multiple vaccines
Things are heating up in the health world with many interesting news stories from the last few weeks. Is something big on the vaccine front headed our way? Public agencies are certainly acting as if there is. The WHO released an instruction manual on how to win the hearts and minds of vaccine deniers and if that doesn't work, the CDC has plans to stop, quarantine and 'treat' any travelers who look a little under the weather. The American Academy of Pediatrics says it's okay for doctors to ditch the non-vaccinated and, thanks to a little bill out of California, showing the film VAXXED could become a crime.

Join us for this episode of the Health and Wellness Show where we'll discuss the above madness as well as ways to protect against the dreaded MMR vaccine, the high costs of Autism, useless cancer screening and more.

Stay tuned, as always, for Zoya's Pet Health Segment and find out what an anal gland is.

Running Time: 01:28:35

Download: MP3

Here's the transcript of the show:

Tiffany: Hello everyone and welcome to the Health and Wellness Show on the SOTT Radio Network. Today is Friday, September 16. I'm your host Tiffany and joining me in our studio from all over the planet are Doug, Gaby, Elliot and Erica.

All: Hello

Tiffany: Hello everyone. I think Jonathan may be here. He might be joining us a little late. So our topic for today is connecting the dots-there's something rotten everywhere, not just in Denmark. So we're going to talk about the most recent news stories, some of them really shocking and scary. It looks like things are heating up in the health world. There's a lot of news stories from the last few weeks and we can sense that there's something big on the vaccine front headed our way; not quite sure, can't quite put our fingers on it but something big is going down.

The WHO released an instruction manual on how to win the hearts and minds of vaccine deniers and the CDC is backing them up. If that doesn't work they are wanting to propose a law that helps them to stop, quarantine and treat travellers who look a little peaked and the American Academy of Paediatrics says it's okay for doctors to get rid of their non-vaccinated patients and there's a bill out of California that would make showing the movie Vaxxed a crime.

So we're going to do a little match up of all of these recent news stories, all that and more. So I guess we can kick it off. Do we want to start off with the WHO?

Gaby: WHO? WHO?

Erica: Well yeah, the WHO. The World Health Organization is putting out documents on how to respond to vaccine deniers. So the European regional office of the WHO in 2016 has a Best Practice Guidance First Edition-How to Respond to Vocal Vaccine Deniers in Public. The guidance document provides basic, broad principles for a spokesperson of any health authority on how to respond to vocal vaccine deniers. The suggestions are based on psychological research, on persuasion, research in public health, communication studies and WHO risk communication guidelines. The document centres on how to address science denialism for health authorities in a public venue or discussion.

So according to the WHO those who question "science and experts" are chopped up into three categories - a vaccine refuser, a vaccine sceptic or a straight-up vaccine denier.

Tiffany: I plead guilty.

Gaby: Guilty as charged.

Tiffany: But you notice in all of that they don't say "We're trying to persuade people with facts and the facts that vaccines work and are safe and helpful for people". They're just using these other psychological techniques to persuade people.

Gaby: I will feel insulted if WHO give me a book based on persuasion strategies that work with Coca-Cola, Pepsico, McDonald's. Where is the science?!

Tiffany: But it sounds like they're preparing someone or some people or groups of people to give televised interviews. What they say in there is kind of creepy so I went through it and I'll just go through some of them, not all of them.

Erica: So this is the WHO document you went through.

Tiffany: Yeah. This WHO document and nowhere in the document did they explain any reasons why somebody would be hesitant or why somebody would be a vaccine denier. None of that is mentioned whatsoever. One of their tips is to keep eye contact because it increases the credibility of the speaker, but then they go on to say, do it within a reasonable manner because if you do it for too much it seems a little creepy.

And then they say, stay calm because it makes it easier for you to keep control of the situation. They want the person to wear suitable clothing and be well groomed, but don't dress too nicely. Dress appropriately for the situation. They want the person to be interviewed while sitting down so the interviewee can be on the same level as the discussion partners because if you're standing and especially if you're a tall person, that can be seen as domineering and intimidating.

And then they want the person to prepare three key messages because they say people can't remember much more than that and they want them to keep the message simple. Don't use jargon but use sound bytes. It actually said "sound bytes" in there! And they want you to keep repeating the key message but don't do it so much that you sound stupid or ignorant.

They don't want you to repeat any of the anti-vaccine arguments because if you do they might take that little clip of what you said and it might end up in an anti-vaccine video.

Erica: There's also a chapter in there about how to have safety, right? How to protect yourself. So there's a chapter entitled How to Protect Yourself. The chapter warns "In extremely rare circumstances your personal safety and security may be compromised by your pro-vaccination viewpoint".

Gaby: Wow.

Erica: And it cautions the public health official to be aware that your evidence and opinion may put your personal safety in jeopardy. Now if that isn't the opposite of...

Gaby: What do we do? Get a gun?

Tiffany: That's really weird because for one, it sounds like they're trying to anticipate that maybe they'll use an agent provocateur like on some kind of weird anti-vaccine protest and make him do something to hurt someone that's on the pro-vaccine side so they can cause all this chaos. But if anybody has to be afraid of their safety, it's us, fearing their mandatory vaccines or losing our jobs because we don't get a vaccine.

Jonathan: I was wondering if that threat in Australia with Dr. Tenpenny was a provocateur situation.

Erica: Yeah, the bomb threat.

Jonathan: Yeah.

Doug: The entire document really paints anyone who has any sort of objection whatsoever, not even scaling the type of objection that somebody might have and where they fit on the scale of vaccine deniers, it just paints anybody who questions a vaccine as crazy essentially. The whole thing about safety just puts the icing on the cake. Anybody who actually is questioning what these people are saying - and notice that nothing in the document actually legitimizes what they're saying - it's only about persuading or how to deal with these crazy people who might actually have questions.

Gaby: And of course those who will resonate with the information will be very polarized. I can see comments from doctors saying "Oh, he's a hipster. He's a hippy" because he doesn't want vaccines. What?!?

Erica: He's got a beard and a man-bun. He's anti-vaccine.

Tiffany: They also want the interviewee to emphasize safety instead of low risk. They want to say "make sure you focus on 75% positive and don't mention 25% negative". So if they say "vaccines have been shown to be 99% safe, never, ever mention the 1% where they're not safe."

Erica: One of the bloggers who writes about this is Jeffrey Jackson and he actually carried this article and he was talking about how the whole document reads like a military psyop manual. For our listeners, that's psychological operations and how to properly craft and deliver specific messaging to a conquered enemy force. "Given the massive amounts of scientific corruption, conspiracy facts and political revolving doors with vaccine manufacturers, the WHO's document is a glimpse into a future where forced medicine directed by drug manufacturers will give the public no quarter."

Elliot: It seems like a lot of the advice they're giving to doctors on how to deal with parents and people in the community who ask about vaccines is very similar to neurolinguistic programming and certain techniques that are quite often used in sales and marketing. It's like someone mentioned before, Coca-Cola. They use exactly the same methods. There was one article called The World Health Organization Documents How to Respond to Vaccine Deniers. It shows a slide presentation and it's been developed to train doctors on how to deal with patient objections to vaccines. At the top of one of the presentations, it openly states that you should persuade rather than inform the patient. It's full of these techniques on exactly how to deal with something like that. It's awfully creepy to think that many of the doctors are supposedly meant to look out for the health of the community but what it actually seems is more like a marketing ploy for pharmaceutical companies.

Gaby: The creepy thing is that it will most probably work because doctors are so brainwashed that they will just receive this material like "Yes master! Yes master!"

Doug: Yeah. Well there is one silver lining to this I would say, and that is that I think the reason that these guys are coming out with this document is because people are starting to question these things. There was one article on SOTT specific to New Jersey that talked about how the number of New Jersey children whose parents have requested a religious exemption has grown nearly 600% between 2005/2006 academic year and the 2014/2015 year. So to me that seems like it's a bit of good news. There are people out there who are looking for alternatives, who actually are aware of what's going on.

The article that that came from is actually called More Vaccine Extremism in America-doctors could soon drop patients who don't vaccinate their kids. There was a dramatic statement released by the American Academy of Paediatrics last week that said that it's okay for doctors to drop families who refuse the shots.

Erica: Yeah, and they also urged to repeal laws where parents have a religious exemption.

Tiffany: And how disgusting is that? If you're a doctor you're supposed to treat people who come to your office and who are willing to pay. How are you going to turn somebody away? How is that even congruent with the Hippocratic Oath?

Gaby: First do no harm.

Tiffany: And it's scary too because it just reinforces the fact that in so much of the medical community like the WHO and the American Academy of Paediatrics, their belief is that vaccines are basically the only way to health. If you get a vaccine then you're healthy. If you don't then you're going to get sick and die. So they're just trying to reinforce this belief amongst the population and it's totally not true.

Gaby: Yeah, they're completely brainwashed to the point when there is side effects from vaccines, healthcare providers are not able to see them anymore. Their thinking is so fragmented; vaccines are put on a pedestal so that when they see an adverse effect they don't connect the dots. They just think of something else, "Oh, it must have been a genetic condition" or any other absurd reason they can think of, except the vaccine.

Jonathan: I guess what I'm curious about is, aren't they legally required to tell you the side effects? If you're getting a drug for some other condition, they have to tell you at some point "This might cause you to grow an ear on your ankle."

Erica: No, because they're not monitored the same way as drugs. Vaccines don't have to go through any sort of approval process or anything. It's a whole different section. I don't know the terminology for it.

Tiffany: Yeah, there's supposed to be informed consent where the doctor is supposed to lay out all the risks and the benefits, but that never happens! I've seen doctors put people on a new drug. They might say "Oh, this might make you retain a little water or you might go to the bathroom in the middle of the night and fall asleep on the toilet". But they really don't go into all of that and they rarely give out a vaccine insert, like the inserts that come in the packaging unless you specifically ask for it. Usually they just say "Okay, this is the shot and this is the benefits of it so pretty much go ahead and take it." And I've had doctors come out of the room where they just saw their patient and they roll their eyes with "It's obvious this person has a computer and they've been on the internet".

So they don't want anybody making informed choices about their health. They just want them to listen to what they say and do it and that's it.

Erica: And you do have to sign a waiver if you decide to get the vaccine for your child, at least 20 years ago that was the case. I don't know now if that's the case. Haven't been.

Jonathan: Well this probably now affects health insurance too I would imagine. I don't know for a fact, but I would imagine that there are provisions in health insurance contracts that say if you refuse a vaccine then you lose a certain amount of coverage or maybe you lose all of your coverage. I don't know.

Gaby: This week the documentary Vaxxed was aired, for at least the US and Canada. Am I correct?

Tiffany: I believe so.

Gaby: Yeah. Well I have committed to watch the documentary this week as well and there are some details about that I need to tell because it has to do with insurance coverage and possible adverse effects from vaccines. Basically it portrays how the CDC lied in order to not be liable financially because we're talking about trillions of dollars. What has been uncovered in the documentary is that there are countless people who develop autism after the MMR vaccine. The first dose is at 15 months of age. From all the cases that were accumulating under the Department of Justice it will have cost trillions of dollars. So they falsified a study in order to deny that coverage. So it's not as easy as making sure the insurance company checks on this. It's really corrupted right to the top.

Erica: Yeah, if you get a chance you should watch the documentary. I think you can get it streaming. It's not very much to watch it streaming. You can buy the DVD too, so everybody out there needs to watch it because it's really eye-opening about how the measles/ mumps/ rubella vaccine is linked to autism. Its $4.00 on vimeo says one of our chatters.

Erica: People appear to be really angered.

Doug: There was another story out of Arkansas this week that talked about how there's been a mumps outbreak and apparently every single person who came down with it was vaccinated.

Gaby: Did it talk about how many people?

Doug: It said following 98 cases, 67 of those had been confirmed through tests.

Gaby: That is crazy because when the Vaxxed documentary came out, which has to do with a whistleblower from the CDC, William Thompson, not a single mainstream source covered this story of the whistleblower; nobody because basically everybody is financed by the pharmaceutical companies. But what they discovered was the measles outbreak; and it's funny because it was the Disney measles outbreak.

Doug: Disneyland.

Gaby: 644 cases were reported in several states for that year but in that same year -2014 - children with autism were reported - how much? I forgot - 1,082,353 children developed autism that year.

Erica: I think that the Disneyland measles outbreak was the psyop for the passing of SB277, the mandatory vaccine law in California which means now if you live in the state of California you can only have a medical exemption, which is really hard to get. So I think that was the psychological operation. It wasn't even that many kids that got it. It was some really small number.

Tiffany: And they focused on a woman who died allegedly from the measles, but if you look further into the story, this woman had some kind of immune problem and she was on these medications that lowered her immune system so she caught the measles. But she was already sick and she ended up dying. So they focused on her just to ramp up the fear factor - like measles kills, but really it's just a really benign issue that you get in childhood where you get some spots on you, you stay in bed and after a week or so it's over.

Gaby: Instead thousands of cases of children developing autism from the MMR vaccine and the kids who are at risk are those who are completely healthy when they were born. They had normal perfect development and after getting the vaccine at the 15th month they get sick. And they have seen that its people who have no cerebral palsy, no mental retardation, perfectly healthy children who are getting the vaccine are getting sick with autism. And they are prognosticating that in the year 2032, if we continue with the current trend, there's going to be 80% of boys diagnosed with autism.

Erica: One in two.

Gaby: One in two children with 80% of boys afflicted if we continue with the same trend. And we will if this continues.

Tiffany: That is just madness!

Doug: Oh boy.

Tiffany: Well speaking of the movie Vaxxed, there's a bill in California, AB1671. They were waiting for it to pass at the time this article came out but I checked and saw that it passed on August 31st. So basically in this bill they're saying that you cannot record any confidential speech or telephone call or anything from a healthcare provider without their knowledge and if you do record it and you broadcast it, you'll be convicted of a crime. You'll have to pay $2,500 or be jailed from 16 months to three years. So in the movie Vaxxed, what one of the researchers did was record telephone calls with William Thompson, the whistleblower, which linked MMR to autism and told all the dirty deeds that the CDC was doing to cover it up.
So at this point I don't think any prosecutions have come down but actually showing the movie Vaxxed to somebody could be a crime.

Erica: In the state of California.

Tiffany: Yeah.

Doug: It covers bloggers or anybody who puts a clip up on their blog or somebody who posts a comment in an article with a link to it. It covers anybody.

Gaby: They won't have enough space in jail for everybody.

Tiffany: They'll make space.

Gaby: The whole state jail. It's like Hotel California.

Erica: Well it's almost like they passed that bill in response to this movie because it was getting so much press and people who were maybe on the fence and were vaccine hesitant, watched the movie and then "it's a done deal. There's no way, I'm a denier officially now."

Tiffany: Yeah, they basically shot themselves in the foot by giving it so much press and saying "Oh you shouldn't watch this" and "It's banned and you can't play it here and take it out of that film festival." So they gave the film all the momentum that it needed to spread as much as it did.

Gaby: Yeah, they don't know anything about psychology. Don't tell anybody not to press the red button.

Tiffany: This is really bad. If you consider like you said Gaby, by 2032, one out of two boys is going to have autism and there's another article on SOTT about the hefty cost of caring for children and adults with autism. It said over a lifetime of a person with autism, it can cost $2.4 million, just to take care of them.

Doug: Jeez! I don't see how the healthcare system is going to possibly deal with such an influx of autism cases.

Gaby: It will implode.

Tiffany: I was going to say the word "explode", but yeah, that's better.

Doug: There was another article up on SOTT actually that was called Surprise-New Study Warned of the Dangers of Multiple Vaccinations. There was a study that went through the vaccine adverse event reporting system or VERS and pulled all these different cases and looked for trends and what they found was that the more vaccinations a child got, the more likely they were to have adverse effects and the worse those adverse effects would be.

They looked at how many vaccinations each child had had and how many of those ended up going to the hospital. It's a very, very clear trend that as the number of vaccinations go up, the number of adverse events go up. The fact that they sit around and deny this, that there's any of this kind of thing going on is mind-blowing, when somebody can take the government's own database of adverse effects of vaccines and just plot it out on a graph and be like "Look, if you get two vaccines you're 11% likely to go to the hospital for it. If you get five vaccines you're 14.5%. If you get eight vaccines you're 23.5% more likely to have to go to the hospital for adverse effects. Reading this thing just blows your mind!

Gaby: I think William Thompson, the CDC whistleblower, is really afraid for his life because he has data that shows that there is a relative risk of 700% increased risk of autism in African American children after the MMR vaccine and the earlier you give it, the worse it is. This guy is sitting there and he's waiting for Congress to subpoena Dr. William Thompson.

Tiffany: I don't think that'll happen.

Gaby: Me neither. If it doesn't happen what is going to happen with this guy? He's going to wake up one of these days suicided or something.

Erica: Well then he won't wake up, technically.

Tiffany: He'll accidentally shoot himself in the head with a nail gun.

Gaby: He really has very valuable information that puts all the respect for the CDC on the floor. It portrays it as the most criminal organization and the least capable of taking care of our health worldwide. So it's like a battle here, going on right now.

Tiffany: I guess there are some preventative measures you can take if for some reason you decide or you decide for your children that the MMR vaccine is something that you want to get. You can take huge, massive doses of vitamin C before, during and after.

Gaby: That's a good one. It was published this week on the Orthomolecular Medicine News Services, a case report. It's the daughter of one of the researchers of that journal, Orthomolecular Medicine, and she reports that her daughter had an adverse effect, but not to the MMR vaccine. This was the DPT-diphtheria/pertussis/tetanus vaccination. But it was really bad. She had epilepsy. She was screaming. She had high fever. The parents knew about vitamin C. They gave her mega doses of vitamin C before, during and after the vaccination. Her weight was 35 pounds or something like that, 17 kilograms and she received one week before the vaccination, up to 11 grams of vitamin C every day. On the day of the shot, 24 grams and afterwards 20 and it went down for the next week or so down to 15 grams. That's a lot for a 35 pound girl. But that's what they did and she's perfectly healthy right now. And for the MMR vaccine, they repeated the protocol and she was safe, which was very reassuring.

Elliot: So for an adult human body, how much vitamin C do you think that translates to?

Tiffany: Well they said in that article to give it to bowel tolerance so not so much that you're actually having to go to the bathroom but just enough that you feel a little bubbling and gurgling and some gas. So whatever that amount would be that's what you should take.

Doug: That's what you need.

Gaby: My guess is it will be - depending on peoples' diet and health status - an average person eating at McDonalds will probably tolerate 20 grams easily before the vaccine. With the vaccine, depending on their reaction, it could go up to 40 or 50. But one has to take into account the youngest persons, babies are more at risk. For the MMR vaccine and the autism link it's the same; the younger the person, the more risk; the older the person, the less risk.

Tiffany: But this made me question the parents who had the daughter and they gave her the vitamin C, they said that she had an adverse reaction. She was having a fever. She wasn't feeling well and they gave her the vitamin C. But I'm just wondering, did they know about the dangers of the MMR or the DTAP vaccine that they gave her? Why even go through all of that in the first place?! Why not just skip the vaccine altogether?

Gaby: She doesn't want to go into a debate about vaccines. She basically reports that New York State changed the law requiring an additional MMR shot in order for children to attend kindergarten. So she was hinting "If you have no choice, here it goes. Vitamin C."

Elliot: Wow! Imagine that! It's gotten to the point where you can't even send your child to school without them being vaccinated.

Tiffany: And the fact that you need two MMR vaccines! Why would you need two? If the first one's so good, it's so effective, why do you need another one?

Gaby: Exactly.

Doug: Good question.

Erica: Well Gaby, maybe you want to address that part in Vaxxed where Dr. Wakefield talked about how - I can't remember what year it was - where they started to see these issues with the MMR vaccine and so they decide to split them up into three different shots. It was causing meningitis, right?

Gaby: Yes. This was in 1987 so they know this vaccine is bad since back then. They tried it first in Canada, I think it was Ontario and a lot of people got meningitis after the MMR vaccine. So it was forbidden, but instead of destroying the vaccine they just took it to the UK and changed the name from Triverex to Priorix and they knew it caused meningitis but guess what? They didn't destroy the vaccine. They took it to Brazil and they did mass vaccinations with it! Guess what happened? People got meningitis.

Doug: Oh my god!

Gaby: This was in the '80s.

Doug: That's depressing!

Gaby: It is. That's why Wakefield thought out his hypothesis well; the younger the kids, the higher the risk of meningitis so he was wondering if maybe it's the same thing with autism and yes.

Elliot: It just shows these guys are completely above the law in every aspect of the word. They can just do what they want when they want, do crazy experiments on large numbers of people and then go to another country and do the same thing.

Tiffany: It's like some movie.

Gaby: And it's so bad that even Bigtree which is the producer of Vaxxed, knew about the whistleblower and he knew that the story of the CDC whistleblower was going to be live in two weeks and he couldn't cover it because his health show was financed by big pharma. So he waited there for two weeks and checked out all the mainstream media to see the news and guess what? Nobody covered the story. Everybody was fine with big pharma. So he had to get out of it and make a documentary because otherwise nobody will know about this story. But it was everywhere in social media, Twitter, #CDC Whistleblower. Everybody in social media knew about it.

Tiffany: We're living in Bizarro World. There's no other way to describe it. It's bizarre.

Jonathan: It totally is. I don't know if this is too paranoid a thought, but I almost wonder if at some point you will not be able to cross borders or get onto an airplane if you haven't had a vaccination.

Gaby: Well this is what I want to tell my story about. Two weeks ago a woman from the Dominican Republic came to the clinic and she was asking for two shots of the MMR vaccine. I said why? And I was like "this is dangerous" in a very polite and formal way. She said "Well I need it because it is a requirement to get a visa for the United States. I'm doing my paperwork and I need two vaccines." But you know that even if you never have positive antibodies for sure, you can get an MMR vaccine and you can still not develop antibodies. And she said "It doesn't matter. They're going to take the blood test or something." I thought it was crazy.

Doug: What's crazy is that they're telling her to do two of them. That's insane! Like one's not good enough?! You have to double up?! That just blows my mind. I can maybe understand if you were going to give that vaccine that maybe doing two over the course of a longer period of time, the booster that they call for, but somebody showing up at your office and saying "Give me two vaccines at once!?"

Gaby: Yes.

Doug: That just doesn't make any sense at all!

Gaby: And I explained to her it is not part of our protocol. We are not mandated to give you two MMR vaccines. She basically was begging, like "Please I need this paperwork!" It's crazy.

Tiffany: And even if you do produce antibodies as a result of getting the vaccine, that doesn't mean that you're protected because as we've seen with all the mumps outbreaks with the MMR vaccine, most of those people have been vaccinated and when they get the MMR vaccine, they get a form of mumps that is more serious and can lead to brain damage or testicular damage or blindness, than you would get if you just caught the mumps naturally.

Jonathan: Yeah, it's the same with shingles. People who had been vaccinated for chickenpox as children and may never have gotten chickenpox but were vaccinated for it, got worse cases of shingles in adulthood than people who had not.

Doug: Yeah, don't mess with your immune system folks.

Erica: And if that's not scary enough, in the first week of September - be very afraid - Dr. Brownstein did some shocking research confirming that vaccines are now contaminated with - can you guess? - Monsanto's roundup glyphosate! It's in everything. It's everywhere. So this researcher, Anthony Samsel, has done a lot of research on glyphosate along with another researcher, Stephanie Seneff. They published five peer-reviewed articles on the herbicide glyphosate and a yet to be published sixth paper found various commonly used vaccines are contaminated with the herbicide. So basically, many vaccines contain animal by-products such as gelatine, bovine casein, bovine serum, bovine calf serum, chicken egg protein.

So all these animals are fed grains that are sprayed with glyphosate and he ran numerous studies, groups of vaccines and identified several vectors of contamination. He included excipient gelatins, egg protein and similar substrates used to grow vaccines and stated "I found gelatins and egg proteins, contaminated with glyphosate-based herbicides from animals fed a glyphosate-contaminated diet, carries into the thousands of consumer products, even vitamins, protein powders, wine and beer."

Doug: Jesus!

Erica: What's interesting is the following vaccines were found to be contaminated: MMR, chickenpox, Zostavax-the shingles vaccine, ProQuad which is the MMR-rubella/vericella, the flu vaccine and hepatitis B.

Gaby: Basically all of them.

Erica: And he even wrote a letter to Congress. Of course they did nothing. They said nothing. He wants congressional investigation. Not going to happen.

Tiffany: Well what would they say? Sorry!

Doug: Oops!

Gaby: Maybe they can say add vitamin C at least!

Elliot: I think there is a serious, serious problem with that. It's not just being in eggs. Say you're eating egg on toast or something like that. When you eat it via the digestive system, your body has certain ways to protect yourself from that stuff, whereas if you get it injected directly into your vein, your body has absolutely no defences against it whatsoever. That glyphosate within vaccines can potentially do so much more damage when it is injected rather than as residue on someone's food because it completely bypasses all of the body's natural defences and it's so unnatural. So it's going to be very interesting to see the effects of this and whether these vaccines that are now contaminated with glyphosate actually have any stronger effects.

Erica: I've mentioned it in previous shows that glyphosate is actually regulated as an antibiotic, so already it's got immune disrupting properties to it. The WHO - coming back to the WHO - labels it as a "probable carcinogen". They've never confirmed.

Tiffany: Probable is good enough for me. It's not like vaccines weren't bad enough on their own. Just finding out that they're contaminated with glyphosate is like the icing on the cake.

Elliot: Yeah.

Doug: Yeah, it really is.

Gaby: Why are we not surprised?

Jonathan: It probably will be everywhere soon. I know that glyphosate is not airborne, but the metaphor that came to mind is how there's airborne yeast everywhere, in every place that you go to it's in the air and it almost makes me thing glyphosate is going to become something like that, where it's just in everything.

Tiffany: It already is! They've tested women's breast milk. They've tested people's urine samples. They have glyphosate in them.

Doug: Even umbilical cord samples. I wonder if Monsanto's going to start charging the vaccine companies a charge for including glyphosate in their product.

Jonathan: Yeah, for copyright infringement.

Erica: Well it may soon be Bayer. I don't know if it went through or not but they're going to buy Monsanto for uber billions or something crazy like that. Maybe they'll have another face.

Doug: Bayer's going to buy them?

Erica: Yes. Maybe they'll have another facelift and change.

Doug: Oh god!

Tiffany: Well speaking of outbreaks, there's a weird case in California about two possible cases of leprosy at Indian Hills Elementary School.

Gaby: Yeah, I thought that was crazy because I don't know anything for sure anymore but at least what I learned from the medical textbooks is that leprosy is so hard to get. It really has to be from continual exposure, not like your normal droplet. It really has to be continual, intimate exposure.

Tiffany: There was nothing I could find about how these kids actually could have caught leprosy but the school board sent the children's parents a letter telling them all about leprosy and the treatment and the course of the disease, which is really kind of strange. How did these kids get leprosy? But everybody's freaking out. They don't want their kids to go to school. But in the letter it didn't say anything about the kids not being allowed to come back to school because they acknowledged in the letter that it's really hard to catch from other people. Naturally, 95% of humans anyway are immune to leprosy. It's just a bizarre little story.

Doug: Very bizarre.

Jonathan: I wonder how long before...

Doug: It reminds me of all those Victorian age diseases that were cropping up in England, that we covered a couple of weeks ago. All these old timey diseases are just starting to resurface. It's really weird.

Jonathan: Scurvy. With the leprosy thing it makes me wonder how long it's going to be before they issue a leprosy vaccine and then have an outbreak of leprosy.

Gaby: Yeah. No Jonathan, first the zika vaccine.

Jonathan: Right.

Tiffany: They actually do have the zika vaccine in production and from what I've read it's in human trials already, not that anything that they report is actually going to be the truth or that the zika vaccine is actually going to be effective, but that's where it is.

Jonathan: This makes me think of something I guess on the macro level, is there a tipping point at which the pharmaceutical companies can no longer come up with any new drugs? It's like the idea that you can't write a new song, that everything has been written already.

Gaby: Well they are coming up with these cocktails of drugs, like if there is an elderly person taking a blood pressure pill, a pill for cholesterol and a pill for diabetes; they're making the 3-in-1 pill. But it isn't cheaper. It's easier for grandpa to take just one pill instead of four. And that's where they're coming from now.

Tiffany: They do actually have the 2-in-1 blood pressure pill so all the major ones like blood pressure, cholesterol, diabetes, yeah, I can see that happening. They do something called an evergreening where the drug companies will have a drug and then they tweak it just a little bit so they can keep their patent, so other companies can't come in with a generic and cut into their profit margin. I don't know how many more drugs they can develop because they're all crap, but vaccines seem to be at the forefront now. Something big is happening.

Doug: I think it's just like the music industry; basically they can just find ways of forever just recombining what already exists so you have this constant background drone of the same old thing over and over and over again. It'll be the same with drugs, just the same stuff over and over again. "Oh my doctor prescribed me new pills." "How are they different than the last pills?" "Well they're not really, but they've got a different name on them."

Tiffany: And they cost more.

Erica: So does anybody have anything to share on this new CDC ruling about detention and quarantine for travellers?

Tiffany: Well it's like Jonathan said, they're going to crack down on travel. I think I remember it saying in the document, people coming into the country and people doing interstate travel within the country. It's like they're assigning properties to whatever agents - they're not healthcare professionals so how do they know what they're looking at? If somebody has a rash or something, how do they know they don't just have psoriasis or they got bitten by some fleas or something? They're going to say "We need to detain you. You have some red bumps on your arm." What gives these people the right to diagnose you on the spot like that and then detain you for treatment? But it's all voluntary though.

Erica: We carried an article on SOTT about the CDC's measles hysteria. Proposed rules call for detention or quarantine of travellers. It's a Dr. Mercola article. But what I found interesting was "after you're taken into government custody, they can hold you for 72 hours without right to contact a lawyer or anyone else to appeal your detention and then you're asked to sign a contract with the CDC that you consent to public health measures - whatever that means - being applied to you or your minor child and which may include quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination and treatment." But even if you don't voluntarily agree to sign that contract, public health officials can still do whatever they want to you. It says here that "Individual's consent shall not be considered a prerequisite to any exercise of any authority by the CDC."

Tiffany: Yet it's voluntary.

Doug: You can ask for it.

Erica: So if government officials do release you from detention - get this - you can be electronically tracked and monitored including by electronic tracking devices you have to wear, or by email, cell phone text, video conferencing and voicemail.

Gaby: What comes up with this?

Doug: Medical police state.

Jonathan: Yeah. Lawyers, man. Lawyers come up with that.

Erica: And if the CDC finds you're guilty of disobeying their orders and they believe you transmitted an infection to someone else, you can be fined $100,000 if the violation does not result in death or one year in jail or both, or a fine of more than $250,000 if the violation results in a death.

Tiffany: How can they prove that you did it though? How can they prove that? It's so ridiculous.

Gaby: It's just to create jobs for lawyers or something?

Erica: Well here it says right now the measles is not officially on the "detain and quarantine" list but measles could easily be put on that "isolate and quarantine list" if the CDC officials convince the president to issue an executive order, if or when the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) becomes law after October 14, 2016. So yeah, don't get the measles.

Doug: So you've got the equivalent of a TSA agent doing a medical analysis on people and with the way we see the zika thing becoming hysterical, people will be detained because they've got a mosquito bite and put under all these watch lists. It's a police state. It's the medical mafia police state.

Elliot: And you can see how any dissenters, anyone who protests against this or anyone who is in any way a threat to this system, could quite easily be set up and detained, even if they didn't contract a virus. As you said it sets a precedent for a much higher level of control and this step towards this police state.

Jonathan: Yeah, it's the very definition of fascism. It's punishment by exclusion. You're not required to give your child a birth certificate when they're born. You're not actually required by law to do that but if you don't, they'll be a non-person. You won't be able to get a social security number. You won't be able to get a job anywhere. You can't get a driver's licence, any of that. Just like how you're not required by law to pay income tax, but if you don't you'll go to jail. It's the same thing with this. You have to be in the system and anything that they rope into the requirements for the system, you just have to continue to do that. So like you said, they say that this check when you're travelling is voluntary; that's a fancy term for saying if you don't do it then there are all of these other consequences.

Tiffany: But the bright side - sarcasm - is that the CDC wants your input before the bill is passed. There's absolutely no way in the world I would give the CDC my input, 1) because they're going to do whatever they're going to do anyway. When has protesting ever led to any big industry changing their ways? And 2) you just set yourself up as a vaccine denier.

Gaby: That's the blacklist.

Tiffany: Yeah. You're just letting them know who you are.

Jonathan: Being Amish is really starting to sound a whole lot better.

Erica: But those religious rights are going out the window.

Jonathan: That's true.

Erica: The AMA thing and the Journal of Paediatrics. They're questioning how a child even can express religious rights. "They don't know! They're ignorant!"

Tiffany: Well one of the good things about the Amish is that they're out of the system and they have really, really low rates of autism too, surprisingly or not, because they don't vaccinate their children and they don't send them to public school. So yeah, I'm going to become Amish tomorrow.

Jonathan: Yeah, that's again a question of being inside or outside of the system. If you're outside then you can't do all the things that are in the system like travel on a plane, that kind of thing. What scares me too is, if this really starts to become a thing, say for instance there's forced medical treatment when you're travelling, and the body scanners. I've opted out on a number of occasions but I've also just gone through because it was like "Screw it. I need to get on this plane so I'm just going to go through the scanner". So at what point is it going to be "Screw it, I'm just going to get this shot. I need to get to my destination."

Tiffany: Yeah. Or "I need to keep my job" or "I need to send my kids to school. What am I going to do?" So they're really putting people in a bind.

Erica: And I think that's why the WHO is really trying to crack down on all the information and even issuing that safety warning for people that are trying to push the vaccines. They started writing up documents in 2015 about how to deal with vaccine deniers and how to shift the conversation in another way. So I think it's been in the works for a while. One thing that I found interesting in the Vaxxed documentary was how Daniel Bigtree talks about the fact that the CDC has never done a study where they compared vaccinated children and unvaccinated children and that would give you tons of data right there. But they won't do it.

Jonathan: Well yeah, they're not going to do real studies.

Tiffany: Come on!

Jonathan: Nope.

Tiffany: One of our chatters speculates maybe that's what internment camps will be for - for vaccine refusers, vaccine deniers. That's a scary thought. And you can't take mega doses of vitamin C if you're in an internment camp.

Doug: You don't think that'll be provided?

Tiffany: Nah.

Erica: It'll be something like black market "Hey, can you get me some of that vitamin C?"

Gaby: White powder; the good white.

Doug: The good stuff.

Jonathan: Well if you think about it, from a big picture perspective, if internment camps start to be used, they have been used intermittently for "small things" like during the Occupy protests there were some internment camps when they were arresting hundreds of people at a time. But what occurs to me is there would be two things - terrorism or a public health crisis and it would be a lot easier to accuse people of having a condition or having been exposed to a virus than it would be to having some sort of terrorist connection. So the easiest way to control a large number of people is to either institute or take advantage of a giant public health crisis.

Tiffany: Never let a good crisis go to waste.

Doug: A manufactured public health crisis.

Jonathan: Yeah. Of course I'm a pretty paranoid person and I tend to be a pessimist more often than not so I wouldn't be surprised if it was engineered, but that doesn't preclude it either. It could actually come about accidentally. We've talked before about the psychopathic mindset. When psychopaths run rampant, anything is on the table is what I'm saying. So it doesn't necessarily have to be engineered. It could come about as a result of blundering and then the ones who are in the position to take advantage of it will do so.
They might not intend for tens of thousands of people to get measles, mumps and rubella but that may happen because of the carelessness of shooting this vaccine all over the place.

Tiffany: And they don't really take into account the long-term consequences of their action. They are just strictly focused. They have blinders on for whatever their goal is, they're going to go for it and it doesn't matter what the fallout is really.

Doug: And it seems like if there isn't an actual crisis that they're perfectly willing to manufacture one. If you look at what's going on with this whole zika scare, they're pumping up this zika virus as if it's something absolutely horrible and everybody needs to be so scared of mosquito bites, when realistically, anybody who's been keeping up with these things on SOTT, there is zero evidence that the zika virus actually leads to microcephaly if pregnant women contract it. But nonetheless the hype is so strong on this it's unbelievable! They're pulling out all the stops. They've got people out on the streets getting rid of standing water. Actually one thing that they're telling people that is just making me so angry is that they're telling people to wear long clothing to cover themselves up to protect against mosquito bites and on exposed skin to use Deet. Deet is toxic. Deet is a neurochemical.

Erica: Neurotoxin.

Doug: It affects your nervous system.

Jonathan: It's highly toxic, yeah.

Doug: Neurotoxin, thanks. That's the word I was looking for. And they're spraying - what's it called?

Tiffany: Naled - N-A-L-E-D.

Erica: I thought it was "nailed".

Doug: But that stuff is an organophosphate and apparently if you mix Deet with an organophosphate, it makes the symptoms or the effects that much worse. So they're going around aerial spraying this place with Naled (or nailed) and anybody who's putting Deet on themselves are getting a more extreme reaction to the Deet because of the two mixing. It is so irresponsible!

Gaby: I thought it was banned, the organophosphates, at least in the United States.

Erica: No, they're not banned. They're just kind of "regulated", whatever that means. They're everywhere.

Tiffany: And of course there's been no studies showing that Naled is actually safe to be sprayed around human beings. In this article about the CDC using the zika virus to be able to detain people, they talk about how toxic Naled is to people and there are some pretty scary side effects - if I can find them - a lot of neurological symptoms. You've got the ones that are not that bad like a bloody or a runny nose, coughing, chest discomfort, difficulty breathing, wheezing. If you get it in your eyes it will cause bleeding in your eyes, pupil constriction, and blurred vision. It might come on within a few minutes or might take up to 12 hours for you to get these symptoms and you might get nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, cramps, headache, and dizziness.

And even more severe - if you get a big dose of it - you'll be lacking in coordination, slurred speech, loss of reflexes, weakness, fatigue, muscle contractions, twitching, tremours and eventual paralysis of the body extremities and that includes your respiratory muscles in there too. You can involuntarily defecate and urinate, have psychosis, unconsciousness, convulsions, coma and death by cardiac arrest.

Doug: Wow!

Gaby: What's wrong with a mosquito bite?!?

Doug: Seriously.

Tiffany: I'll take a mosquito bite.

Doug: And what does the zika virus cause? Minor flu-like symptoms?

Tiffany: Here are the symptoms of zika. So compare that to what I just said about the symptoms of Naled poisoning. Here's zika.

Gaby: I want a mosquito!

Tiffany: Zika is fever, rash, joint pain, conjunctivitis, muscle pain and headache. And that's only if you experience those symptoms. Some people don't even have any symptoms whatsoever.

Erica: I wonder if we're going to see resurgence in the future, of polio. I think it was over a year ago we had an interview with the author of Virus Mania, Dr. Köhnlein; he talked a lot about the polio epidemic and how his research showed that it was poisoning from DDT which has since been outlawed but it sounds like all those symptoms that you shared are very similar to the DDT poisoning. So maybe polio will be the new resurgent, because there are vaccines for polio. There's a live oral where you don't get the shot and then there's the dead where it is the shot. But I wouldn't be surprised.

Tiffany: They wouldn't call it polio though. They'd call it "acute flaccid paralysis".

Jonathan: There are already some conditions that are resurging that are very similar to polio. I'm blanking on the name. Is it Hashimoto's disease?

Erica: Guillain Barre.

Jonathan: Guillain Barre, yeah.

Gaby: It's an adverse effect from the vaccine.

Doug: It's so unbelievable.

Jonathan: Although I wouldn't be surprised if they just went ahead and called it polio if it served their interests. Imagine, that would be an incredible crisis for the pharmaceutical companies to take advantage of. "Polio is back!" Everybody's got to go get the vaccine!

Doug: And then blame it on the people who didn't get the polio vaccine.

Tiffany: Whatever they come up with, the media will run with it and people will believe it just like they believed that Hillary Clinton has pneumonia.

Erica: Well one thing about the polio for parents, to give them the illusion of choice is, like I was saying earlier, if you say "I don't want the polio shot" then they say "Oh, well we have this live version that's not a shot and we'll just give your kid some drops of it."

Jonathan: Yeah, just eat the polio.

Tiffany: It tastes good.

Doug: It's what's for dinner.

Gaby: What could possibly go wrong?

Erica: A lot!

Tiffany: So are there any other stories we want to cover from the news in the last week?

Jonathan: There was the news about chemotherapy, which is not really news if you follow it. I'm trying to find this link here.

Gaby: The news is that it got into mainstream medicine because it was published in a mainstream medical magazine.

Jonathan: Let's see here. It says "A startling study by Public Health England and Cancer Research UK has found that cancer treatment itself may be killing up to 50% of patients."

Tiffany: So it's not the cancer that's killing them, it's the treatment.

Doug: Yeah. They were looking specifically at patients who died within 30 days of the beginning their cancer treatment, indicating that the death was caused by the treatment itself, not the cancer.

Jonathan: Yeah. But that's something that, if you have known anyone who was affected by cancer, which I think most people have, sadly, or if you have been following any of the research about cancer, in the vast, vast majority of cases where people get chemotherapy, tumours re-emerge after the chemo.

Gaby: With a vengeance!

Jonathan: Yeah, and it's a pretty clear correlation. I feel like if you have just the very simplest understanding of the scientific method and you can say "I got dosed with a shitload of radiation. Oh no, a tumour came back", I think it's a pretty straightforward causal relationship.

Tiffany: Well to a thinking person it is!

Erica: Chemo- denier!

Jonathan: This is another thing that's very similar to the setup with vaccines, where you can be denied a whole bunch of services by refusing it. I've read stories too about people, who go in, are diagnosed with pretty much any type of cancer, say that they don't want chemo and instantly lose a lot of insurance coverage or can be rejected by their doctor and basically end up on their own. That's a scary, lonely place to be especially if you don't know any natural ways to treat it on your own, which the disinfo campaign on that alone has been really effective in that area. If you ask anybody in the street "Can you treat cancer yourself?" they'd be like "No, of course not!" But you can and it's been proven.
So it really gets my goat every time I see all of the "Race for the Cure "and the "Search for the Cure" campaigns and rallies and the pink ribbons.

Erica: Oh yeah!

Jonathan: The other day I saw a "Raise money for the cure" gumball machine. And I thought "Those gumballs are causing cancer, right?" It's sadly ironic.

Gaby: Get your mammogram. Never mind that it's much worse to get the mammogram than leaving your breasts alone.

Tiffany: Yeah, don't squeeze your breasts and shoot x-rays into them. I don't see how that could be helpful for anyone.

Elliot: Yeah, we need to remember that chemotherapy is an extremely lucrative endeavour, especially for doctors actually. In the US the amount of money that a doctor would get from prescribing someone chemotherapy is - I can't remember the exact statistics - but I just remember reading that it is a lot more than if they were to prescribe any normal sort of medication. So I think doctors, aside from the way that they're taught in medical school, I think a lot of them really benefit financially from forcing this chemotherapy on cancer patients, even if they don't actually want it. So it's not so surprising that it's so prevalent.

Tiffany: And as far as I know - I don't have the information in front of me - a chemotherapy prescription is the only kind of drug class where doctors can get monetarily rewarded. They don't get rewarded for making any other kind of prescriptions. They might get gifts and things from drug companies or the drug reps that come to their office, but they don't actually get cash money for prescribing regular medications, but for chemotherapy they do.

I also found it odd ,Jonathan, when you said that if people refuse chemotherapy, their insurance will kick them off ,which is strange because chemotherapy costs money for the insurance companies to pay for. So why would they kick somebody off? That saves them money if they refuse chemotherapy. I don't get it, unless the purpose is to kill somebody.

Elliot: Almost like it smells a bit fishy. There may be some ties between these pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies as well. It seems counter-intuitive that an insurance company would force their clients to take chemotherapy when it costs the insurance company money to do that. Maybe there's something going on there.

Erica: Yeah. What about all the drugs that are prescribed during the chemotherapy treatment for nausea and side effects from chemotherapy? There could be something to it.

Jonathan: I think you can't take your health into your own hands and keep a certain level of insurance coverage. That's basically what it comes down to. This is a case where I actually kind of agree with this, but as a corollary, in Michigan they repealed the required motorcycle helmet law so you're no longer required by law to wear a helmet when you ride a motorcycle. However if you don't, you have to put that down when you register your bike and get insurance and your premiums are going to be a ton higher. So you could say that that's a corollary in the sense that you're taking your health into your own hands by not wearing a helmet but you have to pay more premiums.

That may be a bad example, but in general if you do anything in the realm of medicine - forgetting about the motorcycle thing - and you're trying to treat yourself or take your health into your own hands, you can either lose your coverage entirely or your premiums will skyrocket, which is an incredible state of affairs in the US right now.

I was watching a Vice documentary the other day about Fentanyl addiction in Canada and one of the guys who was living on the street, homeless, was trying to get off of it but he was having a very hard time and he went to this doctor who was doing treatments for people for Fentanyl and he said "Well how much is this going to cost?" The doctor said "It doesn't cost you anything. It's healthcare." And I was like that's such a novel concept to me as an American, like bullcrap. We're really in a sad state of affairs, that peoples' health is being made worse by the elements of the system, the food, the medicine, everything that's out there. And at the same time hand-in-hand they're being required to pay more to keep up their health, or be excluded completely.

Gaby: They don't want people opting out from the system.

Jonathan: Yeah, exactly. I don't have health insurance. I probably should, but it's very expensive, so my first thought is never to go to the doctor or the hospital. I'm like "How can I take care of this myself?" I would not go to the hospital except in maybe extreme cases of a broken bone or something worse than that. I don't mind that. I'm comfortable with the way things are in my life right now, but at the same time I feel like that's a crappy place to be. The average citizen should not have to worry about whether or not they can afford to receive healthcare.
I had a finger fixed. Years ago I broke my finger playing soccer so I went to the emergency room. It cost me $800 for them to reset my finger!

Tiffany: Jeez!

Doug: Wow!

Jonathan: Yeah. And it took me six months to pay it off and it was a finger. I could have pulled I back into place myself.

Doug: In retrospect.

Gaby: I was just going to say. It's not the responsible thing to say.

Erica: But Jonathan, you live in America. You can get the flu shot for free.

Jonathan: Yeah right.

Tiffany: That'll fix your finger.

Gaby: You're so lucky.

Tiffany: I think healthcare is extremely overrated. Like you Jonathan, I don't have insurance either and I wouldn't go to the hospital or to a doctor unless something was falling off of me and I needed it sewn back on. Like in that article where they're talking about the useless screening tests like the PSA test and CAT scans and x-rays and mammograms and all that, it leads to over-diagnosis and over-treatment. I think people demand their healthcare but I don't really think that they know what they're demanding because it's not really helping them.

Gaby: Yeah. Men usually ask for the prostate cancer screening which again and again proves nothing. Even mainstream medicine recognizes this. Nevertheless, it's the PSA test and it will lead to more false positives, over-diagnosis, adverse effects. You can get chemo radiation for this and it was all for nothing.

Tiffany: Do we have any good news to round out the show since we're coming up on time before we go to the pet health segment?

Jonathan: Nope.

Gaby: Yes we do. Think!

Jonathan: It may not be health-related although tangentially. I just heard a story the other day that prisons in the United States are no longer going to be run by private corporations. So that could be good or bad, depending on how you look at it.

Erica: I swear there was a caveat in that though, like it was only this or that kind of prison and it wasn't going to be implemented until 2070 or something.

Jonathan: Yeah, you're probably right.

Tiffany: Too late for us.

Jonathan: The reason I said that tangentially relates to healthcare is the point in the story that I heard about, it had to do with medical care of inmates and they were sending prisoners with either advanced diseases or severe physical trauma back to their cell with a Tylenol.

Tiffany: Oh!

Jonathan: And basically not doing anything. And this was a way for the private companies that run the prisons to save money on treatment.

Erica: Yeah, and that's federal prisons, not state.

Tiffany: One of our chatters shared some good news that Hillary might not survive until the election.

Doug: It's drug related.

Gaby: Unfortunately I have to say that probably she will just be a complete robot, stimulated by drugs.

Erica: It's mental health-related, Doug.

Doug: Exactly.

Erica: No other good news? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Tiffany: Okay, I guess we can that this time now to go to the pet health segment. If you ever wondered about anal glands, here's your chance to find out. Okay, here we go.

Dr. Andy Roark (Cone of Shame): Today, on the Cone we are talking about four things that you need to know about anal glands.

Assistant: Oh goodness! I didn't know it was that kind of show. And now the vet who's great at expressing himself, Dr. Andy Roark.

Dr. Roark: Anal glands turning pets into scooters for thousands of years. Here are the four questions about anal glands that you need answered. Let's go. So what the heck are these things? Anal glands as they're commonly known aren't technically glands. They're actually small sacs that are lined with glandular cells that continually produce oil and sweat. This yellow stanky fluid is stored in these sacs until it travels up a narrow duct and it comes out right around the anus at either 4 o'clock or 8 o'clock position. There's one on each side.

Assistant: Did you say stanky?

Dr. Roark: It's a medical term. So why are they there? What purpose do anal sacs serve? Well the truth is we don't exactly know but there are a couple of theories. They are a territorial scent marker that's used to show ownership of an area. Or they are a communication tool that's used to pass information about the health and wellbeing and stress of one animal on to another. Or they are a form of lubrication to help pass hard poop. And my personal favourite is that they are a leftover anatomical part from the ancestors of dogs and cats who used to defend themselves by spraying. Think about it. What a wonderful world it would be if we solved conflicts with butt spray instead of weapons.

How do they cause problems? There are two major factors that lead to anal sac problems. Number one, blocking driveways and number two, double-parking so that people can't get out.

Assistant: Do you mean cul-de-sac problems?

Dr. Roark: Yes. What are we talking about? So two factors that cause problems: number one, impaction happens when there is a blockage in the duct that drains the sac out so it gets blocked and then infection often follows right behind impaction. Anal sac problems don't seem to be related to age or sex. They are more common in dogs than in cats and they are much more likely to occur in small breed dogs than large breed dogs. #smalldogproblems.

Other pets can have damaged or squished ducts due to past trauma or past infection or even allergies. Once anal sacs get impacted and infected they cause pain and inflammation and that's why we see our buddies scooting their rear ends and licking all the time. Sometimes impacted and infected anal glands even form abscesses that rupture through the skin and they drain that way.

Number four, what can we do to keep them healthy? Science {whispered}! It kind of depends on what's causing the problem. For example if your pet is having problems because of allergies, getting allergies under control may be all that we need to do. Generally increasing the fibre content in the diet or using a supplement specifically designed for this purpose can help create firm stool that will press against the side of the colon as it goes out and it can squeeze out the anal sacs and that helps decrease the changes of impaction.

Some pets might benefit from having their anal sacs expressed regularly. Your vet can teach you how to do this or you may be more comfortable just letting professionals handle it. Personally, my rule of thumb is I try to mess with anal sacs as little as possible. So talk to your vet about whether or not this is a good idea before you make it a habit. If you're looking for something to make a habit of, maybe take up jogging.

In extreme cases surgical removal of the anal sacs is possible; however there are risks of complications with the surgery so it's not super common. If your buddy is scooting across the carpet or licking back there with regularity it's time to make an appointment with the vet because there's nothing funny about ruptured anal sacs.

And that's our show. Thank you so much for watching. Please help us out and help people who have pets that might have anal sac problems by liking, commenting and sharing this video so that they can hear the word as well. Take care and let's be the people that our pets deserve.

Gaby: Well, that was cheerful.

Jonathan: Yeah.

Tiffany: Stanky but cheerful.

Jonathan: I'm ordering that custom T-shirt today that says there's nothing funny about ruptured anal glands.

Tiffany: That was a good one Zoya. So do we have a recipe for today besides vitamin C for the MMR vaccine?

Jonathan: I've been very busy lately and of course that's an excuse but also a reason, if you can have both at the same time?

Gaby: We forgive you.

Tiffany: That's our recipe folks. Massive doses of vitamin C for vaccines. So I guess that's our show for today. Thanks to all our chat participants and make sure you tune in Sunday for our other SOTT Radio Network show, either Behind the Headlines or The Truth Perspective. We'll see.

All: Good-byes