O:H header
We seem to be confronted almost daily with stories about ordinary citizens being the victims of state overreach in enforcing what is deemed "the right medical treatment". When citizens want to pursue healing modalities that don't conform to the mainstream medical establishment's enforced treatment protocol, they can end up with a gun in their face or even having their children taken away.

Looking for alternatives to chemotherapy; using CBD to control seizures or pain, resisting the forced psych meds for children, dissenting against mandatory vaccinations - there are many examples of people trying to go their own way in healing, only to be confronted by the Medical Police State. Meanwhile, access to natural healing modalities, like kratom, IV vitamin C, raw milk or medical marijuana are strictly prohibited, with many people risking jail time in order to heal.

Are we living under a medical tyranny? Can anyone be said to be living in a free country when they don't have the power to choose their own healing protocols? Is trying a modality not recognized by the medical fascists grounds for removing one's children?

Join us on this episode of Objective:Health for an in-depth discussion on medical fascism: Do we already live in a medical police state?

For other health-related news and more, you can find us on:
♥Twitter: https://twitter.com/objecthealth
♥Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/objecthealth

Running Time: 00:58:58

Download: MP3 - 54 MB

Here's the transcript of the show:

Doug: Hello and welcome to Objective Health. I'm your host Doug and with me today are Elliot and Tiff. Today we are talking about medical tyranny, medical fascism, the medical police state. Are we all going to be forced at gunpoint to have vaccinations? If you read some of the headlines, a lot of them were dire predictions telling us the medial police state is right around the corner or indeed is already here. And there's certainly a lot of support for that, a lot of the stories that you hear about some of the stuff the state has done to enforce particular medical things, procedures on people, mandatory vaccination always seems to be hanging over our heads. There's forced medication, psychoactive treatments with kids, forced chemotherapy on children.

At the same time, a lot of times they are withholding things, certain medical treatments, like medical marijuana or CBD. Home births are things as well are things that kind of get forbidden in some cases, forcing people to give birth in hospitals. A few years ago there was the whole raw milk thing, where there were FDA agents armed to the teeth, like SWAT teams going in and confiscating raw milk, the dangerous, terrible threat to society known as raw milk. {laughter} In other parts of the world you've got the whole Tim Noakes controversy, prosecuted for giving dietary advice. There's Kratom. People would like to be using that, it's a natural substance that is used to get off opiates.

Tiffany: There is also Facebook banning certain low carb groups or saying that they consider anti-vaccination groups on Facebook to be fake news so they're going to try censoring that. So, I will vote for the police state already being here. People aren't that aware of it yet but I think it's here.

Doug: Yeah, and it's not just Facebook either. Amazon banned a whole bunch of things from Amazon Prime, the streaming service. they banned anything that was anti-vax, then Instagram has banned anything, I think Pintrest also banned any kind of anti-vax stuff from their platform. One other therapy that is kind of withheld from people is IV Vitamin C, but I mean there's a lot of them. There's tons of medical therapies out there, natural remedies, that sort of thing, that are held from people. Even if they aren't outright illegal, it's kind of like the access is so controlled, it's basically impossible.

Tiffany: Yeah even if they aren't outright illegal, I think people put so much faith in what their doctors say, they see their doctors as absolute authorities, so if you say that you wanted to try some IV Vitamin C and you told your doctor about that, you'd get a lot of pushback and a lot of negativity from your doctor. They actively discourage alternative treatments. Sometimes in some cases they'd even refuse to keep seeing you. Now there's a lot of paediatricians who refused to see children who do not get vaccinated. If it's not mandated on the state level, then certain state therapies are being withheld from people, just the social pressure and the pressure from individual doctors can be a lot to make it seem like it's a medical tyranny, because you don't really have a choice, if you consider your doctor an authority over you.

Elliot: It's very interesting actually as well because there was a case of a trainee nurse somewhere in the United States, I can't remember where it was, and as part of the training, it was on the topic of basically providing people with vaccinations, immunizations. During her training, basically the instructor who was kind of guiding them through it, was advocating that what they should be doing was using threats, and actually lying in some cases, using threats against people who were in the hospital, and actually lying and telling them for instance, one example was that they needed to have the vaccination and if they didn't have the vaccination, they would immediately lose their Medicaid, or health insurance cover, and that they would be required to pay for the entire hospital visit. That was just false, that wasn't true. Likewise as part of the training, they're trying to teach these nurses to lie and to make threats to the public that they needed to have these vaccinations.

So, she questioned that, rightly so, because her logic was that health professionals should not be in a position where they're forced to lie to people, but rather provide them with informed consent, and actually build a relationship with the average public. She was actually dismissed from that nursing school on the basis that she was apparently being oppositional and essentially questioning the authority. I don't know how that case progressed, but it turned out that she had a black mark against her name.

So, she was unable to train at any other nursing school. It seems that just simply the act of questioning authority, even in the context of professional training, where you would think that that was promoted in a higher education institution, it turns out that even in that context, they come down quite hard on anyone who questions in any way.

Doug: Yeah it's kind of crazy if they're teaching nurses, that in their nursing school. How is that really part of the curriculum if you're teaching nurses to be policemen, like enforcers. that it's their responsibility to enforce a particular medical procedure on people, and to use things like coercion or threats? That's not nursing. I don't think anybody who had a desire to be a nurse is doing it because they want to have the power to force people to do a particular medical procedure. Most people are going to go into a nurse because they want to help people, they want to help people get well. It's so backward.

Tiffany: Yeah that's correct. I think that a lot of the pressure from these hospitals comes from on high where they have certain quotas to fill, or they have certain numbers or percentages of vaccines adherence that they have to fulfil at all times. So I guess you could say that sometimes the instructors or the nurse managers are true believers in vaccinations. I think a lot of times that's the case, but they're under pressure too as well to fulfil certain standards as far as vaccinations are concerned.

It's the same thing with nurses and doctors. There have been news stories over the last few years about nurses who refuse to take the flu shot every year. If they don't take the flu shot they are at risk of losing their job. If they don't take the flu shot they have to wear a mask everyday when they come to work, which is really just kind of scarlet letter saying "I don't believe in vaccinations" whether or not that's the case.

Doug: Yeah it is crazy. It is like the scarlet letting basically. How is the patient going to feel if they're full indoctrinated into the vaccine narrative and they see a nurse coming to work on them and they're wearing a mask? It's like, "Wait a minute! They must not be vaccinated, or maybe they're sick," or something like that.

Tiffany: Yeah, I wouldn't want anybody working on me if I think they're sick!

Doug: Yeah, totally, especially if you're immune compromised in some way. But it's not just vaccinations. The mandatory vaccination thing is certainly a hot button topic because it seems like that is, like I said at the top of the show, a threat that's looming. It seems that all the time they're pushing more and more for the mandatory vaccination thing, and of course anybody who's up to speed on the vaccination information that's out there - and if you're not we did a past show on vaccination that you should check out - but anyone who is up to speed on that is at the very least questioning vaccines, questioning their safety, questioning their effectiveness, knows that the narrative that's being put out there doesn't really make sense, the idea that somehow unvaccinated people are a threat to vaccinated people, whereas if vaccinations work they way they say that doesn't make any sense.

The fact that there is this push, a lot of people who are already naturally questioning this sort of thing, it's not helping at all. "Why are you forcing me to?" It was always a choice before, it was always a choice. Do I want to get vaccinated? Do I not want to get vaccinated? Weigh the pros and cons, the risks versus the benefits and you make a decision based on that, and it was fine. Nobody was pressuring anyone else. But in the current climate, there's such a strong push for it, and you just have to ask why? Why are people pushing so hard for these vaccines?

Tiffany: Another funny thing about it is that when it comes to abortion, it's always the argument, 'my body my choice', but when it comes to vaccines, you can't say that.

Doug: Yeah. There's also other things going on as well, like the mandatory chemotherapy. There have been a number of cases. Many of them are just with children. The parents are kind of like "You know what? I don't want my kid to go through this chemotherapy thing", and then the doctors will report them, and they get threatened with child protective services taking their kids away, like it's some kind of child abuse or something like that, to choose an alternative to chemotherapy.

So there's this medical fascism going on where there is only one option for cancer treatment, and that is chemotherapy, and if you refuse that, I think at this point as an adult you still have the option to say "No, I'm not going to do chemotherapy. I'm going to pursue other things." But if it's your child, then that's considered child abuse. You're a neglectful parent because you're denying them the only treatment available for cancer. So there's been a number of situations where children have actually been removed from their parents and forced to go through chemotherapy.

Elliot: Well you say it's only for children, but there was one case of a physician who was claiming that he was an integrative doctor, practicing integrative medicine, and one of his patients declined chemotherapy, so he reported them to the local authorities. I don't know if the local authorities then have the right to take this guy and bring him back, but it seems that it's no longer applicable merely to minors, but what they're trying to do now, is to apply this to everyone, even if you are an adult, and take away the choice of what you do to your own body! So, it seems as though if they have their way, then there would be some kind of mandatory treatment, and you get no say in it because you have to trust the authorities that they know better and sit back and shut up, so to speak.

Doug: There was one case of a 17 year old girl who said "No, I don't want to go through chemotherapy. I don't want to do that." I think she had had a couple of treatments already, it was really wearing her down, she felt terrible, she wanted to pursue other treatments and her mother agreed with her, so they didn't go to the next chemotherapy session, and the police were called. They threatened to take her away. I think that in that case she didn't have to go. The court decided that she could make her own decisions. She was 17, so it's right on the line. I guess at 18 you're allowed to make your own medical decisions. Even in the case she was under her mother's care and her mother agreed with her, still the authorities weren't happy with that. She could've been taken away from her mother.

Tiffany: I think she actually was taken away, I think Cassandra Callender, the girl who had Hodgkin's Lymphoma, had a couple of treatments and she ran away from home and she didn't go to her next chemo appointment and the hospital reported the mother to social services and they took the girl into custody. I think the girl and her mother took the issue all the way up to the Connecticut Supreme court but they lost. I was looking for a follow up on that but I couldn't find anything on the internet.

There was another one recently, a three year old boy named Noah McAdams who had lymphoblastic leukaemia and he got two rounds of chemo and he had really bad side effects and his parents decided they didn't want to use chemo, they decided they wanted to try a more holistic approach and use cannabis. I don't know if it was CBD or straight cannabis with THC. They ended up missing a chemo appointment too. I think this was in Tampa, Florida.

Doug: Yeah.

Tiffany: So they went to Kentucky and the authorities tracked them down in Kentucky and brought them back to Tampa, Florida, and the grandmother was given custody. So I'm guessing maybe the grandmother didn't agree with their decision and basically ratted them out and the authorities found them. So that case is actually still ongoing.

Doug: The judge said that the kid had to get the next round of chemo, but that they didn't dictate everything over the course of the three years of treatment. They said that he has to get the next one and they could discuss with the doctors and come up with a plan for what they're going to do with the rest of the treatment. The parents were kind of like "Well that's as good as it's going to get." They were resigned to that. It was a compromise really.

Tiffany: I mean, what else are they going to do? If they're going to have their son taken away from them, what bigger threat is their to a parent?

Doug: Yeah, it's ridiculous. Well on speaking up, there was another case where there was a little girl who was having 40 seizures a day. Her condition was so bad, she was having so many seizures and her parents started treating her with CBD oil. She was still having seizures but it was much less. She was having one a day instead of the 40. So it was clearly helping a lot. But the doctors wants to put her on a drug called Keppra and apparently it has a lot of side effects and is kind of crazy. So they weren't really interested in doing that because the CBD oil was working so well. And again, they got reported, and there was the threat to actually more or less kidnap the child and force the Keppra treatment on her, and the parents would be charged with being negligent, etc.

I was confusing the two before, that's the one actually that did have somewhat of a happy ending because there was a politician or some sort of judge who ruled that no, if this treatment is working then their parents are doing what they're supposed to do, looking after the child, so they're not going to take her away and force this treatment.

Tiffany: Yeah, in that case, a state representative that called the governor that's how they got the child protective services to stop harassing the parents. And, the parents had a prescription from the neurologist they were seeing, they had a prescription for the CBD. It's not like they were sourcing it illegally and just dosing her up. Not that I would have a problem with that either.

Doug: Oh yeah seriously. I think it's even legal in that state, so they really didn't have any basis for doing this. It really is just like a tyrannical authoritarian power trip, more than anything else. Reading these cases too, child protective services seem dangerous, to be perfectly honest.

Tiffany: Oh their hands are dirty!

Doug: Yeah. The fact that they can arbitrarily decide that you're not doing the best thing for your child so they can come in and take it? That's scary! That's really scary! Especially considering how twisted the mainstream perspective on everything is, in regards to medicine, food, all them sorts of things. The idea that you could look at what the herd is doing and say, "I don't think that's right, I'm going to do things differently". They're going to be like "No, you can't. You're abusing your child if you don't do what we say." That's terrifying actually.

Tiffany: Yeah I would consider child protective services to be the enforcement of the medical police state.

Doug: Yeah. It's really terrifying. Here's a question. Since we're talking about kids, let me put this out there. A little bit of a devil's advocate position here. Okay so child protective services come in and take your kid away, so far we're looking at cases where to us it seems completely unjustified. Okay but what if a case where what you see in the headlines a lot lately are parents who are feeding their kids a vegan diet, and these kids are malnourished, dying in some cases or at least getting sick. They're talking about severe malnutrition in these kids. In those kinds of situations, on the one hand, I'm thinking like okay, mandatory vaccinations, chemotherapy, forcing psychoactive drugs on your kids, withholding CBD, medical marijuana, raw milk, Kratom, whatever the case, those things seem like the state is completely unjustified, because I know the truth about these medical interventions.

But in the case of a vegan parent who really honestly thinks they are doing the right thing for their kid, they're like "I'm not going to poison my kid with animal products, I'm going to feed my kid sorts of raw fruits and vegetables and that's it. My kid is going to be the healthiest kid on the face of the planet." So they're deluded, they insane. But then in those situations it's kind of like thinking "Well yeah, I want child protective services to go in there and get that kid and let's get that kid some nutrition and feed that kid properly".

So this is where I get kind of torn on the whole, because on the one hand, somebody call could me a total hypocrite, because really it's like, "Oh so the medial stuff that you agree with, its okay to go in and take the kids away, but in the medical stuff you don't agree with it's not?"

Elliot: Yeah you've definitely opened a can of worms there Doug. {Laughter} That's a highly nuanced question there.

Doug: Right

Elliot: Yeah, I feel in a similar way, but then the question is, who gets to make that decision?

Doug: Right.

Elliot: Because the parents may love the child sincerely. They may, as you said, be deluded, but their best interests are with the child's health. With these people it is very difficult to educate them if their belief is kind of set. Where do you draw the line? Is there a way of measuring that physically? Could you realistically do some testing? Have mandatory nutrient testing? Test their B-12? Test their folate? All these kinds of things.

Maybe you could kind of - this is just very hypothetical - perhaps setting up some kind of foundation, or kind of health program, for children of plant based families, whereby they could go for regular check-ups, so they weren't going to take the children away from them - this is just off the top of my head - take the children away from them, but emphasize the point that if that child is displaying clear evidence of nutrient deficiency and malnutrition due to their diet, then the parents must comply in terms of propping up that nutrition in a more reliable way.

So you could run fat soluble vitamins, B12 and actually check their BMI, growth and development and education levels against the average child, kind of measure that way as a compromise. So they wouldn't take the child away from the family but they would say "Look, we have clear evidence that they are ill, then surely if your concerns are with the best interests of the child then you will comply with actually feeding them a proper diet." What'd you think about that?

Doug: I do think that is a pretty good compromise. My problem is that essentially is it still kind of deferring to an authority about how to raise your kids, more or less. That's where I'm torn because this wouldn't be an issue if the authorities actually knew what they were doing and had an understanding of what real nutrition is and what should be seen and what a proper diet is and all that kind of stuff. We all know that they don't. The mainstream perspective on all that kind of stuff, everything that we're talking about, is completely backward.

So having any kind of authority in this case is just, I think in an ideal world what you're laying out is a great idea Elliot. That's actually perfect. The person has the freedom to feed their kids what they want to feed them, but there's somebody keeping an eye on things to make sure these kids are okay and that sort of thing. I don't necessarily see anything wrong with that. But the problem is those kinds of things get out of control really quickly. Those same bodies would probably be checking that the kids are getting all their vaccinations and making sure they're getting their five servings of bread a day or something like that, all these different things that I would certainly object to.

If they don't have any power to enforce anything, if they said "We noted that your child is not getting their five servings of bread a day", I could read that and go, "Well thanks for the tip. I don't agree. I'm not going to do anything". Then there's no power to enforce anything, then vegan parents are going to be like "Okay, my child doesn't need meat". So anyway, it seems like a very sticky situation.

Elliot: How about without the power to enforce - now this is very hypothetical - without the power to enforce, just as an education, to have a screening option where parents could take their children but there was no kind of legal authority, the authorities couldn't do anything about it, but rather just show "Okay, do you understand that the diet is bad, and your child is B12 deficient?" I don't know.

Doug: That's great, but then it kind of relies on the idea that the parents are reasonable and are not completely ideologically possessed. They can't just be saying "Well Vegan Gains said I can feed my kid spirulina and he gets all the B12 that he needs."

Elliot: Yeah okay and also if there's not that authority involved, then how are they going to make it obligatory to take their child? If they are kind of ideologically possessed they might choose not to go. That's a conundrum.

Doug: Yeah it really is and it's really tricky and it's like as I was reading this stuff, all the things I really do disagree with mandatory vaccination or the forcing of drugs or whatever the case may be, and I'm thinking about it from the other perspective. These people who are threatening to take kids away because they don't want chemotherapy, quite likely the people who are doing this actually do think these parents are being negligent, actually do think these parents are endangering the life of this child by not undergoing this medical treatment because they don't believe that anything exists other than this medical treatment.

So if you're refusing this medical treatment because you're a crazy hippy and you want to try taking him out in the forest and eating plants, I can see why there would be, "No, you are endangering that child, we have to do something about this" and call the police. Because I can see totally doing that in a case where there was somebody who was feeding their kid a raw vegan diet where it's obvious the kid is malnourished, and that the kid is in danger. So, I don't know where I fall in this, I honestly don't. You know, medical police state, bad of course, but where's the line?

Tiffany: I would draw the line barring any kind of government intervention into people raising their children, except in the most extreme cases of neglect and abuse, where it's quite obvious to anyone who happened to examine the case. Say you have a child and you want to feed them a total carnivore diet and say there was some authority that took issue with that, that would be problematic as well.

I don't think everyone can be saved. I know this sounds kind of cruel, but everyone has free will. Parents have the right to raise their children as they see fit and not everyone is going to agree with all of their choices, and I think you have to allow for the fact that not everyone is going to do things that are 100% towards the betterment of their health. Sometimes people are going to be hurt by their choices, sometimes people are going to die sometimes, sometimes children are going to be hurt and sometimes children are going to die. But I think that the laws have to be the least restrictive laws possible that will save the most people possible. There are going to be some people who cannot be saved by that law.

Elliot: It's not a very nice idea, taking a 30,000 feet bird's eye view of that scenario, if there were vegan children to actually die of malnourishment, and that got out, it might save more children in the future. So I guess, yeah.

Doug: I can see your point Tiff, I definitely do and I definitely don't disagree with you either. The fact of the matter is, if you give the state the power to have these kinds of interventions, it's going to get abused. It's as simple as that. Worrying about where to draw the line, maybe you're right.

On the one hand it's kind of like yeah of course the government should not be interfering with how someone raises their child. On almost everything that's how I feel, 100%. If someone wants to homeschool their kid and teach them about flat earth theory, then that's the way it is. Hopefully that kids going to get out there in the world and learn that their parents were wrong. It's just the vegan thing you know. I'm torn on it, I really am. {Laughter}

Elliot: Also Tiff, with what you said, I question where do we draw the line in terms of where is the cut off point for extreme neglect and abuse? Because extreme neglect and abuse, someone could class putting a child on a purely carnivorous diet as extreme abuse.

Tiffany: That's always going to be a problem because who's going to make those decisions?

Doug: Exactly, as Jordan Peterson says it's the last person you'd want to be making those decisions.

Tiffany: Especially if they want to be making those decisions. We think that the authority figures are the best and brightest but let's face it, they're just people, like everybody else. They have their biases and whatever education that they have, but they're human beings, they're flawed, and I would still prefer to make those decisions for myself.

Doug: Yeah, I guess you have to give people the freedom to make these kinds of mistakes. What you were saying earlier Elliot that if children died of vegan diets and that got out, maybe it would influence other people. But the fact is you see those headlines fairly consistently now. It does seem like they come out with some regularity. Different parents are in court because they malnourished their children and it's considered child abuse and things like that. I guess on the one hand you can try and educate parents in some way. But you're getting awfully close to the idea that you need a licence to have children, like you've got to go through education camps to learn how to raise kids or something like that.

Tiffany: It's a sticky situation, I don't know if there's one good answer for it, but I would still err on the side of being more libertarian with these things.

Elliot: Yeah keeping in mind individual rights over societal, kind of group rights. When you start sacrificing individual rights for the betterment of the group, it seems that the group suffers. When those individual rights go, even though it sounds like a lofty idea and it's going to work in theory, you're setting the stage for something potentially a lot worse further down the line. But the choice to preserve those individual rights, as you rightly said Tiff, is less pretty because there is generally more suffering on an individual level, because people have the choice to have really bad choices and cause suffering to their loved ones in their immediate environment and things, that honour kind of a wider scale. I think it would be better for people as a whole to kind of have their individual rights respected. It's a difficult topic.

Doug: Yeah it is, because on the one hand I agree with everything you guys are saying, but I guess the one question that you brought up Elliot, where is the line and what point is it okay for the state to step in because there's neglect or abuse going on, at what point is that the case? A kid can probably survive for a long time on a vegan diet, but they're going to be on a downward trajectory. At what point do you step in and say enough is enough? I don't know the answer to that question. I honestly don't. Where is the line? If a kid was sleeping on the floor, never given a bath, child protective services would be in there and be like "No, you can't raise your kids this way, I'm sorry." If you feed your kids a vegan diet they can have like permanent debility from not getting the right kind of nourishment at the times that they need it. So I don't know the answer.

Tiffany: Even outside of the realm of vegans, there are cases of extreme abuse and neglect that child protective services doesn't catch. There are laws against abusing and neglecting children, keeping them in filthy environments, feeding them, locking them in cages. Stories come out about that everyone once in a while, I think there was that family in California where they had the kids locked in closets or something for years and years. It just came out that nobody knew about it. There are some things that are going to fly under the radar at all times.

Doug: Yeah, it's true. I don't know the answer on this one/ I think it's very easy to see it from this kind of perspective that's the libertarian freedom is the most important thing perspective. That's the kind of the angle a lot of these people that are arguing about the infringement of government into their lives, the coming medical police state essentially. That's generally where they're coming from. It's that kind of thing, that freedom is the most important thing. I agree with that. I really do. It's just, I don't know, I think maybe I'm still a bit of a soy boy liberal in some way. There's a lot of stupid people out there, let's be honest. The fact of the matter is that the kids shouldn't be suffering because their parents are completely ideologically possessed. On the other hand, we could argue it that the people who are following the mainstream narrative and getting the entire vaccine schedule and pumping their kids full of psychoactive drugs and whatever else, that they're abusing their kids.

Tiffany: Mm-hm.

Elliot: That can cause permanent disability. It can trigger immediate death, and that's out of ignorance. So it's difficult to define something like that, especially when you have such controversial views, as we do on this show. I'm sure, probably 99% of people would claim that what we advocate is abuse. So, there are many different perspectives on this surely.

Tiffany: Yeah, say like the parents who follow the vaccine guidelines, who feed their children the standard American diet, who if their child comes down with cancer they give them chemotherapy and radiation, like if we were in a position of authority, would we take the child away from that parent and put them in a house on a carnivore diet? {laughter} I mean looked at it that way it seems completely ridiculous, but those parents are just as ideologically possessed as the vegan parents.

Doug: Yeah , that's true. That makes me definitely come down more on the side of the freedom to whatever you're going to do argument.

Elliot: Perhaps in the big scheme of things, lessons are to be learned, and whilst you can try to interject into other peoples lives, and to some extent I agree Doug, people are stupid and kind of need to be guided in some way, but when you live in a world where that guiding force is working against humanity, then it's like, how else are you going to realistically manoeuvre around that, other than to completely go the whole libertarian perspective? I think in a world like our own, if we had benign leaders and benign authority, that had our best interests at heart then I think state intervention would be a good idea. But ultimately that's an idealistic fantasy. In the big scheme of things, in this life, perhaps people need to suffer and perhaps part of that suffering is to be born into a vegan family, go on a vegan diet and get really sick and kind of learn from that. That's taking a very kind of philosophical perspective. It's not a very nuts and bolts reality, but perhaps on some level that's what needs to be done. You can't save these people, it's just reality unfortunately it's a horrible place.

Doug: Yeah I agree, I do agree. It's hard for me to go there, but I think that ultimately you're right.

Tiffany: I think that the bigger issue is protecting people from the police state versus letting them do whatever they want to do.

Doug: You're probably right.

Tiffany: Yeah, I think that people forced to undergo certain medical procedures is more harmful than just letting people do whatever they want to do. They had the state called and SWAT teams called on this woman in Detroit, Maryanne Godboldo. She had a 12 hour standoff with the police because she didn't want her daughter, who was injured by vaccinations, who started displaying some sort of behavioural problems, she didn't want her daughter to start taking Risperdal, which is an antipsychotic medication. So the SWAT team was called, there was people out there sitting behind trees, like she was a terrorist or something, had their guns pulled, and they actually took her daughter away from her. She was given a bond of $500,000 USD. Eventually she ended up winning the case, but the prosecutor kept going after her. They were very vindictive and took her to court like four times and they filed a fifth lawsuit against her. So obviously this prosecutor had an axe to grind with her and I think that things like that are more problematic than whether somebody lets their kid eat a vegan diet.

Doug: I think you're right. I think bringing it a bit more down to earth. Most people have some common sense, despite the fact that I just said people are stupid, {laughter} I think most people do have some common sense. I think that you're right that the infringing police state actions are more of a danger to people in general than individual vegan, or whatever people are doing, kind of stupid harmful things to their kids.

Tiffany: Yeah.

Doug: Yeah, because there are certainly a lot of examples of this kind of medial police state coming in. We mentioned the mandatory vaccination thing a couple of times but the whole thing with the measles that just went down in New York state was kind of scary. You weren't allowed out in public or something like that if you hadn't been vaccinated, or you weren't allowed into public spaces.

Tiffany: Yeah like schools or malls or churches or something. Who's going to report you?

Doug: Yeah how are they going to know?

Tiffany: Yeah and that's another thing that makes this issue loom very large. Is this going to come down to people ratting on each other in order to enforce these things?

Doug: Exactly, it's Stasi tactics basically. Everybody is going to be reporting different things on each other. "Oh I suspect my neighbour hasn't been vaccinated", or "I suspect that my sister isn't feeding her child enough vegetables", or something along those lines.

Eventually it's going to get to that point right. That's the way that they enforce it. You see that with the whole vaccine thing, that they have got the public so terrified of unvaccinated people that they will stab each other in the back to try and report each other for this kind of thing, which is insane! Like honestly, the idea that your unvaccinated child is a threat to my vaccinated child is just so stupid on the face of it, but that the people are so worked up that they would report that kid. It's crazy.

Tiffany: I don't know what a person can do to protect themselves from becoming a victim of the medical police state, aside from staying as far away from doctors as you can, because once the system kind of has you by the short hairs, so to speak, if you refuse to comply with whatever treatments they recommend then you're actually kind of making yourself into a target. That's the only deterrent I can think of, just stay as far away from these people as possible.

Doug: Yeah, well, it's hard.

Tiffany: Yeah because now they have electronic medical records and you're going to have these records travel with you. They are talking about having microchips implanted in people that has all their medical information on there. So, it's going to become more and more difficult to stay out of this system if you don't want to be in it.

Doug: Yeah especially if there is some kind of medical emergency, or not even a medical emergency, like a hyped up medical emergency, as we just saw with this whole measles thing. Say, this Zika virus a couple of years ago now, when every headline was about Zika, this threat of Zika. The mosquitoes are going to bite you and give you Zika, everybody was freaking out and it turned out to be nothing.

But, say they had a Zika vaccine, they're giving everybody these vaccinations and you're smart enough to go well this doesn't sound like a good thing so you don't get the vaccine, but then you don't have the information on your electronic thing that says you have been vaccinated. So at that point it's like if they were enforcing vaccinations, that you have to get them, then it's basically a man hunt at that point and they're hunting you down. You can do things like don't enrol your kids in school, home school them, but that's not exactly practical for a lot of people, although it's a good idea for many reasons. Kids get sick. You can't just decide to never take your kids to the doctor. That's negligent in and of itself.

It's tough man. I do not envy people with the kids at this stage in human history. Honestly, having kids right now and wanting to raise them in the right way, you've got your work cut out for you. You really do.

Tiffany: Now they're talking about having microchipped drugs where if you swallow them, and your doctor will be able to know if you're taking your medicine and not.

Doug: Yeah. I think those exist already.

Tiffany: Yeah.

Doug: Yeah that's crazy. So, if your kid's teacher decides that your kid acts up too much, and then they send them to some doctor who says that he's got ADHA and he needs to take this medication, and you don't want to give your kid this medication because it's mind altering medication that's going to affect your kid, but they've got microchipped medication to make sure that he takes it. You can't escape this stuff at this point you know. It's insane. When I was a kid, if you didn't want to do something, there were ways around it. If what you wanted fundamentally disagreed with what the state wanted you to do, in many cases you could get around that. But now, it's getting harder and harder all the time.

Tiffany: I think that in Australia their national health and medical research council are considering making it mandatory for parents who have kids who are diagnosed with ADD or ADHD, if they don't take the doctors prescribed drug treatments for that condition then they will have to have child protective services case opened on them.

Doug: Hmm, wow! I'm always surprised at Australia actually. They seem to want to win the race towards the ultimate police state. I always thought they were pretty laid-back people, kind of cool with stuff, had a live and let live kind of attitude, but I always see these headlines about them implementing straight up Nazi Germany type tactics on people, like mandatory vaccination. It's like they're always taking what all the other countries are doing and going there first. Or going above and beyond what all the other countries seem to be doing. It's just weird, I never thought that Australia was like that, but it kind of seems like that.

Tiffany: There's a lot of vegans in Australia too it seems.

Doug: Oh yeah, I didn't know that.

Tiffany: Yeah, maybe that's a part of it. Who knows?

Doug: Maybe {Laughter}

Elliot: Yeah, they've gone a long way in terms of outlawing nutritional supplements and that kind of stuff as well. They've made it very difficult for any practising doctor to prescribe anything other than a drug. I think actually they were trying to ban homeopathy as well, saying that it's against the law to practice homeopathy.

Doug: Against the law!

Elliot: Yeah. {laughter} They just go above and beyond. They take it to the next level and it's just bizarre, because Australia's the other side of the world, and it only comes out every now and again. You don't hear anything then all of a sudden {laughter} it's something major. So, it's very strange that, indeed.

The topic of our show is essentially medial terrorism, but it seems that to have a child, on every single front these days, like aside from just the health stuff, we know of all the toxins, like we talk about on this show, you've got the Glyphosate, you've got the GMO's, you've got all of the sugar and processed crap that's fed on a daily basis, but then you've got things like the EMF. Then you've got the education system, which is crumbling, whereby the education is going downhill by the day and children who are answering logical answers to questions are being penalised because they haven't done the working out for the question in the correct way, which is actually a lot slower. Clearly the kid has just worked it out in his head and he's just done it and they're penalised for that. It seems as though there's an active dumbing down, whether it's conscious and intentional or not conscious, I don't know, but it seems like there's a dumbing down in the education system.

Practically every aspect of that whole thing really makes it difficult for any parent who has alternative views in any way to bring up a child in our modern world. With the media, with the ideas, with the fashion, with the music, with all of it, it seems like the world that we are now moving into is almost like a satanic hell-hole. I don't use that phrase lightly {laughter}. I really sympathize with parents, because some of them really try to do their best, but it seems as though in the next couple of years it's going to make it very, very, very difficult for anyone to bring up a healthy child, and that's not only physically, but emotionally and psychologically as well, and it's the children who are really suffering in today's day and age.

Doug: Yeah, absolutely.

Tiffany: Especially these kids that come up in the era of social media, and that's all that they know, and they've never living in any other way. I shudder to think what these children are going to be like when they turn 18 and become adults.

Doug: Did you ever see Idiocracy? (film)

Tiffany: Yes, I did. It's a gigantic social experiment that we're running here and in some ways I'm curious to see how this will turn out, but I know it's just going to be a train wreck.

Doug: Well, on that happy note... {laughter}

Elliot: Yeah.

Doug: ...we're all doomed folks! That's it for this week. {laughter} Did you guys want to talk about anything else at all? I was just going to wrap it up.

Tiffany: Well speaking of trying to protect your kids from all of the social ills and the medical tyranny, there was one case where, I think it was a teenage boy who did not want to get chemotherapy. Let me see if I can find it. Anyway, he and his mother ended up running away to Mexico, and they haven't been heard of since.

Doug: Oh really?!

Tiffany: Yeah. I think it was Daniel Hauser and his case was in 2009. He had Hodgkin's Lymphoma too and they skipped town and they headed to Mexico and I was trying to find more information about them but there's nothing. So, I don't know. If you're really, really serious about having a family and you want to bring them up in a traditional way, you might have to just get off the grid.

Doug: Yeah, run to Mexico, run for the border. Well, honestly it would be something to consider for me anyway. I would think about it. Find a medical tourism hotspot where you could get the therapy that you actually agree with. I don't know.

Tiffany: Yeah so that's all I've got.

Elliot: Me too.

Doug: Alright, well I guess that is our show for today. Everybody be sure to like and subscribe down below. Give us a thumbs up and we will be back soon with another health topic. Thanks a lot for joining us and we'll see you next time.

Tiffany: See you!

Elliot: Bye!