in the news objective health
Welcome to another In The News (ITN) show from Objective:Health, where we troll the latest health headlines to bring you up to speed on the latest in ongoing stories.

This week we first look into masks... again. The recent news is that the long awaited Danish mask study has finally been published and it shows exactly what we'd expect (spoiler alert) - there is no statistically significant difference between wearing or not wearing mask. Surprise!

Then move on to the latest in the elites trying to change the way everyone eats to genetically modified, lab-grown, processed garbage that has no right to be called food. Purina is putting bugs in their pet foods, McDonald's announces the release of their apparently long-awaited veggie burger and a new study shows vegans and vegetarians are more likely to break bones than meat eaters.

Join us for another informative episode of Objective:Health!

And check us out on Brighteon and!

For other health-related news and more, you can find us on:


♥And you can check out all of our previous shows (pre YouTube) here.

Running Time: 00:34:53

Download: MP3 — 31.9 MB

Here is the transcript:

Doug: Hello, and welcome to Objective Health. I am your host, Doug, and with me in the virtual studio is Erica and in the background on the ones and twos keeping it real is Damian. Today, we are bringing you another one of our "in the news" shows where we go through the recent headlines and take a look at what's going on.

We will be visiting a couple of topics that we have covered rather extensively, but it's good to do an update on what's going on every once in a while. I'll say masks still don't work in case you were curious, that's the update there and eating meat is still good for you.

I guess the big news on the mask front was that the Danish mask study finally came out. It was finally published, people have been talking about this on various social media platforms for a while. Though, the actual study hadn't been published yet. It has now finally come out.

It was up on and is called Danish mask study finally published: No statistically significant difference between wearing or not wearing mask. That is essentially it, that's what they found. They took a whole bunch of participants, I think it was close to 5000 people, and they broke them into 2 groups. They were given 50 masks and the first group were given advice on how to wear their mask properly and advised them to change their mask every 8 hours, and another group were given no advice, they just gave them masks.

Then they followed them to see how many of them ended up getting SARS-CoV-2 and it was an identical proportion of people. It was 42 in every 2393 people in the masked group and 53 out of 2470 in the no-masked group who ended up with Covid. It was more or less identical, there was 0.3% difference.

That points to this idea that masks aren't really as effective as they would like you to believe that they are. There are lots of criticisms of this study. Some people say that it was underpowered and said the adherence was poor.

The author of this article actually makes a very good point about the adherence being poor and said it mimics what people are doing in society. If adherence is poor in the study then it means that there is poor adherence of mask wearing in the general populace as well. You see people with it below their nose or as a chin-strap. If people were doing that in the study then that's because that's what people do in day-to-day life too.

This was big news because it is yet another piece of evidence that masks are a bunch of BS. Right, Erica?

Erica: Basically. It begs the question: why the continual push for it? Why if we know all this? We covered it before in previous shows, the WHO came out months back and said it doesn't really work. The CDC did the same thing and now we are at the stage where they say "just wear it anyway".

Doug: Exactly. In fact, I think when the New York Times was reporting on this study they said "study finds that masks aren't very effective, but wear them anyway". They said that right in their headline. It's ridiculous.

It's like being gaslit, because you have got all this evidence piling up showing masks are not effective and that they are harmful and yet on the front lines you have got these Nazi mask-enforcers who are abusing people for not wearing their masks.

In France recently there was an incident where they used the fact that they guy wasn't wearing a mask as an excuse to beat him up. He was going into his music studio and they piled in after him and beat the shit out of him. When they got caught they said it was because he wasn't wearing a mask.

The situation that is going on here is unbelievable. Incidentally there is an article which was on which was called Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science. I don't want to necessarily go through this one extensively because it's basically a summary of all the different mask studies that are out there.

It's a really good one for sharing and giving to people; giving to your friends and family, anyone who is on the fence about things and is like "I don't know if these things work." Show them this article because it is really good at summarising all the different points about masks. It talks about whether they're effective at preventing transmission of respiratory pathogens. They're not; spoiler alert.

It talks about the air flow around the mask, the penetration through the masks, N-95 masks versus surgical masks versus cloth masks. It also goes into safety and whether wearing a mask is safe. Again, spoiler alert, it's not. It's not like if you wear a mask you are going to drop dead, but there are safety concerns surrounding mask wearing.

Especially when people are wearing them long-term. Like someone who is in a job for 8 hours a day, or where I am right now where there is actually a rule that you have to even them on the street when you are outside. There are definitely concerns with that and we are going to get into some of those.

Erica: As Damian is scrolling through on the screen here, you can see that they have taken the video down which was originally in that article. I just saw the little unhappy face. If you go to you can watch a video that's super informative because it talks about the history of mask wearing, particularly in medical settings.

It talks about how it was debunked over the years as exactly what Doug said: that now it's just a theatre that doctors continue to perform even though it's been shown that it doesn't really prevent the spread of disease the way that people might think it does. What really stuck out for me in the video was the psychological effects of wearing a mask and seeing the evolutionary biology.

When a human is approached by somebody with a covering over their face it affects those innate human responses to read: is this person a good person or a bad person? Should I be afraid, should I not be afraid? It really hijacks the brain in a way that's really negative.

Anybody that has had to wear it knows that feeling. For one, you can't breathe properly so you are already lacking oxygen to the brain, your parasympathetic nervous system is being taxed because you are in an excessive fight or flight mode because you can't read your environment any more, you can't read people.

To me, this is the insidiousness of it and it is not about a health requirement at all but something much more dark and sinister. I don't mean to be a fearmonger on that, but there are psychological aspects to it. This little video on the SOTT page will clearly delineate that.

It's really helpful because we are all struggling to navigate in this new paradigm that we live in. Knowing that these things are happening while you are wearing a mask is part of what helps you navigate that. Knowing that I can't really read this other person and everyone is walking around and you cannot sense the people around you in a very real way.

Doug: It's true. Speaking of the fact that masks are actually harmful, there was an article up on Health Impact News from November 20th. The headline is 4-Year-Old Almost Dies due to Lung Infection Caused by Prolonged Mask Wearing - Doctor Rants "How Many Children Must Die?".

It's basically just that, it's the story of this 4-year old kid who ended up with a bacterial infection from prolonged mask wearing. Who knows how long the kid was wearing the mask for. It's just so aggravating.

First of all, from the beginning they have said that children don't need to wear masks. Parents who are saying "I don't trust that, I'm going to put my kid in a mask because he might catch the Covid." They think that they are doing the right thing. It speaks to the hysterization that is going on right now, people are hysterical.

Forcing your kid to wear a mask all the time? The bacterial infection is an extreme example, but even just cutting your kid's airflow minorly throughout the day is going to have a negative effect at some level. Whether it be brain damage or any number of other things. The point being is that the mask thing is ridiculous. The fact is that it doesn't work, it certainly shouldn't be put on kids, but it shouldn't be put on anybody.

Erica: Doctor Sherri Tenpenny actually came out and said it is a form of child abuse to do that. It's concerning because with enforcement and whatnot is child protective services going to get involved? Especially since the information has been out since April that children don't really spread Covid. I think that the fact that they're masking-up is more of that predictive programming. Let's just get them to support it young because this may not change in the future. I just feel so terrible when I see children wearing a mask. Obviously I would never say anything, but I feel like "oh my gosh, that's just wrong on so many levels."

Doug: Definitely. What you were referring to there, Erica, was that article in the Daily Mail from back in April. It was called Experts cannot find a single child under 10 who has passed on coronavirus to an adult despite huge trawl of data raising hopes they pose no risk.

Erica: That's the Daily Mail though! That's pretty mainstream.

Doug: They have been pretty good with some of their stuff. They can waver back and forth, it depends on the writer. They have published some stuff that is pretty on-point as far as Covid and masks and all this sort of stuff.

There are a couple of good mainstream sources out there that seem to be a little bit more on-point and a little bit more willing to publish some stuff against the mainstream line. It was back in April, so I don't know if they have now been able to find a single case of children passing it onto adults.

They have been saying from the beginning that it doesn't look like kids even get it. Of course there is going to be the odd exception to that, but for the most part it basically seems like it's a stupid idea to put kids in masks. Even if the masks worked - which they don't - and even if they weren't dangerous - which they are - they're still not going to do anything. There is no point in doing that to your kid, even for the psychological reasons that we were talking about before.

Changing gears, here's another news item. RT recently published something. They have been publishing articles by Dr Malcolm Kendrick who is a GP with the National Health Service in England. I have been reading his blog on and off for years, I'm not necessarily diligently reading it but I was following him back when he was talking a lot about cholesterol, statins and that sort of thing. He always had a very refreshing, on-point, perspective. He has been for RT lately and his latest is A low-fat, high-carb diet has been the largest public health experiment in history as the world gets even fatter, we must rethink.

Regular watchers or listeners - when we were doing it on audio - of our show have heard us go on about this multiple times. It is good to see that it is starting to get into the public perception more and more, this idea that there was no obesity epidemic until the dietary guidelines came along. That's essentially it.

Back when people were eating whatever they wanted to eat and whatever they felt they should eat everything was fine. There was no obesity epidemic, there was no problem. In come the dietary guidelines that tell everybody to eat high-carb and low-fat and suddenly - well, it wasn't so sudden. It took a couple of decades to happen - we find ourselves in this obesity epidemic. Maybe we were all better off before the government decided they needed to tell us what to eat. It's a radical idea.

Anyway, Kendrick goes into some good details on this. People who are familiar with this kind of thing might not get anything new out of the article, but it is good to see that it is getting out there and getting around. Mainstream sources are picking it up and people really need to make this connection between what they tell you is healthy to eat versus what is actually healthy to eat.

Erica: It's amazing to me that information like this isn't picked up and spread far and wide considering that people who are dying from Covid-19 have comorbidities, one of them being obesity if I'm not mistaken?

Doug: Yes, you are right.

Erica: Here is a great opportunity to actually give people tangible information that would help them change their lifestyle to prevent illness. This has been said to me numerous times: why isn't anyone going on TV to talk about vitamin C and sunshine and eating a healthy diet and getting exercise to prevent illness?"

It's all about the vaccine and the masks. This should be far and wide for people, and it's not. It's just relegated to RT.

Doug: It's not super mainstream. It's like we were talking about on our last show about the biosecurity state. We were talking about how the different branches of this multi-tentacled monster is bringing forth this new world order/reset or whatever you want to call it, and the food aspect is one of them.

They started this back in the 70's with their dietary guidelines and things have been pushed towards this weird level of anti-meat and pro-GMO, strange frankenfood which is lab grown fake stuff. They're trying to pass that off as healthy and ideal.

It's interesting because New Scientist had an article recently and the headline was Meat-free diets linked with greater risk of breaking bones. Well, how about that? Vegetarians and vegans are more likely to break bones than meat eaters! That doesn't make any sense if vegetarianism and veganism is more healthy for you and if meat is really bad for you.

It was basically a study where they followed 65,000 people in the UK from 1993 until 2010. It might still be ongoing actually, but they did collate their data in 2010 and they found that "vegans had broken a hip at over twice the rate of meat eaters, while vegetarians and fish eaters had a smaller increase in risk, of about 25 per cent. Vegans - but not vegetarians and pescetarians - also had a higher risk of breaking other bones."

They go on to say that vegans and vegetarians tend to have less calcium in their diets. Maybe, but I tend to not put so much on the calcium and much more on the protein - which they also say in the article. Calcium is important for bones, of course, but you need multiple minerals and I think that the protein, in particular the animal proteins, are more about keeping your bones structurally sound.

If you think about chalk, chalk is pure calcium. Look at how brittle chalk is, you can easily break it with your fingers. You don't want bones which are pure calcium, they need that protein matrix to be flexible. Bones are not just all about calcium. Animal proteins are obviously the best protein source that you can get. Trying to get the same kind of protein requirements from vegetables doesn't work. This is a sign of that, having weak bones is a sign that you are not getting the proper sources of protein.

Erica: They're just not dropping that. After doing the EAT-Lancet show years ago we thought that maybe they've been shown to be pretty much full of crap.

Doug: But it's still the mainstream perspective! People still think if somebody decides that they are going to start cleaning up their diet and get a little bit healthier then they have to eat less meat. [sighs] Ok. That's not going to work.

Erica: The plant-based conspiracy.

Doug: Exactly. I feel because there are people out there who do really want to get their diet on track and they want to be healthier but they're just so misinformed because every mainstream source they see is telling them that you need to cut down on your meat.
"It's not just your health, it's the environment. You gotta save the environment and eat more plants. Eat these lab-grown ultra-processed Frankenfoods to save the planet and to save your health."
On the face of it it's ridiculous.

Erica: That's exactly where it is going. We live in bizarro-world. We did a show years ago about schmeat. That's our loving term which we call fake meat. When we did the show we talked about the yuck-factor. How people were interviewed or however they do those tests on people and most people were pretty creeped out and grossed out at the thought of eating something grown in a test tube.

I remember the article saying that we can get beyond the yuck-factor. Unfortunately, with the advent of Impossible Burger and Beyond Burger it looks like they've pretty much dealt with the yuck-factor. If you're so entrenched in your belief system that you feel you are saving the planet and you saving animals by eating schmeat then you're sold.

Now we are seeing it. It's coming fast and furious. Also, with the breakdown in the supply chain due to the Covid all of a sudden accessibility to things is lessening. Especially in America where we are used to year-round food. It's starting to shut down a little bit or things are not as available.

I will say that I have heard several people report that when their food shelves were pretty much cleaned out of bacon and sausage that Beyond Burger and Impossible Burger's products were still on the shelves readily available. People aren't completely sold yet. I will say that for those who have not watched the movie Soylent Green which was made in the 70's it is a good time to review something like that. Yes, it is a Hollywood movie but it is very telling.

Doug: Interestingly, there was an article back in March in the National Post - a Canadian paper - and the headline was Demand for meat rising despite deluge of plant-based alternatives, report finds. The headline says it all there. The demand for meat is not disappearing despite all these plant-based alternatives showing up, despite all the propaganda telling you that you should be eating less meat and eating these frankenfoods instead.

It seems like people are not buying it. At least to an extent. It seems like the majority of the population is not really interested in this kind of stuff beyond the initial curiosity. I know when KFC came out with their Frankenfood chicken nuggets that there were lineups around the block. Everybody wanted to try it, but how were sales after that? I know that in Tim Horton's in Canada were serving a Beyond Burger or an Impossible Burger or something like that and they stopped because demand was so low. Nobody was interested. Everybody gives it a try and they are like "well, yeah. It's alright." and then they go back to their meat.

Even if they don't know on a conscious level that this isn't good for them, on a subconscious level when their body is craving meat then no substitute is going to do. It's not going to work. You're getting things from meat that you do not get from vegetables, it's as simple as that. It's stuff that your body actually needs. If you are craving meat it's not because of the taste. People all say that you get over that and you won't miss the taste. It has nothing to do with the taste, it has to do with the nutrition: what your body is actually getting from this food.

Erica: Exactly. I feel like having been involved with the GMO research for so long that we almost hit that apex where people were like "ok we're over it, it's done. Let's eliminate this terrible agriculture." Then, they just repurposed it and rebranded it and resold it and used the vegan platform to do it. I've spoken with vegans about it and they're like "it's better than having a hamburger." I cannot wrap my mind around how all of a sudden you think that genetically tinkering with food to create a fake substance that tastes like a hamburger, even though you're a vegan, is of sane mind.

Doug: That's totally true. I didn't really think about that until you mentioned it, but they have totally taken over that whole vegan segment. The vegans used to be the health-nuts where they would not stand for genetically modified crap. They didn't want the processed garbage, they were like "no, you have to go back to the natural food". They had a twisted perspective on what that natural thing was, but it's true, vegans nowadays are into this weird hightech future of lab-grown meats and lab-grown foods and highly processed stuff.

It's so weird, I think of that writer for The Guardian, George Monbiot who has this weird sci-fi perspective on the future where farms don't exist any more and everything is grown in vats. It's this weird 1950's space food idea of what everybody is going to be eating. It's so bizarre, it's this really twisted perspective. It's so strange that somehow they managed to divert the vegans away from this idea of "natural" to something weird and high-tech.

Erica: It's like a Brave New World.

Doug: Just to round things out here, McDonalds, the one hold-out that was not having any kind of bullshit plant-based burger-thing has now announced that they are debuting - get this name - the McPlant. Isn't it catchy? [Laughter] The McPlant is going to be McDonalds' new veggie burger, essentially. A fake-meat burger.

Erica: For vegans and omnivores alike.

Doug: Everyone can eat one of these McPlants. The delicious McPlant. "Do you eat plants?" "No, I don't eat plants, I eat McPlants." Not that you can really fault McDonalds for serving fake food. Let's be honest here, it's just another fake bullshit thing they are adding to their menu. I think they're probably one of the last fast food joints that's actually going to be introducing one of these things. That'll be coming to a McDonalds near you.

Erica: McPlant extend across a line of plant-like products including chicken-substitute breakfast sandwiches and burgers.

Doug: Can't wait to see that.

Erica: The scary part is when it's at the point where they just don't even tell you any more. Back to my reference of soylent green. We're just not going to tell you what's in it. No that you don't care about GMOs any more it doesn't even really matter. They are just going to continue to tinker and you will all willingly go along with it, if you are hungry enough.

Doug: There was an Ice Age Farmer report recently called Green New Meal. He talked about the McPlant in that, and it was funny because he started off with a video which was done by the Onion. Do you remember when the Onion used to do satire news things? It was from 2012, so eight years ago. It was about Taco Bell and how they have moved away from anything natural and their entire product line is unnatural and there is no actual food substance left in it, and they were promoting it as a good thing because it was green and good for the environment. It was quite funny, but it's so prescient. It's not far off from what we are seeing now.

It's almost like there would be a fast food chain out there who would brag about the fact that there is nothing grown naturally on their product line. Everything comes from a lab. "Our carbon emissions are so low, it's so good for the environment and there are no animal products in here." I can actually see it. At the time, it was ridiculous. Now? Well, give it a couple of years.

Erica: People should go and watch it because at first they don't tell you that it's a joke so you're like "this was really on TV?" They were saying that "we've recycled all the packaging so everything that we made it with is now recycled in this new taco." I was like "Is this for real?" I caught myself. It's believable. "I know that they could do it, but these guys are actually coming out and this is their sales pitch?" Then, obviously you realise. Spoiler alert!

Doug: I guess that spoiled the whole thing.

Erica: You know what? That is where we are coming to. Once the Covid-thing fades into whatever it fades into, next it will be your diet. Eat the fake meat, and the cricket flour. You want to share that one?

Doug: The pet food one? Nestle has come out with a Purina line and I think it is called Beyond Nature? [Beyond Nature's Protein] which is a really creepy name for it. Beyond Nature Purina Pet Foods which I think is both cat and dog food which has bugs in it. The main source of protein in it is bugs. I don't know if it is the main source, but one of the sources of protein in it is bugs.

Again, this is normalising the idea of eating bugs which is another thing that these guys have been pushing on people for a while. They are shifting the Overton Window to make bug eating more and more acceptable. The idea being that we can breed tonnes of bugs and it has zero impact on the environment and it's just as good as meat as far as the protein source is concerned. Again, it comes down to that ick-factor, right? Nobody wants to eat bugs. I will state outright that I don't eat bugs.

Erica: I don't intentionally eat bugs.

Doug: Right, but I mean I'm not going there. I will eat a steak thank you very much. I am not going to drink cockroach milk, I am not going to eat cricket flour, I am not doing it. Everybody has to draw their line somewhere, I am not doing that.

Erica: As you said, Doug, it's just a way to subtly introduce it. We were talking before the show about animals in general, and we saw this with putting a tracking chip in your dog in case they get lost. Now, it is totally acceptable. Any time you adopt an animal, particularly dogs, they already have the chip embedded in them. People are fine with that, there are no questions about chipping your animal. It's great, if your dog runs away then they can find it. We will see them slowly start to introduce these things in animals and then before you know it it will be available [for humans].

Doug: Some people chip their kids now. That's becoming more acceptable. It's the same thing with the bugs. "Feed it to your pets, it's fine" then after a while it's like "well, we are going to have to have you guys start eating some bugs."

Erica: On that happy note. [Laughter]

Doug: We are over our time here so I think that we will call it there for this show. Thanks everybody for joining us, be sure to join us on the next one, we are back next week. Thanks to Damian and to Erica. Be sure to "like" and subscribe if you are so inclined. We will see you next time.