yeah, so my PhD basically asked the question. It said, okay, that’s what happened then. I’m gonna pretend I’m the dietary. Sorry, can I just check? Cause that study you showed, it was only on two and a half thousand men. Yeah, so yeah, this is what I’m gonna go into now. So. Yeah.
Um, what I showed, I, I said, right, I’m going to pretend I’m the dietary committee at the time, so I’m going to go back to 1983 in the UK and 1977 in the U S and I’m going to say what evidence was available then, and I’m going to use a technique that they didn’t have them because there’s a technique called meta analysis, systematic review, which is when you pull everything together. And that sort of came into our, um,
evidence literature around sort of 1976. So yeah, they could have been using it, but they didn’t. So I said, right, what were all the randomised controlled trials available then when you actually do a dietary intervention? And what were all the population studies then? Because we had things like Framinum and the Sydney Diet Heart Study, the Oslo Study. We had a few of those around at the same time. Sorry, Sydney was an RCT and Oslo was an RCT, but we had things like the Seven Countries Study.
Framingham was obviously a big one. So I said, right, what was the evidence available at that time? And if I had pulled it all together then, would it support the introduction of those dietary guidelines? And it didn’t. So the first paper went nuts. It was published in 2015. For a PhD paper, it was just, it went berserk. I mean, it hits Sydney morning,
Ahmad (13:47.234)
because it basically said we should not have introduced those dietary fat guidelines. So where you got the two and a half thousand thing from the pooling of the most important evidence, which was the intervention trials where they actually said, right, you hundred people go on this diet and you hundred go on this diet, and then we’ll see what happens. Those six trials only involved two and a half thousand people. They were all men. So women had never been studied at the time. Cause they’re not that important.
No, because we have, we have hormones and things. So we get in the way of, of trials. So they never study us. So two and a half thousand men only, and they were all sick. They’d already had a heart attack. So we were not even studying healthy people. Wow. Six trials. None of the trials concluded that we should do anything. And in fact, they did the opposite. So the low fat trial that was conducted in London, one of the final sentences of the paper says,
a low fat diet has no place in the treatment of myocardial infarction, which is heart attack. And then the Sydney diet heart study, and I think it was the Oslo study, a couple of them said, we’re really quite concerned about the potential toxicity of our intervention, which was the vegetable oil intervention. So it’s like you controls, carry on with your eggs and your butter, and you intervention, let’s switch you to sort of spread.
alternatives to what time frame was this again? So these trials were conducted in the 1960s and 1970s by and large. So the final trial was actually not available. It was in 78. The Sydney one was published. So that would have been available to the UK committee coming up with their guidelines, but it wouldn’t have been available to the US. So I kind of really looked at time scales and I looked in detail.
Zippo zilch zero evidence for introducing those guidelines. So in the second part of the PhD, I said, okay, that was 1980, let’s bring it up to date. So I was doing my PhD 2015, 2016. So I looked at the evidence available in 2016 and there was no more then than there was back in 1980. So I looked at any trials that had been done between 1980 up until 2016. And there’s things like the
Ahmad (16:03.75)
women’s health initiative, huge study of just women. So at last we’re getting women added into the mix. You’ve got the Minnesota coronary survey. And again, pool all of those in meta-analysis, zero evidence for introducing those guidelines whatsoever. So there’s no evidence base. I wanna move on, but I mean, part of me is just thinking, how the hell did they even get it authorized? Like how, without.
any evidence, how did they push it ahead and make it, this is science, this is facts. Cause it’s still there, all that garbage and it’s actually got worse. I mean, can I just quickly say, you know, you said 15% of the diet is protein. What about if you’re on a carnivore diet? It still doesn’t go that much higher to, to get protein levels anywhere up near 30%, let alone 40%. You have got to do some really unnatural things.
So you’ve got to be having skinless chicken breasts, not even the rest of the chicken, white fish, no oily fish, protein shakes. You’ve really got to be doing some pretty unnatural things. Protein is in every single food that we eat other than sucrose, table sugar, and oils.
and it’s in everything else. So people are like, oh, you’ve got to make sure you get enough protein. You’ve got protein in lettuce, you’ve got protein in apples. Now it’s not the protein that the body wants. The body wants the protein that comes in the form that it’s found in animals, but you do get protein in everything. So unless you’re doing something really out of the ordinary, I mean, take, I know Sean Baker has now gone keto rather than carnivore, so he’s trying to watch his fat intake.
Um, but he doesn’t cut fat off steak. He’s not having, I love the fat and you need to eat the fat. It’s really weird. It’s really weird. I didn’t like the fat before. And this is when I was fat. So when I was fat, I was like, Oh, I don’t want to eat that. I’d want the bread roll. I’d want the pizza. I want the, the bowl of cereal. I was waking up in the middle of the night with cravings and, you know, almost like an asleep walking state.
Ahmad (18:11.806)
I would find myself eating a bowl of cereal. I’d sometimes wake up in the morning and say, oh, who had that cereal? And my wife was like, you, you idiot. At three o’clock. I was having like bowls of sugar basically at three in the morning. But if I looked at fat on a steak, it repulsed me. I’m not eating that. I don’t want to get fatter. And now I don’t crave the sugar. But when I see that fat on a steak or a lamb chop, oh God, I want it. Isn’t it funny how your body changes?
It’s got an appetite name, hasn’t it? Yeah. In fact, it doesn’t help because you, you see dietary fat and you think body fat. That’s not the same thing. It’s not going to make you fat. Ironically of all the macronutrients, that’s probably the one when it has no impact on glucose and it has no impact on insulin, which is quite interesting because protein doesn’t impact glucose so much, but it does have an impact on insulin and of course carbohydrate has a massive impact on both insulin and glucose. So fat doesn’t make you fat.
It doesn’t. I mean, if you eat it with carbohydrate, yes, it does. Um, and, and this is, I mean, when you said earlier on, you kind of come at it from a different way. And it’s because, um, because I just ask why all the time I’m such a skeptic, I’m such a natural skeptic, which is why we can get into other things of what’s sort of happened over the last three years, but I just don’t trust anything. So, um, especially not the government, especially not the government.
So things like, you know, I’d look at their eat well menus. I always put that in inverted commas, you know, the eat well plates. No, I know. And you’ve got, and you’ve got your own, the big, the eat badly plate and the badly guide. But I kind of look at food and then when I realized everything I had been told was wrong and I was actually getting my, you know, I myself was craving carbohydrates and podgea a lot podgea than I am now. And all I wanted to eat was carbohydrate. If somebody said,
Do you want a salmon steak or do you want a bowl of cereal? Bowl of cereal every time. So I really wanted to understand what food is. So I drew this little diagram. So it’s like, okay, at one end you’ve got pure carbohydrate, which is table sugar. That’s the only one. And then the other end you’ve got pure fat, which is your oils, coconut oil, olive oil. It’s not even butter because butter has got a little bit of protein. And then a ghee would, I don’t know, to be honest. It might be- Beef tallow? Tallow is-
Ahmad (20:33.49)
No, it’ll probably have protein in as well because it’s basically what’s left over when you’ve done a beef joint, isn’t it? Yeah. Um, so I think it is just the pure kind of refined oils. I mean, people rave about olive oil, but to me that’s still, it’s processed olives. What you were supposed to be eating was the olives. So I’m a little bit unsure about all of those. So you’ve got those at the extremes, but then everything else has got protein in. Um, but then what fascinated me, and I kind of looked at this one day and this is when I started writing diet books.
It’s like nature, we should be eating real food, which is how you opened. Nature, fascinatingly provides carb proteins or fat proteins almost all the time. So think about it. So your carb proteins are legumes, grains, vegetables, fruits, things that vegans would eat, okay? They’ve got carb and they’ve got protein in, and then your fat proteins are the things that the vegans don’t eat. So that’s your meat, fish, eggs and dairy.
And then you’ve got these really unusual foods in the middle. You’ve got your nuts and seeds and kind of avocado is avocado and nut, whatever. It’s in that middle bit where nature has put carb, fat and protein all in quite good measure. And when we carbon fat together, we can’t stop. And so the only thing that we find more ish in real food is that carb fat combo. So if I say to you, right, you can have dry crackers.
or you can have cheese, you’ve got a limit on both of those. The minute I say to you, you can have oat biscuits and cheese together, you’ve got no limit. It just is. And as soon as I realized that, it’s like, oh my goodness. So the fake food companies have worked that out. They’ve worked out that the fat carb combo is irresistible. We want it and it’s moreish. We want more of it. So everything they make is that car fat combo. Think about it, ice cream, cakes, cookies, donuts.
And they put students in labs, I’ve seen it. I was on the board of Cardiff Met. I’ve seen their fake food lab where they pay the students to sit in there and they put through the hatch, there’s the latest creation. Is it at the bliss point? Give us the mouth feel. What was the aftertaste? Did you love it? Did you want more of it? Tweak the recipe, come back again. I mean, they get it just, my son-in-law calls Dunkin’ Donuts crack cocaine.
Ahmad (22:51.254)
you know, he had one and then he wanted another one immediately. So I’m not going to have one because I don’t, I don’t want to go down that drug route again. So they, they’ve worked that out. So I just kind of see food differently to, to how it gets presented by the government. And then you look at that eat badly plate and it started off as 55% carbohydrate, 30% fat. And then they revised the eat badly plate and they made it the eat badly guide in 2016.
And that’s when I discovered the conflicts of interest, but they published some recommended menus at the time. And then they took them down really quickly, but I grabbed them and then I analyzed them and I got somebody else independent to analyze them. And we came up with exactly the same thing. They were like 65 to 70% carbohydrate. They were around 15% fat. So then I ran them through a nutrient calculator. They were deficient in everything. They were deficient in all fat soluble vitamins because there just wasn’t enough fat.
They were deficient in your B vitamins, particularly 12. There wasn’t enough animal foods, deficient in calcium, deficient in zinc, deficient in vitamin D, deficient in everything that makes us healthy. Do you know, talking about deficiency, and this is how also I’ve had this massive paradigm shift and how I look at disease. We are meant to be in a state of ease. And so dis-ease is when you’re not. And when you go for med school, when you’re taught the traditional Western medicine,
There’s something fundamentally wrong with you. There’s a genetic thing going on. There’s a family history going on. Or quite often, we don’t know. It’s idiopathic. We don’t know why you’ve got this problem. It just is. Don’t ask why. Here’s a tablet. And the tablets are quite often blockers. They block your normal metabolic pathway, your hormonal pathway, your enzyme pathway, whatever it might be. And when you think about it,
That’s really an upside down way of looking at things, blocking your normal physiological pathway. But it’s that mentality that there’s something wrong with you and your body. And so we need to block it. And so whether, you know, beta blockers, SSRIs, statins, you know, whatever you want to look at, it’s always blocking proton pump inhibitors, you know.
Ahmad (25:10.21)
But the way I look at it, so much of disease is actually about deficiency and all those things that you just mentioned like magnesium, methylfolate, vitamin D, zinc. You know, so what we’re doing is we’re getting lots of people eating lots and consuming lots of food, which are really fundamentally nutritionally depleted. And that’s then what causes the problems we’re seeing with leaky guts, with, you know,
autoimmune conditions or mental health problems or whatever it might be. It’s the deficiency. And where does that come from? Poor food. Bad dietary advice. So am I right in thinking also that I read somewhere that basically the American big food industry, which is related very closely to big agra, which depletes the soil and, you know, rapes the land of nutrients. Um, they, they fund and pay like the American
diet association. I mean, we’re talking about billions of dollars. Am I right about that? Yeah. Um, yeah, I remember doing a presentation over in the U S a couple of years ago and talking about the American dietetic association conflicts. That’s it. Um, Australian dietetic association, the same, the British, the British ones, I find particularly heinous, the British dietetic association and what we are focused on, um, infant formula. So they’re gold sponsors of companies like Abbott nutrition, Danone.
I can’t remember the other infant formula. So the dieticians are getting into mums as soon as they’ve had the baby. And then apparently they show them charts saying, oh, look, your baby should be at the 90th percentile. Well, back to maths, you can’t all be at the 90th percentile. The whole point of the 90th percentile is you’re above 90% of other people. So they show mums the 90th percentile and they say, well, that’s where your baby should be. And then the mums panic, particularly the first.
Mums to the first borns and like, oh gosh, what should I be doing? Oh, well, they’re obviously not getting enough breast milk. So I think you should be switching to infant formula. And infant formula is basically baby milkshake. It’s got soy in it, which is a hormone disruptor. It’s got sugar in it, which is something that’s going to make you addicted to sugar. So if you take a toddler that’s been breastfed and then…
Ahmad (27:30.238)
I know real food parents. I’ve got one in my head at the moment, a guy called Sam Feltam. He runs the public health collaboration in the UK. And I can think of his two little ones, breastfed as long as they possibly can be. And then when you start mixing the breast milk with the baby food, basically you just take what you’re having for dinner, which might be lamb and vegetables, and you mince it up, you puree it up, and you give it to the baby. So the baby’s then getting real food.
and you give that child something sweet when they’re a toddler and they’re just not interested because their taste buds have been formed correctly. But you then compare that with the toddler at the nursery who’s had the infant formula and got addicted to the baby milkshakes. 100%. You know, I was telling my wife this other day and she was like, 100%. You know, so I do a lot of the childcare even more now since I’ve been suspended. But you know,
Um, you know, like normally like three days of the week, I get up and I did, you know, breakfast pack lunch, drop them off at school, pick them up. And when I’m at pickup, it blows my mind. Every parent almost, I mean, not everyone, but almost, I mean, the vast majority handing their kids these carbohydrate snacks, chocolate bars, rice, crispy bars, whatever they are, you know, like just some kind of fast food processed sugary thing.
And it’s like the first thing and the kids, I’m telling you right now, you know, we’re in a quite affluent area, you know, it’s a nice place. You know, the parents aren’t, you know, they’re middle class, they’re educated, but they’re giving all the kids these artificial food substances and the kids are wild and they’re crazy and they’re on the floor yelling, screaming. And. And I just think, what the hell has happened to society? This isn’t right. And then I hear also quite often
Okay, do you guys want to go for a treat to McDonald’s? A treat. Yeah. Like that’s like, when, you know, fast food to me is poison. When do you offer your kids poison as a treat? Yeah. That’s the way I look at it. Yeah. Do you give your kids packed lunches or anything? Yeah. So we’ve had some real food parents say, I sent my child off to school and in the lunchbox, I put, I don’t know, boiled eggs and cheese, some cucumber slices, pepper strips.
Ahmad (29:51.886)
um, real food majoring on the things that provide nutrients. And they sometimes get a little note back from the school saying, where was the starchy carbohydrate? You know, at least half the box should be starch. Wow. Yeah. And they write notes back saying, um, you know, if you want to have a debate about nutrition, I’ll come into the school, but if not leave my child the hell alone. Wow. Um, no, I mean, thankfully our kids actually even said, you know, um, we did.
get them on school dinners purely because our friends are having school dinners and they want to sit next to their friends. And literally like a week later, they’re like, can we have packed lunch again? The food’s disgusting. And my sister, my daughter, you know, she was on like four or five, like reception and everything, you know, really quite young. And the way she turned up her nose at it, she was like, daddy, I don’t want to eat that. It’s disgusting. I was like, good, she knows.
term what we should eat on its head. So the government, you kind of know now why we ended up with the high carb low fat advice because they demonized fat. They thought they were going to do the right thing by heart disease. They were really only caring about heart disease in men. So, um, lots of wrong reasons, but that’s why they ended up demonizing fat. And I think where we are at the moment, I think the conflicts have come in since. So
Um, I think it very much suited the fake food industry at the time when they realized that Senator McGovern was going the low fat route and he had a vegetarian, um, Nick Motten who was writing up the report from the Senate committee. Um, so they had sort of integral biases even at that time. But I mean, imagine the fake food industry. Whoa, guys, they’re going to come out recommending cereal for breakfast instead of eggs and sandwiches for lunch instead of, um, you know, tuna salad or something like this, this is, this is manna from heaven. So.
The fake food companies were then very happy. They were involved at the time, but since they have become more and more embedded in our dietary advice. So when the badly plate became the badly guide, and there’s a little funny story just here, so why did that change? There was a, so my paper had come out in 2015 saying the low fat advice was completely wrong and it was picked up by a lot of news programs at the time. And then radio for program, like the today food program kind of thing.
Ahmad (32:08.574)
wanted to do a feature on it. So they did a feature. They interviewed me. I think I seen Mel Hotra was on there as well. And we were all saying this high sugar, low fat is just really terrible. And they had Alison Tedstone on who was the head of nutrition for public health England. And the presenter was called Adrian. And I’m trying to remember his surname, but anyway, you can look it up. And he said to her, why is there Coca Cola on the plate? And she said, no, there isn’t. He said, yes, there is. And
You just kind of got the impression that she went back to the office and she’s like, why is there Coca-Cola on my plate? And she had no idea. And I think she then just put together some people and said, right, whatever happens, it’s now going to be called a guide, not the eat badly plate, but that Coca-Cola needs to go. So she then appointed, so she’s head of public health. Sorry, eat well guide or eat badly. I call it eat bad. I can’t call it eat well. I know, I know, but just for the listeners to know.
They used to call it the Eat Well plate. They then changed it to the Eat Well guide in March 2016. But it’s Aurelian because it’s actually eat bad. It is so bad, yeah. So right, at the time I wanted to look at, well, who did this? Who put this together? Because I’d been following this plate for quite some time. So I’d written a book on obesity in 2009. And back then, the plate was the responsibility of the Food Standards Agency.
So there was this visual plate and I’d actually written to the food standard agency, being this annoying, you know, four year old again, saying, where do you get those proportions from? What are you trying to achieve with this? Because like a third of the plate is fruit and vegetables and a third of the plate is starchy foods. And you’ve got 15% that is quite frankly, junk with Coca-Cola. What’s going on here? And they said, oh, it’s, it’s kind of by visuals, but actually that ends up being by weight. Um, God, there’s so much to cover in there because the problem I then analyzed it and said, well, the problem with
saying you want a third of your plate by weight when it’s fruit and veggies, that ends up being 6% of your calories. Because they’re really low cal relative to everything else. And if you want a third of your plate in starchy foods, that ends up being 50% of your calories. So I was already saying to them, you don’t know what you’re doing, this is all going a bit wrong. So they came up with this new guide in 2016. So I wanted to look at who’s been in charge of it now. It’s not the FSA anymore. Who’s in charge? So Public Health England, I found out, had appointed a panel
Ahmad (34:28.974)
to revise the plate. And there were 11 members on the panel and eight of them were basically the fake food industry. Wow. And when I say the fake food industry, I don’t mean Coca-Cola, I mean the Institute for Grocery Distribution. So they represent a hundred, let’s say fake food organizations or the Association for Convenient Stores or the Food and Drink Federation. Think of any food and drink company from Starbucks to Nabisco to General Mills, Kellogg’s, whatever.
They were being represented by these organizations. There was also the British Nutrition Foundation, which is the who’s who of the fake food industry. Don’t be fooled by the name. So when we’re talking about fake food, just to clarify, just to clarify, we’re not talking about like the fake burger thing. We’re talking about everything that’s just processed. Everything ultra processed. So for example, one of the things I just find horrific as you go to a corner shop or convenience store or a petrol station, gas station, and you walk through the aisles, 99% of it is just garbage.
And it’s all in bright packaging to allure the kids. Shiny, shiny packaging. And it’s all, it’s really funny, whatever it is that you see, whether it’s chocolates or crisp, it’s the same ingredients just in different combinations and processing it. But the essential thing is sugar, refined sugar, seed oils, flour, and that’s it. And they just mix it up like it’s quite.
clever actually that you can make things that look very different superficially, or essentially the same, same ingredients. And there’s no whole foods. I mean, you’re lucky if you go into a gas station and you see some nuts, you know, like whole nuts or pistachios or cashew nuts, but it’s all processed food. And these people are the ones who are pushing the guides and telling the government what to do. And the government must know this.
They’re not stupid. Two quick things. And we honestly, we could talk for five hours. You remind me so many things from my past. So, um, first of all, one of the reps out of these 11 reps was the association for convenience stores. So exactly what you’ve just described, there’s nothing healthy in a convenience store. So they’re not going to be on that committee saying, Oh, I think we should really major on meat and fish and eggs and dairy cause they’re in the nutritious foods, they’re going to say, great, all the stuff that we’re putting on this, this plate, and they did take the Coca-Cola off the plate, but they
Ahmad (36:48.982)
put this sort of junk segment to the bottom left of the diagram. So if you look at the diagram over in the bottom left, which is where your eye is drawn to, they’ve got the crisps and the other junk and all that kind of thing. So they’re represented. And then the second thing you’ve reminded me of is I used to work for Mars Confectionery. Whoa. It’s coming out now. Confession time. Confession time. I have in the past worked for Big Food and I have worked for Big Pharma.
Um, not many people know Mars actually had an electronics division and that’s where I started out. So you probably don’t remember. I know I never used vending machines, but when you used to put your money in a vending machine, the product didn’t used to come out. So bang, yeah, kick it. We want to sell chocolate 24 seven. So we’re going to need to invent a good, um, vending machine. So they set up a division of Mars because Mars was just a company of very bright people set up a division, send, get me a.
machine that will work, you put your money in and your product comes out. And that’s how Mars electronics came about. So I joined the electronics division. Mars, by the way, is the best company on the world, in the world to work for. Just magnificent. But the products leave a little to be desired. Then I moved over to Mars confectionery and Mars move you around. So I started off in manufacturing, then I was in training, then I was in marketing. Then I moved to confectionery. I ended up in sales. And here’s where I learned what you’ve just described when you go into the gas station.
So seven out of 10 confectionery purchases are impulse. Seven out of 10 times you walk into the petrol station, you did not intend to buy anything. In fact, you’d said to yourself in the car, I am not getting anything. And you walk out with a double decker, or hopefully Mars would want you to walk out with a Mars bar. And I was responsible in my first job at Mars Confectionery, I was responsible for sales merchandising.
So you’re really dead work for the devil. Geez, Louise, how did I miss this one? I missed this one. I didn’t, I didn’t know this. Um, yeah, it’s quite funny, but then you do, it’s like the reform smoker, isn’t it? You’ve, you’ve seen it from the inside. So we had all these merchandises and I, my training, my induction was to go out with these merchandise and I loved the, and they were always women. And I loved them. They were just the nicest, funniest women in the world because their job is basically to walk into a cinema or into the petrol station or into the news agent.
Ahmad (39:11.814)
and to charm the assistant, the keeper, the manager, the shopkeeper, to put the Mars products where we wanted them, because it was such a science that when you look at that brown rack in the petrol station, Mars and Cadbury were doing the same thing and Roundtree was there at that time. They were doing the same thing. We were all working out where your eyes went on the brown racks. The next time you’re in there.
just have a look and see where your eyes go because we knew where your eyes were going. So we would- Kind of sinister. Oh, it was not left to chance. It was not by chance that you walked out of that petrol station with something in your hand that you did not intend to buy that was not good for you, that you just wasted 50p on or whatever it was at the time. And we knew we couldn’t just go to the shopkeeper and say, oh, look, you could only have Mars on there. So we want Mars and we want Snickers and we want M&Ms.
Maltesers and opal fruits. Yeah. Drug reps are the same. I remember like in the nineties in the medical student going in the ward and going to the meetings, we’d have audit meetings and morbidity and mortality or whatever. I was always sponsored by a drug company. I’d always be a very attractive sales rep. Yeah. You know, very pretty, very charming, flirtatious, you know, flirting with you. Yeah. And, um, yeah. And you felt very special and would you like a pen? Yeah.
all this good stuff. And it’s like, you know, even at the time I was like, this is well dodge. This is so dodgy. So I went from, I was head hunted by Smith Klein Beacham as it was at the time, just before the Glaxo takeover. Sorry, merger and all. And I was, I then went into HR as in the consumer healthcare business within Smith Klein Beacham. So we were looking after products like day nurse, night nurse, resolve, the hangover remedy, toothpaste, that kind of thing.
But obviously the farmer was the really big part of the Glaxo, the GSK business. And so we had just the same as the merchandising reps trying to sort out the confectionery bars, we had the drug reps who are exactly the people that you’ve just described, the ones going into charm, the doctors, the pharmacists, whoever’s going to prescribe the product, they want it to be their product.
Ahmad (41:24.802)
Now, here’s a really interesting thing. That bold gastroenterologist with a comb over suddenly feels very special with this young girl in her early 20s flirting with him. And they loved it. These old guys. I’m telling you right now, I used to watch them and I’m like, man, this is like disgusting. I’m just like, this is disgusting. It was. But do you know what? They don’t have to do that anymore. And I’ll tell you why they don’t have to do that anymore. Oh, it’s nice guidelines.
Nice guidelines. 100%. You’ve got it. No, listen, cause I watched it. I watched, I mean, I’m not going to lie. Part of me missy seeing these young attractive women. I’m joking. Like, so I, I’ve witnessed it as a medical student. I’ve witnessed it. All these girls coming in, you know, flirting with all these old guys and, you know, and then suddenly you’re seeing that the drug that was at that meeting is now being prescribed. You’ve got the low sec pen, you’ve got the low sec pen torch. You’ve got the whatever it is.
You know, and then suddenly as the years went by, you know, they disappeared. But now it was all nice guidelines. One of the things I’m always going on about is like centralization is evil and totalitarianism is evil and it comes in many shapes and forms. And it’s not just governmental. And one of the things with healthcare is this idea that me as a clinician can treat my patient the way I want to you differently to that patient has gone out the window because now you’ve got these guidelines.
which are anything but guidelines. Oh my God, I didn’t turn my phone off, that’s so bad. So basically they’re dictats. And the problem is, like you’ve just said, these guidelines are being generated by few individuals that can be manipulated, coerced, bought out, have conflicts of interest. And that’s what’s happened. That is 100%. And we have to spell it out for people listening because it came in 1999.
It was under Tony Blair’s watch that he was in from 97 to 2007. And it basically centralized everything. And then I’ve done a number of conflicts of interest is one of my other things that I’m fascinated by because, um, if something happens that shouldn’t happen, there’s only two reasons that happens. One, it’s incompetence and two, it’s, it’s malice, it’s conflict. And increasingly in the field of food and farmer, it’s, it’s conflict. So, um, you don’t even have to get.
Ahmad (43:41.038)
to those people anymore on the nice guidelines. If you go, and I’ve done this and the Sunday Times have covered it a couple of times, they’re not even interested anymore. It’s like, yeah, well, that’s how it is, that’s how it is. So you’ll have probably again, about 10 to 15, maybe 11 or 14 reps on any of the nice setting guidelines. And you go and look at their conflicts of interest. So I happen to, I think it’s an observer article. I looked at some conflicts of interest that had come out in some bariatric surgery recommendations.
and went through the panel and it’s bariatric surgeon, bariatric surgeon, bariatric surgeon, bariatric surgeon. It was- Unbelievable. And they justify it by saying, oh, well, we’re discussing bariatric surgery, so we should have bariatric surgeons on the panel. We’re discussing blood pressure, so we should have makers of blood pressure medication on the panel. It’s like, no, how about you put together a panel that’s got me and you and Claire Craig and Norman Fenton and Jonathan Engler or something and-
just people who can look independently at evidence who are not being paid. So, so I’ll come to, listen, I just want to quickly say something. I’ll cut this line that I really want to get out. I was going to say when you’re talking about convenience stores, when we were talking, convenience stores are not convenient to your health, right? They’re inconvenient to your health. So guys and girls listening, you know, just, just stay away from that shit. Just for God’s sake, stop looking at it as crack cocaine.
and start looking at it as literally poison, it’s poisoning, it’s killing you early, it’s gonna make you dribble in that care home and get dementia, so just stay away from that shit. Anyway, moving back, you know, conflicts of interest, it’s in every facet of our world, and it’s freaking me out, and this is why I talk about everything. This is why I say everything’s related. Take for example, our GMC, you’ll have people there who are on the vaccine panels, and they’re interested in vaccines, they’re our vice chairs or chairs of the vaccine, you know, commissions, whatever.
Say for example, if I question vaccine safety and then my fellow doctors say, he’s an anti-vaxxer and blah, and report me to the GMC. And then on the GMC, you’ve got people who have a vested interest in vaccines because that’s what they do, that’s their job. What do you think they’re gonna do? Do you think they’re gonna independently look at me and go, well, he’s got a point? Or are they gonna go, god damn the anti-vaxxer? And we’ve got these conflicts of interest.
Ahmad (46:06.814)
everywhere Zoe and I will say corruption here in the West is so sophisticated, so sublime. Everybody thinks, oh, the corrupt countries are like Nigeria or Pakistan or whatever because you know what? You go there and they want this envelope of cash or there’s a gun pointed at you saying, give me this. And sure, yeah, there’s corruption there and scams there. But I think we in the West have fine tuned the level of scams and
you know, corruption to such a high level. It’s, you know, the corruption is, you know, promotion. The bribes are promotions. They’re appointments. You bribe by appointments. So, you know, you get on all these directorships or chairman of this or whatever. And we need to sort out this corruption, this conflict of interest, because it’s gonna ruin us. I quite like those countries because I think they’re honest about it. And we’re not, so.
I remember I went to speak at a conference in Saudi Arabia a few years ago, which was an experience and the flight was cancelled that we were supposed to go back through. So we had to drive into Bahrain to try and get a flight back from there. And we got to the border and because I didn’t have a visa for Bahrain, it’s like, I’m just trying to get to your airport. I should have been flying to your airport. But yeah. And we kind of got to the
to the checkout or the border control or whatever. And they clearly didn’t want to let us through. And it’s like, I so want to get home. I just, you know, this country is not great for women. And we just gave the guy on the border control a shed load of dollars. And it’s like, okay, fair enough. If that’s what it takes, I just want to get home. You know, how much do you want? But it’s just so much more honest. I mean, I think people have been woken up- The dishonesty is honest. Yeah, that’s true. That’s how I like that.
But people have woken up to it in COVID. It’s like, you know, Matt Hancock got all of his mates supplying PPE and gave them all loads of contracts and everyone’s like, oh, that’s outrageous. It’s like, I think that’s been going on quite a long time but perhaps we didn’t spot it. So I mean, we need to go back to the food stuff but you remind me of like, like so many people I know I’m not gonna name names, but so many who just go like I hate the government, I hate the Tories. You know, the Tories, they’re killing, they’re killing old people with, you know, the heating and the bills and you know, people are
Ahmad (48:20.426)
are not able to warm their homes and the government is terrible. They’re, they’re evil. And then COVID comes along. Oh, the government tells us to do this. We need to do this. I’m like, hold on one second. All your life, you’ve just criticized the government and the Tories. Yeah, but they wouldn’t do this to us. You know, like seriously, like I don’t get that. I don’t, I don’t get how people can’t see through the bullshit. I was totally with you. It’s like you hate Boris Johnson and you’re doing exactly what he’s telling you. Right.
Like you’ve just bad mouthed him forever and what a buffoon he is, but then you take on board his advice, like it’s the most important thing ever. So before we go back to food, we do need to cover up a couple of conflicts. We’ll cause being interested in conflicts and not buying. Oh, can you see my cap by the way? What does my cap say? Uncaptured. I’m uncaptured, which is why many people hate me, but many people love me. I ain’t.
No shill. Be your own thing. So I got sort of known to some people who were, I mean, you found your tribe, didn’t you? We all found our tribe during lockdown. And it’s a good one. I remember somebody saying, speak your truth and you’ll find your tribe. And my truth was, I’m just not buying this. This just does not make sense. Right from the beginning, my very first blog, if you go on my site, there’s a blog from March 2020. And I’m saying, okay, guys, what’s a coronavirus? How many have we had? Let’s look at the early data.
I don’t think we need to be rushing out buying toilet rolls. I think we’re kind of overreacting a bit. But anyway, the two big conflicts of interest that I looked at the first one was the sage committee, which was the scientific advisory group on emergencies. Oh, by the way, I just forgot to tell Andy, this is the listeners are going to love this. You talked about toilet paper. I forgot to say our toilets, he’s broken.
I think he’ll work out. I hope he doesn’t end up in the floor. We’ve left my husband in the house with the two cats who are just going to actually, they’re just going to sit on him and then he’s not going to be able to move. The thing is that I just need to tell you my little, my little, my middle daughter swivels on the toilet seat and she keeps breaking it and it’s got to the point now where I cannot be bothered fixing it. I’m like, just stop swiveling on the toilet. He’s an engineer.
Ahmad (50:35.062)
It’ll be fine. It’ll be fine. Trust me. All right. Sorry for that. Right. So Sage, so, um, Sage, scientific advisory group on emergencies. And they had loads of people who were turning up. So what I did, and this was really methodical, but I went through all of their meetings and they were publishing the meeting minutes. I go through every, all the meeting minutes and I built a little spreadsheet. So I’d look at who was at each of the meeting minutes and the same names keep coming up again and again. So it’s Neil Ferguson.
Patrick Vallance, Chris Witte, all the usual suspects on the telly, John Edmonds, who’s been speaking to the inquiry recently. And there were about 20 people that just were coming up again and again and again. And they were clearly the ones who were having an influence. So you might have been invited to one meeting and then you didn’t appear again. So you clearly weren’t a key influencer. So I then looked at the conflicts of interest for the key influencers and I looked at the functions of the key influencers.
And 12 out of 20 of those key influencers had conflicts with COVID vaccines. Um, and I did that in inverted commas. Um, please tell me. So they had, they, they had an interest in, in basically locking us down until there was a vaccine. So, you know, if you remember, we were told three weeks to flatten the curve. Um, and, and people still think that was three weeks to save lives. Can you give me examples?
Yeah. And what is the conflict of interest? Yeah. I mean, I bought the table along with me. I want to hear this. I remember Einstein saying, have nothing in your head that you can look up. I treat my head like a desktop. So when I’m working on the Monday note, I put the things I need for that Monday note on the desktop. And then when I move on to the next Monday note, I take it off the desktop. So for a meeting like this, there’s certain things I want to have on the desktop. And then you’re putting other things on there. Like I used to work for Mars and Smith Klein Beach. And so it’s all coming in.
But some of the sage conflicts of interest. So, I mean, Neil Patrick Vallance, personal vaccine conflict, which was highlighted by the Telegraph at one point, 600,000 shareholding in a pharmaceutical company. Neil Ferguson, who of course was probably single-handedly the person who managed to get us into lockdown, March 2020, when Boris was gonna go the Sweden route and Neil was like, no, we must lock down, otherwise we’re all going to die. Report number nine or something? Yeah, exactly. And oh, what a…
Ahmad (52:56.374)
What a coincidence. Imperial College in the month that he published that report got $70 million from the Gates Foundation. Gates. And he’s got the audacity to say it was nothing to do with me and I wasn’t recommending it. You wrote this paper that wasn’t peer reviewed, wasn’t scientific, wasn’t referenced or anything. Like there was nothing. It was a report and that was used to justify lockdowns across the world. Yeah. If you could get the UK to go, US would follow.
and other countries would follow. So the UK was the critical one, which is why. What was, yeah, what was his conflict of interest? So he worked for Imperial. He’s at Imperial College, who are actually directly in the vaccine race. They were also taking part in various vaccine trials. And of course he received so much money from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Yeah, massive grants. Massive grants. Chris Witte, his connection with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
They’d received $46 million from the Gates Foundation. And they were also looking into vaccine research at the time. Because if you remember, they said, and this is important to remind people of it, it’s just three weeks to flatten the curve. And that wasn’t to save any, the only lives that they thought might be saved by that was we just can’t overwhelm the NHS. So we just can’t have too many people turning up at once. So you’re.
you’re still all going to get COVID was probably what they were thinking. But we just don’t want 60 million people to get COVID all at once because we’re not going to be able to cope within the NHS. So that was the whole idea of the lockdown. And then of course, it was never intended. You can look at some of the sage minutes and you can see that it was never intended to be three weeks. They knew that it was going to be a few months. They just went quiet at the end of the three weeks. They didn’t then say anything. It was just like, Oh, they won’t realize the three weeks is up.
That’s the point where I was having chickens. You know, it’s like, what is going on? What the frack? Why are we? Come on, say what the frack, my tagline. What the frack? Yeah. What the frack? Why are they not letting us out? One more time. What the frack? I was getting really concerned. And then it started to become clear. By May 20, it was clear.
Ahmad (55:01.718)
They plan to keep us in lockdown until they’ve got a vaccine to get us out. The next conflicts of interest. Graham Medley was also at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine vaccine centre. So was John Edmonds. He also had declared conflicts that his partner worked for GSK. Jonathan Van Tam. I mean, these are people off the telly, aren’t they? Worked in the pharmaceutical and vaccines industries from 2000. He’d been with Smith Klein Beacham. Hasn’t he been given an appointment somewhere? Yeah, yeah, yeah. He’s gone to Moderna.
So he recommends vaccines to the whole nation. Other countries do follow the UK. They do follow the lead of the US and the UK. So his influence was global. He ends up at Moderna. James Rubin was a nice one. He was, do you remember that paper? It’s in Laura, Bare Realities, Laura Dodsworth, brilliant book, State of Fear. So there was a quote in an academic paper.
where it said the public are not scared enough, we need to up the level of fear because it’s only with fear comes compliance. And James Rubin was one of the main players on the Sage committee and he was one of the co-authors of that paper. So one of my other observations about these key 20 influencers were there were four times as many modelers and behavioral manipulators as there were immunologists and there were no virologists whatsoever.
on the whole committee. So you just staffed it with wrong people. You’ve staffed it with people doing modeling and manipulating. It makes me listen. Can I be honest with you? I was speaking to, um, red pilf, um, pharmacist is Graham Atkinson. Um, there’s morning sending him voice notes. I was really upset going back to dropping off the kids at school. You know, I have a little bit of PTSD. I was walking through
I was remembering when we had to social distance, mask, kids, you know, from being masked, teachers masked, kids being told to stay at home, homeschooling. And I’m like, I’m still angry about that. I’m not, I’m not over it. So I’m with you. Okay. And it makes me really pissed off. And some people might be listening, don’t get angry. That’s not really useful. Whatever. Shut up. No.
Ahmad (57:22.818)
I am angry. Okay. And I look around me and I think how many people, how many parents feel like me? Because I don’t think many do. They’re just getting on with their life like nothing happened. And it’s like, why? Why are enough people not upset at this? What they did to us? Because the damage is still ongoing. It hasn’t gone away. The children.
are really delayed in their learning, they’re suffering from anxiety, their mental health crisis has gone through the roof. You know, this is a problem that’s gonna last a generation. It’s not, it wasn’t just in the past. People would think, oh, why don’t you just get over it? Like, you know, it’s not 2023. No, we’re gonna suffer this and we are. The cost of living is not big bad putin. Cost of living is cost of furlough and cost of COVID.
everything we are going through now and the next 20 years will have been because of the bullshit that happened to us. Sorry, I’m just, I just want to get that off my chest. Totally with you. I could have said exactly that. Yeah. And I just don’t want to, I just don’t, I don’t feel like I want to close the chapter in that I’m going to keep scratching that scab and keep the wound raw. Cause I think people need to bloody hear this. I think we do need to keep it raw and scratch it because if we don’t, we’re going to do it again.
Amen. And we know that they’re working on the international health regulations at the world health organization. And we know that the minute they get those through, which could be May 24, they will create another pandemic. They’re telling us already, there’ll be another one. Well, how come we didn’t have one for a hundred years. Yeah. And then suddenly we’re going to have one in a year’s time. Uh, that’s a little bit suspicious guys. Right. No, but for most people out there, they seem to think, okay, government told me, I don’t like bars, but you know, Rishi Sunak, whatever they say. I mean, so.
You got an unelected prime minister is now appointed an unelected foreign minister who’s not even an MP. I mean, you can make this up. It’s an absolute joke, but you know, going back to, you know, COVID and everything, you know, I am worried about it. You know, you’d mentioned the, who Ted Ross was up, talking about, you know, Oh, the European union had this great digital passport. We’ve now taken it over and there’ll be a world digital vaccine passport. Everyone listening, if that doesn’t scared the,
Ahmad (59:47.602)
Hegibis out of you. I mean, you should all be saying, what the frack? So to travel, you need a digital vaccine passport. You need to show you’re up to date. So just to clarify, all those doctors listening, because I know that by the way, do you know people are listening and spying on me and reporting on what I do and say and tweet? This is the state of the world that we live in. So all those people, yeah, you know what? I’m…
I hate the vaccines. I’d love to bring the whole industry down because I think it’s a sham and a fraud. Um, especially these vaccine, MRNA technology, which is complete fraud and dangerous and toxic. Um, I’m really worried because you know, if they’re going to say now you need this digital passport to travel, I’m afraid that a lot of people are going to do exactly what they did in the COVID years. Oh, we need to go on holiday. Everybody come on kids get grabbed up. Um, and people need to say, no, we’re not going to go.
along with this, it’s kind of scary, which is why we need to talk about this kind of stuff. But anyway, we need to move back to. I think, I think a lot more people will say no next time. So the way I look at it is look at how many people had jab one and fewer people had jab two and fewer again had jab three and fewer again have had jab six. And that for me is the starting point at the next time.
So I know they’ll up the level of fear and I know they’ll make all these kind of lies again. And they’ll say, oh yeah, there were some problems with the last one. And you know what? This isn’t good enough for me. I mean, Zoe, I, I don’t think it’s right that people who did this, people like the stage panel have got conflicts of interest, get away with it, get promotions, gongs, night herds, literally. And people who speak out and question it get punished.
and demonised and ridiculed, suspended, sacked, you know, struck off. It’s completely the wrong way around, isn’t it? You should be the one getting knighted and Van Tam or some of these guys should be the ones being, being struck off. I mean, just to look specifically at the vaccine conflict. So I did the same that I did for Sage. I looked at the JCVI, the Joint Committee on Vaccine Immunisation. Um, and I found out that the organisations that panel worked for, and that’s much more a fixed panel. It’s not.
Ahmad (01:02:01.994)
you go through all the meeting minutes and you find the top 20. Collectively, they worked for organizations that had received a billion dollars from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. And they were ruling on children getting vaccines in the UK. Can you tell me any names of the people that are on the panel? I think there’s someone called Andrew Pollard. I don’t know if I bought that one along actually. Oh, I did. Did I? That would be good, wouldn’t it? JCB conflicts of interest.
So the chair was Professor Lim Wee Chen. You’ve got Anthony Harden, Kevin Brown, Rebecca Cordray, Maggie Weirmuth, Matt Keeling, Alison Lawrence, Robert Reed. Most of these people are just not known, are they? No. Anthony Scott, Adam Finn, Fiona Van De Klees, Martin Potmar, Simon Kroll, Martin Williams, Professor Jeremy Brown. And they’re just not that well known. But if you go on my website and you put in JVCI,
Is that the right way? I know JCVI joint committee on vaccines and immunizations. You’ll see a number of those characters and you’ll see their individual conflicts of interest and a lot of them that they’re required to report conflicts of interest when they’re on a government committee and you’ll see when you go through some of those details, you’ll see that I document reported no conflicts of interest, but then they’ve got some direct connection to Pfizer. It’s like, how is that not a conflict of interest? Exactly. Yeah. Right.
What, what Cuckoo Land are you living in? So you just mentioned Anthony Hardin, Hardin. He’s, he’s a, he’s a member of the GM, GMC. Okay. General practitioner, professor of primary care at Nuffield is currently the deputy chairman of the joint committee on vaccination and immunization, which advises the UK government on vaccine policy. There you go. Formerly national clinical champion for child health.
Inaugural chairman of the WHO global network of national immunization and technical advisory groups. Holy moly. Right, so all of these people are in. They’re all in the club and we ain’t in it. Yeah. It’s as simple as that, isn’t it? And the average person has just got to realize that and say, okay, I can’t trust these guys anymore. Whether it’s Boris or Rishi or Kia.
Ahmad (01:04:24.77)
They’re all in the big boys clubs. Keir Starmer’s one of the forerunners of the trilateral commission in Europe. Rishi and David Cameron and all the rest of them are all on the World Economic Forum website. Can I just say, let’s go back a bit, right? To me, it makes sense that if you’re gonna have a committee that’s gonna decide on whether you should have vaccinations or not, they should be made up of people who are not involved in the industry. And who will gain from the decision-making. So for example, if you are
promote it. If you’re on this board, say you’re on this board of vaccination, you’re not going to be on that board if you’re saying people shouldn’t be vaccinated. You’re only going to be on that board if you’re telling everyone you need to get this vaccine. I mean, no one’s going to be appointed if they’re going to go against it. It just doesn’t make sense. Right. It just doesn’t. It’s like saying you’re the board of dog, you know, the dog association and you’re telling everyone to have cats. No, no, you know, it’s just not going to happen. Yeah.
So these people have conflicts of interest. They’re gonna recommend vaccines. So how can they be on a committee deciding whether to appoint, you know, authorize vaccines or have children vaccinated or not? Because they’re naturally always gonna say yes. That’s the only way they’re gonna look at things. Their livelihoods, their careers, their promotions, their financial interests are all dependent on one answer, one decision. So my take on it is on these so important committees,
people who have got nothing to do with vaccines. Now, some people might argue, well, you need to be an expert in the area to make that decision. Not really. I think what you need to be is an intelligent person who can weigh up information, the pros and the cons and ask the relevant people to provide the evidence.
and then decide on the outcome and make a decision. And they are not influenced in any way, whether the decision is yes or no, it doesn’t make any difference to them. Their job will be secure. They are not gonna be promoted depending on what decision you make to go. That’s what it should look like. Yeah. So I don’t know if you’re familiar with the paper that Dr. Peter Doshi did. So he was a assistant editor of the BMJ.
Ahmad (01:06:41.718)
I’ve heard his name and I’ve seen him do a few things. Yeah. Which one was that? So before the Jabs were approved. So I think his paper was somewhere around October, November, 2020. Is he the one that was critical of it? Yeah. And, and, and he’s the kind of guy that to me you should have on this panel. Cause basically what he looked at, he said, okay, there’s a lot of vaccine vaccines in inverted commas because they’re mRNA and viral vector technology. So we’ll call them injections.
There’s a lot of injections in trials at the moment. So he really simply just looked at what are they testing? And he did a little table. And if you look at his paper from autumn 2020, this is brilliant little table in it where he’s got the Pfizer jab, the Johnson and Johnson jab, the AstraZeneca jab, Moderna, there was a Russian one, Sinovac or whatever. And he then just put down the left-hand side, which of these are testing?
whether or not you can stop transmission. And there’s a cross in every box in that row. So none of them are testing transmission. Which of them are testing severity of outcome? None of them were testing severity of outcome. So he gets down to what are they actually testing? So they were all testing, would you…
get a positive PCR test. Now we all know that the PCR test was a joke. You run it to 45 cycles. You can basically work out that your chickens in the garden have got COVID. No, don’t say that. Don’t need to get masks on them. No, they’re fine. Should I tell them to social distance? They’re climbing up and catching my eye. I need to tell them to social distance. Oh, we can come on to where the social distancing came from in a minute, if we remember.
Let me scribble it down and then we’ll come back to that one. Six feet, six, six. I’ll tell you where it came from. Cause I think it’s all six, six. It might be that. Um, yeah. So it was basically, did you have a positive PCR test or not? And then of course the great whistleblower work that Brooke Jackson did. I need to get on the podcast. I need to get on. You do. When she was running the trials over in, um, America. So the whole idea was that, um, let’s take the Pfizer trial. So you’ve got 44,000 people.
Ahmad (01:08:49.645)
22,000 people have been given a genuine placebo, which for the Pfizer trial was a saline solution. And the other 22,000 have been given this mRNA injection. And then they were tested to see who ended up getting COVID. So they weren’t testing, did you then transmit it? They weren’t testing severity of outcome. That’s really important because you know, on Twitter, you’ve got all these people saying…
Oh, I know it doesn’t stop you getting it and it doesn’t stop transmission, but it would have been so much worse if I didn’t get it. It’s like that was never tested. There isn’t like, show me the academic evidence for that. There is none. It’s just what they made up when they realized that the world got to realize it didn’t test transmission or would you get it? Um, so there were then some really, so Brooke Jackson realized that you could swing it quite easily. It was supposed to be blinded. So if I’m in the placebo and you’re in, you’ve got the jab.
We’re not supposed to know. So Brooke is not supposed to know, but she was running three different trials and she’s like, but people know this. It’s just shabby process. People know who got the jab and who didn’t get the jab. And then of course it’s in your interest to give some great results for Pfizer because then Pfizer want to use your trial center again. And that’s really lucrative. So if you can sort of know that actually you got the jab and I didn’t, um, then just keep testing me.
because at some point I’m going to test positive and then that’s one positive result in the placebo arm. Do you know what? And what I’ve found out speaking to Headley Reese, exactly what you’re just talking about. Everything is outsourced. I wasn’t aware of this. I wasn’t aware that actually they don’t even have the manufacturing capacity. Everything they do, the way the tests, the trials, everything, everything’s outsourced. It’s just a shiny label, few people working there, mainly marketing. And that’s it.
Even AstraZeneca vaccine wasn’t produced by AstraZeneca. It was that sort of turned out the manufacturer. I can’t remember the name of it. It’s escaped me, but Headley Reese messaged me to say, oh yeah, they don’t make it. There’s another company that makes it. And that is that vaccine, which is associated with so much harm and clots and whatnot, which was quietly just rolled away. No one talked about it. Cause if you say it’s publicly withdrawn, then it has to be investigated. I still think they’re making another one. Well, Johnson and Johnson.
Ahmad (01:11:10.97)
is also a viral vector jab. So they are gene therapies. We need to call them what they are. They’re gene therapies. They’re trying to get your cells to take on board certain instructions. It’s just the message was delivered into the body in different ways. So with the AstraZeneca and the Johnson and Johnson, it was called a viral vector technology. So what they were, AstraZeneca were basically giving you a chimpanzee virus.
that wasn’t believed to be harmful to humans. Let’s hope they got that bit right. But the virus then gets into your cells and with it, it takes the message just, hey, make billions of these spike protein things. So as we know, the Pfizer and the Moderna was giving the same message to the body, but giving it in a different way, which was through sort of putting a lipid nanoparticle so that it would get into the cells. The cells wouldn’t be able to break it down before it got in. And then it gives it the same instruction. So that’s…
that’s what was sort of going on. But there’s so much that people don’t realise. So one of my favourite statistics about the trial is more than 99% of people in the trials didn’t get COVID. So I would say, oh, can I have the placebo then? Because 99% of people who had the placebo didn’t get COVID and they didn’t get any side effects. I mean, actually the AstraZeneca placebo was a meningitis vaccine. So they did get some side effects because they were having a…
meningitis vaccine. This is the thing I’ve seen as well. Like if you read the book, Turtles All the Way Down, they’re always comparing a vaccine with another vaccine. It’s never with a true placebo, nothing, you know, just water, sugar, whatever. Just nothing. It’s always with another vaccine. So how do we know? So do you remember when they came out, and this is around December, just before approval, it was so close to approval, and Pfizer came out and said, we’ve got 90% efficacy.
on our jab and people don’t understand what that means. They’re like, Oh, that gives me 90% more chance of not getting COVID. So the numbers at that time, because I like numbers, do you know how many positive tests that was based on positive PCR tests? And we know PCR tests are complete, you know, nonsense. No idea. 94. What? So 85 had
Ahmad (01:13:26.486)
been found in the placebo arm, which is probably careful testing of people in the placebo to make sure you get a few number of tests. So 84 in the placebo arm and nine were in the jab intervention. So if you take 85 minus nine over 85, it’s 90%. That’s how they get the 90% relative risk. And at the time it got approval, there were only 170 positive
have put over 10 billion jabs in arms across the world on the back of 170 positive bollocks PCR tests. And for the AstraZeneca jab, it was based on 131 positive bollocks because they are inaccurate. Honestly, you can, I mean, I know people who tested their dog and a African president tested a papaya. It really was that ridiculous. And we then went out.
But then when you talked about manufacturing a minute ago, remember I worked in manufacturing for Mars. So I know useless things like we produce 50 million Mars bars in the Slough factory, I think it’s per day. How did they get 5 billion vials of this stuff within days of the December 2020 approval? Right. That’s often puzzled me. I don’t know the answer by the way. Yeah. Were they planning, were they banking on getting approval? Were their factories?
churning them out. Where did they even get the little glass bottles from? So this is what I mean. So like just talking to Headley Reese on my podcast about the supply chain, everything takes a long time because everything takes a long time. Every step. I mean just changing, like upscaling from a small amount of production, thousands or whatever to millions. Billions. You need quality control.
You need to go through the testing all over again, the animal testing, the efficacy, the toxicity, the distribution, whatever, because just the chemical processes can change these chemicals, you know, the pharmaceutical key ingredients. And so you could change the safety profile. You used to have to keep it cold, do you remember? Yeah. It’s like, how are we gonna administer it? When we just keep it- So what happened with that? Oh, they just gave up, because I think they thought, oh, we’ve got to keep the Pfizer one at minus 60.
Ahmad (01:15:47.19)
And there were only a few fridges in the UK apparently. And then of course, if you remember the rollout, it was, oh, come to a church, come to a sports hall. I didn’t see any fridges. There were no fridges. So they’re thinking, okay, if we’re going to turn over the leisure center in Newport and try to get a throughput. But what I’m saying is like those vials, you know, to have those vials, all those billions of glass bottles, you need to order, you need production, you need to, you know, outsource, you need to, you know, money. So the way I see it is.
the regulatory bodies were just rubber stamping. You know, you’re meant to process bundles and boxes and boxes to read for all the data and research. They had no interest in that. And you know, the MHRA head, Jane, whatever her name is, she even said, we’re enablers now. Yeah, yeah. You know, instead of standing there and say like, stop pharmaceutical companies, we’re gonna check your products. We’re gonna make sure that they’re safe before we give them to our population. It’s almost like, come on, in you come.
And without really just a cursory glance like, oh, okay, sure. If that’s what you say is we’ll approve it. And that revolving doors where, you know, the people in big pharma come into regulatory bodies, but more often the people in regulatory affairs end up in big pharma with their big directorships and whatever, you know, it’s this revolving door business is again, conflict of interest and corruption of our system. And these regulatory bodies, I believe are totally captured. They’re not protecting us.
the population from big pharma. Yeah. And that’s scary. Think, think of what that trial should have gone through. So it should have started off with some trials on animals. Now I’ve looked into this. There were a couple of animal trials. I saw two or three. You are, you’re talking six rats, 10 monkeys, six monkeys or whatever. I mean it was absolutely minute. Can I just correct me if I’m wrong? Cause I looked at this as well. It was like literally we’ll put some viral particles down some monkeys
aspirate it and then, you know, with the vaccine, see if there’s any antibodies or whatever. It was literally like that. There was no bio-distribution, no toxicity, no effect on fertility or pregnancy or the children or whatever. There was none of that. No safe level. They killed them. The monkeys, I understand, were killed quite soon after as well. So if there were any effects that even showed up in primates. But we’ve tested drugs before. I mean, I don’t know if you remember that terrible one.
Ahmad (01:18:14.358)
No, there was, there was one in London many years ago where there were half a dozen people that were testing a drug. It might have been for elephant. Oh, I think I know what you mean. And the, the healthy adults all died or something. Yeah. I mean, they, within seconds of this going in the body and it had been tested on animals within seconds. Um, they were having complete organ failure, malfunction, but sorry, but the problem is these studies, right? Going back to that, those animal studies with monkey studies, you know, I read them
They write it in such a way that look how clever we are. We looked at the assays and we use this technique and this was our methodology and we use this statistical. So it sounds superficially like, oh, this is a, this is a very scientific paper. But when you cut through all that, do you know what I saw? Bullshit. They were polishing turd. Phase one trials. I mean, they basically skipped almost all the processes. So phase one trial should be
You’ve tested it on animals and you’ve tested it properly on animals. So then you give it to these sort of half a dozen human beings, just to see if there is a completely different reaction. Um, then you take it and you give it to more people. So then you might be into the hundreds or even the low thousands. And then you’re testing it over a period of time. And that’s your sort of phase two trials. When you get into phase three trials, you’re testing it on thousands of people for whom it is intended. So at that stage.
we should have been giving it to older people and vulnerable people. Because if you remember at the beginning, that was all that was supposed to be the recipients of this thing. Well, they didn’t. You know, I happened to know someone very fit, healthy, medical professional in her 40s who was involved in the AstraZeneca trial. You didn’t need it, quite frankly. You were never at risk from COVID. I mean, good on you for volunteering for a pharmaceutical trial, not necessarily this one, but good on you.
it shouldn’t have been tested on you or maybe in the phase two phase, but then phase three phase, it should have been tested on older people and vulnerable people. And was it going to do anything for them? But they tested as far as it produced antibodies. Um, well, Zippity do it well, because you’re telling the body to produce billions of these spike proteins, the body is going to build.
Ahmad (01:20:29.086)
some antibodies to these things. 100%. But is it then going to stop you getting COVID? No, it isn’t. And then of course, stuff that’s come out subsequently in this Claire Craig has done some great work on this in that sort of naught to 14 day period. You’re really vulnerable. And I looked at a South African paper where they were looking at vaccination and exercise. It’s funny, they said specifically in that two week period, sorry for interrupting, that you know what, despite having the jab, you’re technically unvaccinated.
So in this vulnerable period, when you get COVID, you’re unvaccinated. What the frack? Talk about fudging the numbers again. Have you not seen that? The epidemic of fudgery that goes on and the manipulation of numbers and statistics to hoodwink us because not all of us are smart with numbers. I confess, not me. I only got an A in maths because I had this tutor who was amazing, but I’ll be honest with you, I can’t number crunch. That’s not my skill. You can number crunch and you’ll see something, I’m like,
this is bullshit. For me, I really need to concentrate. And I can imagine for the average person on the street, they look at these numbers and they can’t really make sense of it. So they just go by trust. But that’s, I think one of the big things they’ve used, they’ve manipulated words and they’ve manipulated numbers to hoodwink us all. Yeah, I mean, 90% effective. If you then sat down with people and said that was based on 94 PCR tests, they’d be like, what you said, what the frack or whatever.
people just weren’t told this. They didn’t know that. I really hope that next time the trust is going to be so low. Um, cause people are going to say you heard me last time. I’m not going to let you do it again. So listen, recap, recap. So the, the trial, the vaccines, these so-called vaccines are mRNA gene therapies. They’re gene therapies. And I think even the, the submission to the FDA and everything called them gene therapies, they weren’t called vaccines by the way.
and they changed the definition of vaccine to include this as vaccines. This is a fact, it’s not conspiracy theory. These were rolled out rapidly in such a manner you’d really need to question how, because the production process, the design, the studies, they take months for a reason. You can’t just click your finger and make it happen. To make it happen, you either are doing major shortcuts or this was being planned well in advance, and it could be a combination of both.
Ahmad (01:22:53.686)
Well, they say, don’t they? Or we didn’t have time. We didn’t have time to wait. We were in an emergency situation. Well, first of all, we weren’t in an emergency situation. By and large, the first sort of Gompertz curve wave had gone through in March, early April, 2020. We were actually over the worst already by then. I love hearing that. You know, that’s my wife’s name, Ed and him. Gompertz. Yeah. That’s brilliant. Yeah, yeah. Anyway, carry on. That’s brilliant.
So we were over the worst. So we were not in an emergency situation. In fact, the funny thing that the trials were being undertaken in the summer of 2020. And they were struggling to get people infected, which is why 99% of people didn’t get COVID. So if you remember, they actually opened up some other centres and there’s a little article, I think it was in the Sunday Times or something, one of the broadsheets.
where they had this little thing saying, oh, they might actually have to try to expose the people in the vaccine trial to COVID because not enough people are getting COVID to be able to come up with any meaningful results. So then there was a bit of COVID over in Brazil at the time. So they had some people over in Brazil. There was a bit of COVID in South Africa. And then what was interesting, wherever we had
vaccine trials going on were where we ended up with variants. So we ended up with a Brazilian variant, we ended up with a South Africa variant, we ended up with a Kent variant. So I’m like, this is a bit curious. And I’m sure Geert Vanden Bosch would have something to say about that. And he’d say, well, I think we were impacting the, what does he say, don’t vaccinate during a pandemic. It’s just the single worst thing that you can do because you just encourage the virus to mutate to get around what you’ve just done. And sure enough, it was almost as wherever we were going.
the virus was mutating. So, so go back to the, the vaccine. So, I mean, I mean, I, I honestly think this was a whole plan dynamic. It was just planned so efficiently. And I think it was almost like the virus was there to justify the vaccine, not the vaccine was there to treat the virus. It was the other way round. It was like, how do we get this vaccine out and we’re going to make this pandemic to, to create the demand for it. And
Ahmad (01:25:06.07)
the way they rushed it out and the vials and the studies, it’s all BS. Um, but the thing is even that study, that original study, that Pfizer study was so fundamentally flawed, so poorly designed. And it was, remember it was a press release. What, what, what big paper research comes out in a press release? It was mental. That was the first time we heard of it. And, and then you, it was all about, you know, relative risk reduction, not absolute. And then the biggest thing was the control arm was all given the jab.
Very soon after. What the hell? If that’s not covering up your crime scene, what is? Yeah. You know, you do not tamper with the crime scene, folks. Yeah. You know, anybody who’s watched any half-decent crime movie or thriller will know that. Yeah. They just went and wiped everything clean. It was just mental. I think that was deliberate as well, actually. So one of the other things that I’m pleased I did at the time was December 2020. The two papers that came out. Yes, it was a press release, but it was related to papers.
Um, so there was a Pfizer paper in the New England medical journal and there was an AstraZeneca paper in the Lancet and they both came out in December, 2020 Pfizer was approved just before AstraZeneca, but there wasn’t much in it. And I went through both of those papers because that’s what I do every Monday. I take an academic paper and I dissect it this, that week I took two. You do that every Monday? Every Monday. I’m so glad there’s people like you in this world because that’s the last thing I would ever do.
And yeah, I mean, a couple of weeks ago, it was on red meat and diabetes. Back in December 20, the big story was obviously the approval of the vaccine. So all the numbers are there. So when people are saying, oh, we didn’t know at the time, I just keep retweeting that and go, this is what we knew at the time. If I could find this, you could find this. This was public information at the time. And I went through, didn’t test transmission, didn’t test, um, spherative outcome, uh, you knew it didn’t stop you getting it. Cause some people who had the, um, mRNA injection did get it.
I went through the numbers. So I said it’s based on 170 for Pfizer, 131 for AstraZeneca. I went through the relative risk, what the absolute risk was. So the absolute risk difference of Pfizer at the time was 0.84. That translates into a number needed to treat of 119. So at the time, I would have joked with someone to say, oh, you’re going for your Pfizer jab tomorrow. Well, take 118 friends with you and then hope you’re the one that doesn’t then test positive for COVID because that’s…
Ahmad (01:27:31.606)
That’s the way to explain it. Now the NNT synths. I love that by the way. I love that. It’s gone through the roof, the NNT synths, because of course it does. So. Number needed to treat. So, um, I’ll do the flu one as well, because there’s a great Cochrane paper. Um, and I did. Oh, please. I hate the flu jab. Right. So, um, there’s a great Cochrane paper pudding, Cochrane, um, flu, uh, vaccination. Um, and, and it should take you to, um, their sort of classic paper because Cochrane.
papers are before it got also corrupted by pharma, the ones that are sort of pre 2019, probably still very, very good papers. And this one looked at the efficacy of the flu vaccine in preventing a flu like illness. And it concluded that the number needed to treat was 71, which is just doing the kind of numbers that I did of what’s the relative risk, what’s the absolute risk, and then you can work out the number needed to treat from that. So,
to put it into lay terms, we had somebody doing some painting on the house recently in the autumn and said, oh, I’ve got to leave at four o’clock if that’s okay. It’s like, hey, you can go whenever you want. We don’t mind. And he said, oh, no, that’s nice. I’m just going off to get my flu jab. And I said, oh, have you got your 70 friends with you? And he said, what do you mean? I said, well, you need to take 70 friends with you and then hope that you’re the one that doesn’t develop the flu-like illness. It’s like, what do you mean? It’s like, well, that’s the number that you need to treat with the flu.
vaccine for one person to avoid a flu like illness, which might just be a bit of a headache and a bit of a sore throat and hey, you cracked on, but you just didn’t feel 100%. When you say it like that, it’s actually insane. Why would you do it? Because then it’s all risk. And then, you know, that the number needed to treat at the time, then you would have said… And this doesn’t actually, sorry for interrupting, this number needed to treat for a flu like illness or whatever COVID.
What they never talk about is what is the actual risk of harm? Yeah. Cause if you’re going to talk about risk of benefit, there’s always a risk of harm. And no one ever, ever explains, by the way, this is your potential risk of benefit, 101 and 118 needed to treat. But actually there’s a one in 800 risk that you might have a serious problem. You know, and if people were given that information, they’d be like, Whoa, hold on one second. So that’s what.
Ahmad (01:29:55.362)
the efficacies like there’s a big chance of one in 180. That’s not even going to make any difference to me. Like, so, you know, you know, it’s just not going to make any difference to me. Like that, that lower and efficacy, but actually there’s a risk as well. Maybe I’ll leave it. So it’s not safe and it’s not effective. It’s the exact opposite of what we were told. Do you remember with the, in the AstraZeneca trial, there were a couple of incidences of
transverse myelitis and it actually stopped the trial for a while. Do you remember that? I do know. I had people reaching out to me saying, look, we’ve got Gillian Bari syndrome and God knows what else. Yeah. So there were a couple of cases of transverse myelitis and it was basically a crack on, nothing to do with the jab. So that’s still going on by the way. That gas lighting still happened. I know. So December 20, when I did that report on those two papers, I looked at the safety, particularly of the AstraZeneca jab and confessed.
what they actually admitted to in their paper was about a one in 6,000 incidents of transverse myelitis. So you go to vaccinate, sorry, mRNA, inject 60 million people in the UK, scale that up. You’re gonna get a lot of incidences of transverse myelitis. And that’s what they were fessing up to. And that was having discounted a couple of cases that had happened along the way. So it was probably higher than that. Now the normal incidence of transverse myelitis I went to have a look at.
In normal circumstances, it’s somewhere between one in a quarter of a million and one in a million. Wow. So your chance of getting transverse myelitis at some point in your life is somewhere between those two numbers. Let’s say one in 600,000. Your chance of getting that after having the AstraZeneca jab as a minimum, what they owned up to was one in 6,000. Now that’s not a risk that I want to start taking for something that actually everybody had already had. So it doesn’t stop you getting something you’ve already had.
And even the risks that we know about are too high. But then of course there was this other thing. It’s like, but it didn’t even make sense. So say for example, you’ve got measles. The last thing you would then want is a measles vaccination. You’ve had it, you’ve got your immunity. And what I didn’t understand was again, this bullshit hard sell, like, oh, everybody needs a vaccine. You need a vaccine to travel. Hold on one second, but significant, according to you and your daily charts and the massive number of people infected, all of us have had COVID.
Ahmad (01:32:15.362)
So why do we need it? Why does everyone need it? Why can’t you say, oh, actually, you know what? If you’ve tested positive or if you had COVID, you don’t need the vaccine anymore. You’ve got natural immunity. It was like, no, every single person. And that’s when I popped my head up when the mandates came through. Cause that was an existential threat for me and everything around me. And it was a complete violation of medical ethics. I was like, to hell with this. To hell with this bullshit. And…
I just want to ask you something. Why is it you’re sitting over here and you’re throwing me all this information. It’s so logical, so reasonable. You’re not conspiratorial. It’s all factual based. You’re not a doctor, as in like medical doctor. Absolutely. Why, like there’s some like 280,000 registered medical doctors and what there’s like a handful that you publicly know of that are speaking out against these vaccines.
Why, what the hell is going on? Part of it is indoctrination. So I had a conversation with a junior doctor in about May 20 and we were talking about the lockdowns. And I said, I’m actually getting really quite concerned that they appear to be trying to keep us in lockdown until they’ve got a vaccine. And at the time I didn’t realize it was gonna be mRNA technology. So I was thinking they were looking for a measles type vaccine or a traditional vaccine. And I knew that was gonna take years.
It was going to take nearer 10 years than 10 months. And I expressed a concern. And this junior doctor said to me, you need to stop talking. And I said, what do you mean? We’re at a dinner. And I said, what do you mean? You just need to shut up right now and stop talking. You must not talk about vaccines. You just must not talk about them. They are the Holy grail. They’ve saved so many lives. They are the best thing that’s ever happened in the world. And even talking about them.
that could raise doubt in someone’s mind that they’re anything other than the best thing that’s ever happened is really dangerous and you just must stop it straight away. I’m not continuing this conversation anymore. And I just thought, wow, the level of indoctrination is absolutely unbelievable. And by the way, I’m on the receiving end. I see it and I hear it. You’ve had it as well, but why? I’m dangerous, honestly. You’re dangerous to the system. You’re dangerous to things that.
Ahmad (01:34:37.402)
are not allowed to be challenged. And I just don’t think they realize what they’ve done with this. And a multi, multi billion dollar industry. I mean, do you think that’s got nothing to do with it? Do you think the multi, multi billion dollar industry isn’t concerned about doctors who speak out and say these things are dangerous? Absolutely. So what are they going to do? They’re going to make sure people like Andrew Wakefield and myself, Dr. Sam White or whoever, you know, are going to suffer consequences.
I don’t think they’ve realized because they shouldn’t have called these vaccines. They shouldn’t have changed. I like it. Well, yeah. Cause what it’s done is it’s actually opened up a whole ton of words. It’s absolutely. It’s I, I actually personally like it. And when you keep saying these aren’t vaccines, I used to be like that I’ve come around to it. It’s the best thing they’ve ever done because now they’re shining the light on the whole goddamn thing. And the reason why they wanted it to be vaccines is cause then, you know, there’s a, there’s a lower regulatory
regulation for vaccines because they say, oh, vaccines are safe. You don’t need to do as much to prove the efficacy. The whole point is label it a vaccine. Oh, well, we know these are safe. You know, these are the best things since sliced bread. Let’s just pass it through. And people need to understand that, that the whole vaccine industry is a sacred cow that really needs to be, I think, brought down. I’ll be honest with you. You know, if you get me a vaccine,
that has gone through proper studies and proper trials, long-term safety data, true placebos and it works. You know what? I’ll take it. You show me that it’s safe. I’m not going to get an adverse effect and it’s going to help me. It’s going to make me healthier. I’ll take it. But until that day, no. I’ve been at dinner parties since this where mums, middle-class mums, who previously if someone had said on Mumsnet…
or I’m not sure about the HPV vaccine for my daughter, they’d have gone in, you know, because it is zero tolerance is what you’ve just said. They’d have gone, well, you’re you anti-vaxxer, what are you doing? And they are now saying, should we be having the HPV vaccine? So people who have never previously questioned these have started to question them. And it is very, I don’t think they realize what they’ve done yet. And I think they did call it a vaccine because they knew you’ve basically got a billion people on social media.
Ahmad (01:37:00.802)
who will do your zero tolerance for you. And you know what it was like. I mean, the minute you said, whoa, I’m not sure about these. Whoa, the army came in on social media. I mean, if you weren’t actually physically removed because that’s what people were getting removed from Twitter for. I was really careful during that period to sail close to the wind, but not to actually get myself banned. Because I thought if I get myself banned, I’ve got no voice. So I’ve got to censor myself a little bit to make sure I’ve still got any kind of voice.
Um, but it’s only now that we’re able to say this is mRNA technology, but why did people at the time not think, okay, so we know about transverse myelitis. And if you remember, there were a couple of anaphylactic shocks on the afternoon. They first started jabbing people up in London with the Pfizer jab, because I was actually with, and that’s why you had to stay for 15 minutes or something. Exactly. I was actually with our little friend Charlotte at the time. Um, that day I was with her and I remember her thinking, oh gosh, this could be a showstopper.
Of course it wasn’t, it just everything just crashed. Shout out to Charlotte, a good human being. We love Charlotte. But why do people not think, okay, so we’ve red flag transverse myelitis and potential anaphylactic shock, but we have no idea what this is going to do in one year’s time, three years time, five years time, 10 years time. We have no idea what this is going to do to fetuses when we inject pregnant women. We have no idea. It’s mucking up periods. We knew that
pretty quickly. I mean, so many of my female friends would say, Oh, my periods have gone mental. Or I had friends in the menopause who are suddenly not in the menopause any longer. When did a vaccine for a respiratory virus ever impact menstrual cycles? Whenever. What worries me though is Zoe, all of this, what you’ve just said a hundred percent, and it should be scaring the living daylights of everybody. What I’m really worried about
has no one been brought to justice. Not even one person, not even a Patsy. No one has been called up. All of these people are getting their gongs and their awards and their promotions and big fat checks, paychecks, right? You know, they’re all doing really well. And now you’ve got factories, factories mushrooming everywhere. And the whole lineup of new mRNA technology
Ahmad (01:39:22.602)
multiple viruses, you just need to go on these pharmaceutical websites and they’ll say, Oh, we’re developing a vaccine for this and mRNA vaccine for this and mRNA, all these new conditions and now for disease treatment as well for cardiac problems and everything. So, you know, you and I know that 95% of disease is malnutrition, nutritional deficit, poor lifestyle choices, poor food, and it’s not genetic.
It’s not disease. Most diseases are not genetic. So actually, if you want to treat all these things, start eating properly, start being healthy in that regard. And, but no, the, the focus is on all of these new vaccines. And I find that terrifying because they’re building all this infrastructure and investment and the government’s funding and everything. They’re not scared about getting into trouble there. They almost feel so cocky and self-assured that we’re going to get away with it again and again and again.
That’s what really terrifies me. The confidence that they have, you know, cause they wouldn’t be putting money into this if, if they were nervous about it. I tell you now, I will never consent to an mRNA injection. Well, never. What does it say on my hoodie? I don’t know if anybody can see. I do not consent. Yeah. I’m uncaptured and I don’t bloody consent, you know? Um, and I think more people need to know that.
Hopefully after listening to you, more people will. I really wanna talk about statins. So let’s talk about cholesterol. What is it? C27, H46O. Oh yeah, yeah. That’s not bad, is it? Yeah, very good. Come on, you must be impressed. That’s one I keep in my head as well, actually. Yeah, me too, me too. Cause again, one of those things where, if you aren’t totally bought in with the whole COVID plandemic,
you should, hopefully this will be a nice one to tease you in. Cause like, I think that once you start showing people a scam, hopefully that will make them a little thing in their brain start thinking, wow, if they’ve lied about this, what else have they lied? Spoiler alert, everything. Everything folks. But anyway, like don’t drink tap water. You know, every, everything.
Ahmad (01:41:44.266)
Statins is a big one because like it’s a multi-billion dollar industry. You know, even one, I think Lipitor is only like 12, 15 billion dollars. And way more than that. Way more. And there’s so many of them now. And this thing is built on the concept that, you know what, cholesterol is bad. Get your cholesterol down. And you know what, you, you know, everyone who gets a heart attack, high blood pressure, diabetes, you should get on cholesterol, but the thing, um, a
That goes against everything I’ve learned about cholesterol. Cholesterol is a basic, essential building block for so many things in your body, like hormones. Everything. And if you don’t have cholesterol, you die. You can’t eat it. You have to make it is so important. Your body doesn’t say, oh, you need to eat this kind of food because you might not get it. So it says, I’m gonna make this shit because it’s so important. I’m not leaving it to chance. This is how important cholesterol is.
You’re the cholesterol lady. Share your wisdom about cholesterol so that in the next 10, 15 minutes, no one will want to be on a statin. Well, it’s not, it’s not for me to tell anyone. I know, I know. Whether they take something or not. Give them the information, give them the information, the real truth, as opposed to the bullshit propaganda. Okay. So, um, I got into this through the same route as the PhD. So fascination with obesity.
Why did we change the dietary guidelines? Let’s look at the evidence at the time. That was the whole PhD topic. The second chapter in the PhD, you’ve got your introduction and then the second chapter is the review of the literature. So you go back in the literature and you say, where did we even get this idea that fat was bad for us? And it actually started with the idea that cholesterol was bad for us. So it started with some Russian pathologists at the turn of the 20th centuries. This is the early 1900s.
And men were just, they hadn’t even really got the term heart attack by then. That came in around 1948 into the sort of, you know, the medical terminology, but they’d noticed- Oh, that late? I didn’t know that. Yeah. I’m pretty sure it’s about 1948 as one of those official reasons for death or whatever. The young people listening will be like, that’s ages ago. Someone my age is like that. Not very long ago. It’s not very long ago, given-
Ahmad (01:43:57.794)
where we’ve got to with heart disease, which is one in three people are now dying of heart disease. So these early pathologists had noticed some men who’d kind of died suddenly. And because they were pathologists, they’d cut them open and they’d realized that there was some sort of kind of blockage in the arteries, which was obviously what had then stopped the blood getting into the heart, and that’s what they call the widow maker. So they’d looked at what was blocking up the arteries and they would see…
at the scene of the damage, they would find lipids, fat. And one of the lipids that they would find would be cholesterol. So not unreasonably, one of their hypotheses was the cholesterol has caused the blockage. Now a different way of looking at it, and Natasha Campbell-McBride would use this analogy, would be, that’s like saying that
when you arrive at a fire, the firefighters are there and therefore they must have caused the fire. She told me that. Yeah. I love her. They didn’t cause, I know Natasha, I spoke with her at conferences and I loved that analogy. So I always credit her with that. And it’s the same with cholesterol. It didn’t cause the damage. It was actually there to repair the damage. So cholesterol is traveling around in our bodies all the time. As you say, you gave a great intro. The body is making it. We can’t leave it to chance that we would get it from food.
So they had this early idea that cholesterol was somehow implicated in this heart disease, sun death, even though they didn’t call it heart disease at the time. So they started off by experimenting on rabbits, and they fed them purified cholesterol. And sure enough, the rabbits ended up in a bad way, but rabbits are herbivores, and cholesterol is only found in foods of animal origin. So vegans don’t eat cholesterol because they don’t eat meat, fish, eggs, and dairy, and meat, fish, eggs, and dairy…
contained cholesterol. So massive nutritional flaw, dear pathologists of the early 20th century, you were giving the wrong food to the wrong animal. So it wasn’t the prize that they sort of clogged up. Wind forward about 50 years, along comes Ancel Keys, and he looked at this and said, I’m quite interested in cholesterol. So he then tried the experiments again, but on humans. So he tried to feed humans cholesterol, he tried to increase their blood levels of cholesterol.
Ahmad (01:46:12.13)
by various means and he actually concluded, cholesterol doesn’t matter, dietary cholesterol, unless you’re a rabbit or a chicken, it just doesn’t matter, it’s just not an issue. But people didn’t realize that he’d said that. So that’s where we should have said, cholesterol’s not an issue, end of, move on, happy days. But we didn’t, it was still in people’s minds that cholesterol was an issue. And he turned his attention to fat. And he said, I think it’s total fat, which is where the germs of the whole Senator McGovern stuff started.
get informed. He said, I think it’s total fat. Then he did the seven countries study, which was a brilliant study, don’t get me wrong. But by the end of the seven countries study, he said, you know what, I don’t think it’s total fat, but I think it’s saturated fat. But his idea of saturated fat was cake and ice cream. It’s like, yeah, they’ve got saturated fat in them, but they’ve got sugar and flour and other stuff in there. So you’re blaming the wrong thing. So there’d just been so many nutritional errors along the way. But we ended up with this idea.
that cholesterol causes heart disease. And then of course, bad cholesterol, good cholesterol, don’t even start. So that was a revelation for me. So when I first heard that term, I’m like, okay, so the chemical formula for cholesterol is C27H46O. What’s the chemical formula for the bad version and what’s the chemical formula for the good version? There isn’t one. I know. But this, this is one of the things that starts waking people up because they’ve all been to the doctor.
Yeah. And they’ve had their blood tests and they’re like, Oh, your bad cholesterol is not very good, but you know, your good cholesterol is not too bad. So, you know, there’s some good news. So for those people who are listening, who don’t know, you and I clearly know and, you know, explain the whole lipoproteins and how it’s not water soluble. And yeah, yeah. Right. So if you get a glass of water and you get some olive oil and you drop some olive oil in the glass of water, it doesn’t mix. It just sits on the top. So the body needs you to transport lipids, fat.
around the body because every cell needs fats. It needs these vital fats to do their vital work. But you can’t put those fats in the bloodstream. Think of blood is water. Mainly water, yeah. And lipids are the fat. So you can’t put that olive oil in the bloodstream because it is going to clog up your arteries. It’s not going to be a very good thing. So the body is just brilliant, which is why we should leave it alone and not block pathways. So the body says, right, I’m going to make these things and they’re going to be called lipo.
Ahmad (01:48:31.79)
proteins, sort of lipo from fat and protein, we know that word. I think of them as little taxis and my little taxi is going to be water friendly on the outside because it needs to travel through the water blood and it’s going to be fat friendly on the inside because it needs to carry those fats and they need to be happy. So the little taxis are going around the bloodstream and there are five main little taxis and in order of size they are chylomicrons,
VLDL, very low density lipoproteins, intermediate density lipoproteins, IDL. LDL, which is the one that they tell you is bad cholesterol, and then HDL, which is the one they tell you is good cholesterol. So LDL stands for low density lipoprotein, and it just means that the cargo is packed a little less tightly than the HDL, which is high density, tightly packed.
cargo, but they are lipoproteins, they are taxis. Now those taxis carry cholesterol, phospholipids, protein and triglycerides. They don’t just carry cholesterol, they carry the four main fats that the body needs and all the cell needs, and then the taxis go off around the body to drop their cargo off when the cells, so that the LDL taxi will go around and cells have got an LDL receptor, and if they need
the cargo from that LDL in that cell, they need some of those phospholipids or cholesterol or whatever. Then the receptor will grab the little taxi and it can then offload its cargo. And then the taxi goes off around the bloodstream and takes back any, the HDL taxi will then actually take back any that’s not been used back to the liver for recycling, not for the body to get rid of. If it was so bad for us, then surely the body would get rid of it, but it doesn’t. It’s still making it. So it just recycles it.
Next time you’re with your GP and your GP starts talking about good and bad cholesterol, please correct them. You’ve got to say, doc, I’m sorry. I heard this podcast and this is nonsense. There’s no such thing. Or ask them, what is the chemical formula for bad cholesterol? And then tell me the chemical formula for good cholesterol. And then do you want to actually want to tell me what an LDL is and what an HDL is because I now know that they’re taxis and they’re not a good taxi or a bad taxi, they’re just taxis with different density packed lipo proteins.
Ahmad (01:50:46.146)
Um, and why would your body be making cholesterol if it’s trying to kill you? Yeah. Um, it just doesn’t make sense. There’s that would be the first real design floor in the body. You know, your body can keep your pH level within like nothing range because it would kill you if it went too far outside. It keeps your blood pressure. If you, if you do the right things and look after it, it will keep your blood pressure, everything’s fine tuned. It’s brilliant. It’ll keep your temperature absolutely brilliantly tuned.
It keeps it all fine tuned. Isn’t it amazing? Statins are so unbelievably lucrative that when they realized they could control, they could stop the body, not entirely, statins stop the body making cholesterol, you would take a statin and drop dead. And in a way it’s a shame that didn’t happen because then it would have kind of put the kibosh on the whole industry. They don’t stop it completely, but they do stop it. They will lower your cholesterol. They will impair
what is known as the mevalinate pathway, which is the pathway by which the body makes cholesterol. But the mevalinate pathway, if you actually look at that, Google it, right down the bottom of the pathway where you’ve got sort of cholesterol as sort of one of the final outputs, you’ve also got an enzyme called CoQ10, which is actually the energy, the body’s energy spark plug.
In fact, quite often if you go to… You need it for your mitochondrial function. Exactly. So if you go to a functional therapist or something and you’re saying, oh, I’m doing the right thing. I’m sleeping. I’m taking vitamin D. I’m getting sunshine. I’m eating well. But I just got no energy at the moment. They might well say, well, look, take CoQ10 for a couple of months and just see if it makes a difference. It’s your body’s energy spark plug. Let’s just see if it sparks things up. And that’s downstream of blocking them a valonate pathway. So it is going to impact your mitochondrial function. So statins affect your M’s.
They affect your muscles. They affect your mind. They affect your memory. They affect my card. My card. And they affect your mojo. Um, they affect so many. So I’ve got a theory. I’ve got a theory, Zoe. And you’ve described it beautifully. So I’ve got a theory about with big pharma conspiracy theory. Um, I’ve got a theory that like with the jobs and these drugs, they don’t actually, I don’t, I don’t believe in this depopulation. Like we’re going to kill everybody kind of thing. Cause
Ahmad (01:53:03.902)
straight away people will be like up in arms and you know, no one would take it. They want the sweet spot where you get sick and it’s done in such a way, slowly insidiously where you can’t even blame it on the product. And actually what it will do is profit the company, but it opens up even more things because you need other drugs to deal with the problems that are arising. You need more intervention, more medical help. You need to be more dependent on the system.
And just look at these vaccines that we’ve got now. We’ve got people getting sick from so many different myriad of complications because the reason why is it affects every part of your body now. Like you’re saying, menstrual irregularities, myocardial, you know, neurodegenerative. There’s a list, I think, with Pfizer published, like God knows how many thousands of adverse reactions. Guess what? All of those complications need treatment. Like, you know, I spoke to this neurologist and, you know, I said, Oh, why are you busy? You know, he was telling me how busy he was when I asked him how he’s doing.
And he’s like, Oh, I’m seeing all this weird and wonderful neurology from like my days in med school and the textbooks. I was like, what do you think’s driving it? He goes, Oh, it’s definitely the vaccines. You know, so people are now profiting from the misery the hospitals are seeing and treating and investigating. And these people are now in the system and they’re sick. And I think it’s the same with the statins. You know, you start with one statin and you know, suddenly you’ve got complications. You’ve got other problems. You just become a dependent individual.
the system beholden to it when actually this is the poison. This is what’s actually killing you. And I don’t, I don’t know. I think it’s quite a, it’s quite a sinister thing. This little statin because it’s given to you like, Oh, this is what’s going to save you. This is what’s going to stop you from having a heart attack when actually it’s a piece of little poison, isn’t it? I, I mean, I love a good conspiracy theory. Don’t get, don’t get me wrong. If I’m at a dinner party and somebody mentions the word conspiracy theory, I’m all ears. I’m, because I’m this natural
naturally filtering it through. I can believe that, but I’ve actually got a different view. I’d love to hear it. I’m open-minded. I think there are so many people who absolutely 100% believe that cholesterol is bad. I think the training of doctors is so effective. We know they only get four hours on nutrition. We know what they get taught and- I didn’t even get that. So they do-
Ahmad (01:55:26.13)
they do get this sort of, you can only call it indoctrination. And I think the Harvard Medical School students once, this was many, many years ago, they worked out all the conflicts at Harvard and they actually went to the university and said, look, are we actually being taught medicine or are we being taught by the pharmaceutical industry? Because that’s kind of how it feels to us. And I think medical students are taught by the pharmaceutical industry. And yes, I do think that there are some people who’ve worked out this is
really not good and actually I wouldn’t want my loved one on these because it is going to affect all of their memory mojo and all the rest of it but I think the vast majority actually 100% believe that cholesterol is bad for you they actually believe that there is cholesterol in your arteries they don’t realize that it’s in a lipoprotein you know people will say or saturated fat
clogs up your arteries and I just burst out laughing. It’s like, you do eat your food, don’t you? You’re not injecting it into your arteries. Because trust me, the only way that saturated fat can clog up your arteries is if you inject it into them. There is no way it can leap out of your digestive system and end up in your arterial system. There really isn’t. Think about it, folks. So I really do believe they buy it. And I’ve had Bupa, you know, have to go for a company medical when you work at these, you know, Mars and
And I’ve had those company medical doctors in all seriousness looking at me saying, Oh, you know, your, your cholesterol is fantastic. You know, you’re a good cholesterol and you’re bad cholesterol. And I just think, do I want to fight today or should I just let it go? It’s not, it’s not the doctors that I’m talking about. I’m talking about the pharmaceutical companies. They must know that this is all BS. Like I think they buy it as well. I really do think a lot of people buy it. I think a lot of people who are writing these papers, I think they’re getting a lot of money to buy it.
Um, and I’m, I’m just not someone you can buy. So I remember a dietitian contacted me once. Do you want to get my cap uncaptured? There’s dietitians said, Oh, um, you know, approached me and said, Oh, um, Kellogg’s, um, we could, could we do some joint work for Kellogg’s? And I went, no, you don’t know what they’re offering. I don’t want to know that there’s no price. I’m not doing it. I think Kellogg’s is shit. So it’s not happening. Um, so, you know, when you’re, when you’re.
Ahmad (01:57:42.79)
doing these academic papers or when you’re making these drugs or when you’re selling these drugs or making money from these drugs. I don’t think you’re too skeptical. I don’t think there’s a little voice in the back of your head going, Oh, do I really want my million dollars a year or should I really think if blocking the mevalinate pathway is a terribly good idea or not? I think a lot of people are just not questioning stuff. It’s like when Boris said, stay at home and don’t go out in the sun for more than an hour a day. And whatever you do, don’t get any vitamin D.
um, we’ll just lock you down. Do you know why that one hour a day business? Cause then they didn’t break the Geneva convention, how you treat prisoners. Oh, no way. I didn’t know that. Yeah. No way. Yeah. It’s really dark. Oh, holy moly. Yeah. Hey, we didn’t do the social distancing. So if you go on my site and you put in social distance, there’s a blog post on that one as well. Um, so that came from a review of SARS-CoV-1.
And some people had looked back at SARS-CoV-1 and said, right, let’s look at all the trials that were done at the time that tried to investigate who ended up getting SARS-CoV-1. And so there were various trials and they’d look at, because there were some quite big households over in the in the Far East and Hong Kong and all the rest of it. So you might have 10 people in a household and you go home with SARS-CoV-1 and they would then look at who got SARS-CoV-1.
And it was the person who was sharing a room with you. So it was your partner. If you were in, you know, not a frail, it was your carer. Um, it was the person who sat next to you around the dining table, the person who sat where you are, chances are didn’t get, so they basically said, what’s that a couple of meters sharing a bed end of the table, couple of meters. So it was generally the people who were within a couple of meters who were getting SARS-CoV-2.
Okay, they weren’t just within a couple of meters. They were having sex. They were sharing bodily fluids. They were sharing food. They were sharing the same bed. They were in the same apartment. This is not you were in a supermarket two meters away from someone. And that was never tested. It sounds so scientific. Oh, it was on a plane and it was it was the people in the row in front and the row behind. That’s where it came from. Do you remember do you remember when they had these face shields?
Ahmad (02:00:05.514)
and a mask. Remember when they had perspective screens? Like, you know, trapping the virus behind the screen. Yeah, because the virus can’t go round. Yeah. It can only go straight. And then they pass your shopping around the screen. Right, right. I mean, like, I mean, it’s lunacy. It was mad. It was a mad time. And we need to remember it was mad. Otherwise we’ll do it again. And we need to do it again. 100%. We need to remember how mad it was. And I think this is the problem. People keep forgetting. I mean, look, in summary, right, don’t trust government.
Don’t trust science. Don’t trust the experts. Question everything. Question everything. Yeah. Question this. Don’t trust me. Don’t look at my website. Pick apart my blog. Question what you’re saying. 100%. I mean, the funny thing is someone said recently, oh, I really like your podcast, but I don’t agree with everything you say. And I replied, dude, I didn’t agree with myself last week. Like
How can I expect you to agree with me when I don’t even agree with myself from just a few days ago? The whole point is that you’re meant to question everything all the time, even yourself. I question my sanity every day. I was telling you this when we came, I was like, how could I be wrong? Have I just lost a plot? Have I just gone down some weird conspiracy theory and just given up my career and my livelihood for just no reason? No, no. I think all my doctor colleagues are at fault.
They’ve got, they’ve got, they need to do some soul searching and self-reliant reflection and have a bit of humility. I don’t, I don’t mind people making mistakes or getting things wrong. So I don’t mind people even being brainwashed because you know, to the extent I’ve been brainwashed in the past. So everybody makes mistakes. What I mind is when you’re very arrogant and rude and vindictive and abusive and cruel because you don’t think the way I do.
I’m better than you. I’m gonna make sure you suffer as a consequence. And the more you suffer, the better I am. Look how good and virtuous I am in my righteous indignation that I will make sure that you suffer because I disagree with you. And there’s very much of that attitude around. And like I said, most of the complaints that have been made about me that I can see, a lot of them are doctors. A lot of the trolls that I have on Twitter are doctors. You know, I’ve had to block so many.
Ahmad (02:02:30.222)
And I know colleagues of mine, like Dr. Dave Cartland, a lot of doctors have gone after him. All the GMC investigations, doctors. That’s what makes me really sad. Why are these doctors not thinking, hey, what are these guys talking about? I raised, for example, a video in December last year about the vaccines. I’m saying I’m seeing a lot of harms. I’m hearing my colleagues talking about harm. No one seems to be talking about this massive experiment. Maybe we should look into this.
And instead of the doctors and the private hospitals coming at the top saying, oh, we’ve seen this consent. What are you seeing? Let’s talk about this. What I got was stop your social media activity. Take down these videos. Otherwise, there will be repercussions. That’s what I’m angry and upset about. Like the doctors have forgotten the basic tenants of medical ethics. First, do no harm.
and give informed consent, which is choice, which is pros and cons, and which means respecting your decision. So if you decide, you know what, thanks for that information, I’m just gonna leave it. I’m not gonna have a statin. Don’t judge them for it. Just say, okay, I gave you my information. I personally would do something different, but that’s what you wanna do, good for you. Lot of the doctors have lost that compass. If you look at the NHS definition of informed consent, I remember looking at it at the time.
And it was, there must be absolutely no coercion and no coercion from medical professions, friends or family. None whatsoever. So, you know, I was with my dad once and he’d come back from a cruise and he got a urinary tract infection and they, they thought he had a prostate problem. So he’d been fitted with a catheter and then it had sort of come off and they thought things were okay, but then he got into this sort of emergency situation. He couldn’t pee. So I rushed him into the L and D.
and there’s this junior doctor in there and he’s in the little cubicle and he’s going through all the informed consent and I’m like, dude, please put a catheter on him. He’s in agony. And my dad is just like, please just do it. You know what you need to do. I mean, he was, you know, blood pressure was going through the roof. And this guy was, no, I’ve got to take you through informed consent and you need to know what I’m about to do and you need to know what the complications could be and you need to know. Dad is just like, for Frig’s sake, will you just do it?
Ahmad (02:04:51.61)
Um, and then I feel like that right now, my tiny bladders burst. Would you know mine is as well? Yeah, we’ll wrap up. We wrap up about 15 hours. Yeah, we’ll wrap up soon. And we carry on. Oh, so I mean, then you just compare that with when you walk into a sports hall and there’s some GP receptionist who’s been trained up in administering jabs and isn’t even going to do the, you know, the, uh, spirit tree method or whatever it’s called and possibly.
Chuck it into your arteries and hey ho, let’s just hope you don’t get a cough. Aspiration, thank you, I can’t think of the word because when you flatter these two things. I know, right? Right, so we’ll wrap up really quick. I was gonna say when you were talking about your doctor friends, having been an HR director for quite a period of time, okay, I’m now a, you know, sort of food interest person, public health research doctor, not a medical doctor. There’s a certain type of person that can only feel good about themselves by putting other people down and that’s a really sad kind of person
your esteem should come from you. And if your esteem comes from you, you don’t mind giving credit to anyone else because you’re quite cool with the contribution that you’ve made and you’re okay with yourself. So it just seems a real shame when these doctors are like, well, I’m gonna feel morally superior and virtue signal and virtuous and all the rest of it by putting down Kikin Ahmed and David Cartland and Sam White and others that have spoken out. Why did you need to do that? I mean, what is with your own ego that…
You were feeling so bad about yourself that you had to go in and do that. I don’t get it. Yeah. Anyway, we’re going to be fighting each other, aren’t we? For your broken toilet seat. No, don’t. Andy’s completely trashed the whole lot. I think, yeah, but he’s an engineer. Now there’s a screw missing. So, um, basically, yeah, I think part of it, again, it comes back to that societal thing where, you know, people like to virtue signal.
They like to show out to their tribe. Look at me, look how good I’m one of you. I belong to you. Look what I’ve done. And to me, it’s the laziest form of doing good, you know? And again, this is what I mean. We’ve got major problems in our society, in our judiciary, in our regulatory bodies, in our education system, in our health system, in our politics. It’s quite sad, you know? And unless we identify them and diagnose them, you can’t treat them.
Ahmad (02:07:08.138)
And that’s why, you know, I always used to say to my patients, um, and still do the one, the few that I can still see, you know, unless you’ve got a diagnosis, you know, what’s the treat, what’s the treatment? How can you treat it? Like, you know, the reason why you’ve seen A B and C therapists, doctors, and not got any better is because they’ve all been treating, you know, nothing. They’ve just given you things without actually addressing what your problem is and saying what it is.
And we need to call out and diagnose all the problems we’re seeing in the world today. So that first we accept there is a problem and then think, right, how do we go about fixing it? And I don’t have the solutions. We’ve got ideas about them, but we need to, we need to talk about them. Anyway, you know, the question now that I’m going to ask you, cause I listened to your podcast. Oh, God bless you. Um, it’s a shame. You know, I was looking at the stats, do you know, 65% of people only get to the end. Oh really? Yeah. Oh wow. Okay. And it’s so sad cause I feel like
near the end is the best. And a lot of people just drop out. And I liked them. Secret fact. I don’t know how to pronounce it, but I listened to him recently and he did those three Buddhist things at the end. Like don’t be greedy. What was the other one? Don’t say bad things. And then the third one I think was about something related to competence. I think I haven’t got the third one wrong, but I just like the first one and he’s a funny thing. It’s a funny drop off dose. It’s within the first half hour.
You go from 100% to 65% and then the 65% just stays. It’s really funny. I need to do a sub stack on that. But yeah, I wish people stayed to the end because like, God, I’ve just learned so much from you guys. So anyway, Zoe. What would I, I mean, trust no one, question everything. You’re, okay, wait, you’re 182. You’re still at. You’re 182, you’ve lived a great life. You’re on your death bed. You’re gonna pass away peacefully. All your families around you, you’ve got children.
And haven’t you got children? Yeah. Well, Andy came with two, so it was kind of like buy one, get two free. So amazing. So hopefully you’ve got grandchildren, great grandchildren. You know, what advice, health or otherwise would you give them before you pass on? It is that I think trust no one question everything right from, right from your adult, when, when toddlers say to you, you say, Oh, don’t put your hand in the fire. And they say, why, um, is that what you’ve got on your mug? My mug question.
Ahmad (02:09:28.534)
Question everything. You can also get it on the hats and the hoodies. I’ll just do a little plug in there. You can go to my commercial. Yeah. Go my merch store and get that question everything. Never stop that questioning that you’ve got when you’re, you’re four years old, you know, don’t put your hand in the file. Why not? We’ll try it and then you’ll find out. Um, but just never stop that. Um, and I wish I’d questioned more because I woke up about, I COVID woke me up. I was awake to nutrition a long, long time ago.
I was awake to food right back in, you know, I mean, all of this century, I’ve been awake to the calorie theory is nonsense. Start advice is nonsense telling you how you can lose weight is nonsense. What we should eat is all nonsense. So that kind of stood me in good stead when COVID came along. Cause it’s like, I don’t trust you on that. When you tell me to lock myself indoors and not get any vitamin D and wear a mask and don’t socialize with people and be fearful. Uh, I know that that’s all bullshit because all of that is bad for my health. Um,
So I was awake to all of that, but we’ll do another podcast sometime. I wasn’t awake to a lot of other things that were going on in the world. So I could have woken up to quite a few more things. Me, me too. Me too. So like, for example, you know, I, I won’t be hard on yourself. Like I was awake to the geopolitical stuff after nine 11. Um, and the Libya, I heard your podcast when you’d signed up, you actually, so moved you signed up to go in and then military people woke you up. Yeah.
They were like laughing at me. They’re like, are you kidding? Son? Um, you know, the sergeant with this wonderful, you know, beard, you know, sorry, mustache. Um, no, but so I was awake to geopolitics, especially then with Libya, Syria, Iraq, everything. Um, but I wasn’t really aware to the awake to the health stuff until about, you know, 2016, 17 and then in politics with the Brexit, like I realized how much fear porn the media was doing and how
wasn’t reliable and it was just a propaganda tool. And then COVID and now it’s just like, I question everything. And I’m not saying I know the answers, actually quite the opposite. I know nothing. And I’m quite happy to say I know nothing, but I’m also not prepared to just believe anything in the government or the TV, the box, you know, that garbage that, you know, Bob Moran’s picture over there, everything. You know, I just, I don’t believe the BBC or anything like this anymore. I get to the point where I say, I know what isn’t happening.
Ahmad (02:11:50.814)
I know what isn’t true. I don’t know what did happen, but I don’t believe that happened. Yeah, and just trust your eyes, like literally what you see. Like I am here, you’re here. Like anything else that they tell you, like, I don’t know, I don’t know anymore. Like, might be the case, might not be. It might be a spin. It might not be the full picture, because that’s another thing. Like they might show you something and it looks really real, but actually if you zoom out and saw the much bigger picture, you’d be like…
Whoa, that’s a complete different perspective now I’m taking. Anyway, listen, I’ve really enjoyed talking to you. I really value coming here with Andy. I hope he’s still alive. Thank you for inviting me. My cat will be sitting on his lap, no doubt. Oh God, I could talk to you forever. Zoe, it’s been a real pleasure and actually an honor for me because like I said, the more I found out about you, I just realized you’re such an intelligent person. You’ve got so much passion.
Like your website, zoehardcomb.com, everyone check it out, but you know, I’ll put the links on my website anyway, and all your other social media. Like you’re just this fountain of knowledge. And what I really, really respect is yes, you’ve written lots of books and you can buy them, but actually the amount of information you put on for free on your website, like you’re very generous, you’re very generous with your time and your knowledge. And that’s actually, you know, really quite special human being from my point of view, I think you’re amazing. So you’re up there with the likes of.
Natasha Campbell McBride, like Dr. Sarah Myhill and Dr. Jane Donaghan. I love her too. Jilly Faye, she’s a Jilly Faye, I can’t remember how you pronounce her name. It’s all you women. You women are incredible. Isabella Cooper is another one. Yeah. You women, men, you need to stand up and you know, step up. Men need to step up.
strong women in the freedom movement. I did find that. We gathered together and have some dinners at times and get together and you kind of look around the room and go, geez, there’s some strong women here. Where are the men? There’s some strong women as well, but it really did impress me how many momma bears. I think more women than men. They came out protecting their children, you know, people like Tonya and Emma Sale and Isabella, as you’ve mentioned, Laura.
Ahmad (02:14:08.846)
Claire Craig. I mean, you know, there’ve been some strong mama bears. Charlotte, I mean, just, you know, God, Renee, how many people am I going to remember or forget or whatever, but yeah, there’s been some great mama bears. And Seafood, BS. There’s another one. I’ve never met her. Mary AF. She’s, she knows her stuff. She writes well. Yeah. Occasionally I’m like, yeah, I’m not sure about that, but that’s what we were talking about. It’s funny, isn’t it? Let’s be skeptical. Occasionally I’m like, ah, you might be off on that one, but you know, I think 85% of the time she’s on the money.
And that’s, you know, it’s good. You know, all you women out there, I’m telling you right now, it’s good. Anyway, everyone else, we need to go and pee. No, obviously not at the same time. And hopefully Zoe won’t break the toilet seat more than it’s already broken. But listen, guys, I love you. The 65% of you who have listened to the end. Um, thank you so much. Um, most of you listening, I know you’re not subscribing to me cause I can see it on my counter how many are, and it’s a, it’s not a very big number. It’s a fraction. And you know, it’s less than 1% of the number of people listening.
So look, I’m not asking like a charity case because I’m producing great content, educational, I’m really helping you guys. I’ve invested in this studio and I’ve now made the ultimate sacrifice by being suspended at work and I’m not earning a penny in the main hospital that accounted for 80% of my income. So, and the 20% that’s left, what people don’t realize, it’s not like, oh, I’ve got that 20%. You know, it takes about 40, 50% of your income to cover the overheads, to break even. So I’m losing money and I’ve actually talked to my secretary about
You know, I can’t afford a salary anymore in the new year. And I’m going to have to question whether I can carry practicing even that 20% because it’s just really tough right now. So everyone listening, I really would value if you even just sign up to my paid sub stack, it’s just £3.50 a month, £35 a year. It would help me a lot. So if you are passionate about getting the truth out and fighting against the system and sticking it to the man and big pharma, then
Then help me and you know, just, just even a little bit will make a difference. If a lot of you just gave a little bit each, whoa, it would help me. So enough of that. Anything else though you want to say? No. Oh, look. Great. Thank you for having me. He’s alive. He is, he is there. I’ve just, we’ve just seen Andy and going back in. Okay. Thank you very much, everyone. I love you all. Even if you don’t support me, it’s okay. I still love you. You’re listening to me. So I love you so much. Right. Let’s.
Newsletter
Love the content? Dive deeper with the Doc Malik Community on Substack and access exclusive contents and perks:
- Newsletter
- Live Stream & Special Guest Interviews (paid subscribers only)
- Personalised Q&A
- Sneak Peeks & Behind the Scenes Access
- Bonus content
- Special offers
Send Bitcoin
Embrace the future with decentralized support.
Whether discussing the state, health, or finance, every Bitcoin donation drives the vision forward.
Bitcoin Address:
bc1qu6e5m2rlt3qm873r33ndqdg8ucdffl650p093a
Subscribe to the mailing list
New podcasts, blog posts and updates from Doc Malik.
We will respect your privacy and keep your email secure. We use Substack for our email blasts.