OUR BABY'S DNA WAS TAKEN AT BIRTH AND YOU WERE NEVER TOLD WHY!

The Cost Of Knowing

Dr Pompa 0:00

If you think you're going to get cancer, I promise you your risk went dramatically up that you will get cancer, and that's a bad thing. So that is the biggest cost, I believe, of knowing.

SPEAKER_01 0:10

There's a plan to make personalized medicine forced. You know, it won't be opt-in. It will be something that you're onboarded into at birth.

Dr Pompa 0:19

We used to just think your DNA was your destiny, and when science showed your DNA's not. There's something called epigenetics above the genome and how your environment changes that it's more important than the hard drive.

SPEAKER_01 0:31

When I heard a geneticist himself admit that genes are the least significant factor in health outcomes, whoa.

Dr Pompa 0:40

Major premise has to shift if we're going to shift the way we think about these tests. Major premise is who is in control, who designed our bodies.

SPEAKER_01 0:49

You cannot undo this information, and it's an atomic bomb to privacy.

Dr Pompa 0:58

Oh, wait till you hear

The Heel Prick Parents Never See

Dr Pompa 1:00

this episode of the Dr. Pompa podcast. You're it's gonna blow you away. I didn't know what was going on. This is happening in 50 states, unknowing to most parents that your baby's heel is being pricked. Oh, yeah, taking the blood, health freedom violated. And wait till you hear this interview because where this is going with health, the future of health, the future of privacy, it's more dangerous than you think. And I'm here with attorney. Leah Wilson, you're an attorney fighting for medical freedoms, and even started a nonprofit. Today's topic, I assure you, this is not going to be boring. And we have, we're gonna break this right here because I would argue almost 100% of my audience has not heard of what's happening right now. They do not know what's going on. And this is, I'm praying, will explode from even from this podcast. And I brought another medical freedom with uh a guy named Paul Levin on this show, and already it made it uh to uh news channels because I said if someone watching this, you know, and boom, Newsmax picked it up, we're hoping Fox News picks it up because there was a medical freedom being violated massively, killing babies. Well, this is heading in the same direction, and you're breaking this here, so I'm excited for this topic. Okay, we want to start right here. Uh, what is the big lie that's being told? Okay, that's you know, absolutely crushing medical freedoms. People have no idea. It sounds so innocent, but we could be all doomed from this. What's the lie?

SPEAKER_01 2:38

Genes are your destiny. I mean, that's the number one trick right now. And, you know, thanks so much, Dr. Papa, for having this conversation, for having me on. Um, and I don't know if you agree, but I've seen so many people exit conventional medicine, but the hardest barrier to bust through is the genetic lie. It's this identity issue of someone looking at your genetics and foretelling. I mean, it's a prognosis, it's predictive of what is going to happen in your life.

Dr Pompa 3:08

Yeah. So I okay, let's bring this into context, right? Because right now, to your point, even in alternative medicine, oh, if we can, everyone loves looking at their genes, right? SNP testing is all the thing, and people are identifying themselves with it. I absolutely hate it. I am an MTHFR homozygous. I have the HMDRG, so I can't detox. So I will end up. It's like, and I I laugh at all of it because your DNA is not your destiny. Time magazine years ago had a headline. Your DNA is not your destiny. They did. Oh, yeah, but this was years ago because it was about epigenetics. Oh, epigenetics is the thing. Your hard drive is not your destiny. Okay, but that's gone the wayside because right now, gene, gene drugs, gene modification is all the rage. I was just at this huge fundraiser for oncology, childhood cancers, and aspen. And I had to endure a panel, uh, some lovely people on the panel, you know, not passing judgment, but they had all the genetic experts there. And a young man who had non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who beat it, and they were just talking about all the wonderful things that are happening in gym, billions of dollars going into genetics. And, you know, if we just know people's genes, the younger the better. So we can change, you know, we'll be able to prevent all these cancers if we just can know their genes early on. That's kind of this topic, right?

SPEAKER_01 4:29

Absolutely. Okay. Absolutely. But the ironic thing is there's a plan to make personalized medicine forced. You know, it won't be opt-in. It will be something that you're onboarded into at birth.

Dr Pompa 4:42

So they're saying personalized medicine, meaning we can develop, this is what they were saying on this oncology group. We can develop the perfect chemo for you if we know your genetics, right? And if we know this person's genetics, we can develop the perfect drugs. That's personalized medicine. That's what they're saying the future is.

SPEAKER_01 4:57

Yes. And I think you and I would have a deeper appreciation for personalized medicine in the sense that it's a physician and a patient that have a relationship. The physician knows the patient, knows the patient's circumstances, their life, their medical history, that they look at the whole person. That's what people are wanting with personalized medicine. Yeah. But leave it to the industry to capitalize on this moment in time and hijack personalized medicine to say that it you swap out that doctor-patient relationship for a reading of your DNA so that you can be dependent upon lifelong clinical care. And the crazy thing is they're gonna capitalize on this and they're building the infrastructure right now as we see as we speak by looking at the DNA of every newborn at birth and then telling the mother if we intervene now, your child won't have a short, miserable life. You know, that's their narrative. And that if we do this before symptoms, so Dr. Pompa, we're talking about asymptomatic, healthy newborns will be the first patients for personalized medicine, which sounds lovely, right? I mean, personalized medicine sounds like the answer to what we all want, you know, the fix to big M medicine, the fix to our environment being insanely broken,

The Genetic Destiny Myth

SPEAKER_01 6:20

but it's actually a distraction.

Dr Pompa 6:22

Absolutely, a total distraction. So, hypothetically, to bring this in context, they're doing these heel pricks at birth, right? Right at birth, how many hours, how many days?

SPEAKER_01 6:33

So the heel prick is supposed to be done between 24 and 48 hours. And I don't know if you know this, and some of our your listeners might not know this either, but moms aren't even asked if you want to do the heel prick.

Dr Pompa 6:44

They're just coming in and doing it.

SPEAKER_01 6:45

Because it's mandatory in all 50 states, in three of those states, it's a criminal action to opt out or do you have to do that?

Dr Pompa 6:52

Nobody knows this.

SPEAKER_01 6:53

Right. So the heel prick will happen unless you know that it's going to happen and you exercise your rights for it not to happen. So for me, for example, I had a my third.

Dr Pompa 7:03

So there's you don't opt in, you have to opt out.

SPEAKER_01 7:06

Correct. And that's why it's criminal to make something so invasive, like a genome sequencing, a whole reading of your DNA compulsory, that it's something that would be tied in to this mandatory newborn screening process. And so if you look at um these states that require it, Indiana, my home state is one of them. I had a baby later in life. My little girl MJ just turned three. She was born at home. To get her birth certificate, I had to print out an extensive religious exemption, take it to my public health department and tell them that I was opting out for religious reasons before I could even have a birth certificate for my child. So they make it very hard to get around it because they don't tell you they're doing it. If they do have you sign something, it's to say how they can use the data, not that they can perform the screen. I mean, that's the only reason they need a signature. And so then so they're taking something that's required and then marrying a very invasive, dangerous, risky process with it. And that's why Stand for Health Freedom is opposing it. That's why we're watching this issue carefully. That's why we're pulling off all the stops and getting this word out because it's our job to tell moms how to make meaningful decisions because no one's gonna do that for us.

Dr Pompa 8:21

Right.

SPEAKER_01 8:22

The government's not gonna help us make meaningful decisions.

Dr Pompa 8:24

So let's talk. Okay, so right now in 50 states, they're doing this heel prick. Okay. Every hospital?

SPEAKER_01 8:31

Every hospital across the U.S. I mean, it's CMS Joint Commission on Health. You know, it is a standard of care.

Dr Pompa 8:37

They're not telling a mom we're gonna do, I mean, so it's happening. Maybe the mom would say what it is, oh, we're just checking, we're just doing a heel prick, a little blood test. Who would be even concerned about that? Correct. Half the time it's probably getting done. The mom didn't even know it was done, right? Because they don't want to panic the mother or have to explain. So they're probably doing it out of sight, out of mind. And this here heel prick, now they have a database of every child that's been born, of their genetics, right? And they're saying, this is wonderful, this is not a bad thing, because now we're going to be able to prevent all these conditions. So your child has the BROC 1 gene, right? So they're going to now start developing therapies and drugs to put them on from day one.

SPEAKER_01 9:23

So currently there are between 30 and 70 inborn metabolic markers on the heel prick, right?

Dr Pompa 9:30

30 to 70 things they're looking at.

SPEAKER_01 9:33

In the blood. So they are blood markers, they're looking at what is there, what's present, and um helping them start treatment early. However, the expansion that's being planned that we need to tell moms about, that hopefully together we can get stopped, is to now take that mandatory process and integrate in whole genome sequencing, which would expand the 70 markers to over 700, 95% of which they do not have an effective treatment or any solution to offer, which leaps over every medical ethic to screen for things you cannot effectively treat. Because medicine says, you know, medical ethics say only screen for those things which you understand and can effectively treat. And if they don't have an effective treatment for 95% of these, they're leaping over every medical ethic.

Dr Pompa 10:23

So it shouldn't be done. But let's talk about the 70 that are here now. 30, what'd you say, 30 to 70 metabolic markers they're able to assess for, right? I would even argue they don't have anything for that, you know, that they would be able to offer. So I think that's even that's a violation. But okay, so what with that, these markers that they're looking at, are they already making suggestions?

SPEAKER_01 10:45

Yes. I mean, if you look at And what are these suggestions? So there's two fairly recent ones. Well, let's go to one a few years back, I think it was 2018. It was, you know, the federal government says, look, now we recommend every state add this to their newborn screen. So that was um SMA, spinal muscular atrophy. It's a devastating rare disease. And they add it to the state's newborn screens right when zolgensma, a gene therapy, is available to treat healthy babies before symptoms. And zolgensma is a gene therapy that is $2.1 million for the infusion. And um there have been multiple pediatric deaths from zolgensma.

Dr Pompa 11:26

So if this shows up, they're gonna say you should get this treatment to prevent this potential thing. Again, we started the show by saying your DNA is not your destiny. You and I both know that that's a bunch of crap. Meaning, just because you have the gene doesn't mean you're gonna get the condition.

SPEAKER_01 11:43

That's right.

Dr Pompa 11:44

Okay. That's right. But they're gonna they're saying you have the gene, we'll assume you're gonna get it. And even if it's one in whatever, whatever, whatever, whatever, it's it may be an increase in possibility we're gonna treat it anyway with this gene therapy.

SPEAKER_01 11:58

And how they convince the moms to do that is because it's such a devastating disease that they say, you don't want this to happen. Like we need to intervene right now. If you don't, I mean I mean, yeah, and maybe even parental rights can be implicated if you are bold enough to say no. And so Zolgenzma, the one of the foundational papers was found to be fraudulent. So they found an error that said six of the seven mice survived the animal trials. And later they came back and said, actually, it was six of the seven mice died. So they the FDA acknowledged the error in the foundational research and kept from this treatment. From Zolgensma and kept the product on the market. So that gene therapy is still on the market today. It can still be offered to kids today, even though it had a flaw in the foundational research.

Dr Pompa 12:49

You're giving potentially, you're giving your child a treatment that doesn't even the condition of the disease doesn't even exist, just a maybe gene that could lead to it. You're giving them a treatment where six out of seven mice died. I would argue the seventh had permanent damage somehow.

SPEAKER_01 13:10

I mean, it would be good to dig deep into look at that. Absolutely. And the the fact of the matter is if even if SMA has like high penetrance, are they giving full informed consent? You know, with because when you talk about what are the chances the scientific community, and I'd love to talk to you about this even further, because I love what you've said about MTHFR and to kind of fly in the face of identifying with that, because um if you look at penetrance identified by the scientific

Personalized Medicine Without Opt In

SPEAKER_01 13:40

community, they say there's only three rare diseases that have a hundred percent penetrance, and that's Huntington's, Taysacs, and a rare form of dwarfism.

Dr Pompa 13:48

Meaning that if you get the if you have the gene, you're gonna get the you're going to get it.

SPEAKER_01 13:54

That's what they say. A hundred percent if you have Huntington's gene, there are three and they're gonna screen for 700 and tell you that this is your future. And so that's where you know, that is a huge violation of an informed decision when you're looking at a mom in the first days of life, you know, let alone yourself. I mean, even we are all vulnerable to what's said over our lives. And you ask about other therapies. The um the uh douchen's muscular dystrophy is the one that HHS just added to the newborn screen because there's a brand new gene therapy. This one's 3.1, 3.1 or 3.2 million dollars for the infusion. That's how expensive these therapies are. And there were four deaths in the past 12 months in that rare disease therapy, but it's on the market.

Dr Pompa 14:43

Yeah, now they're screening for this. And if your child's unlucky enough to have it, not because they have the gene, but unlucky enough because they might get the treatment. And that's uh a you know, a devastating thing right there. And and again, I I want to bring it back to your DNA is not your destiny and what we're talking about here, right? Because I it this isn't the same as Brock One in the sense that we're dealing with adults, that I go, you removed what, you're removing what? Now it's ovaries and breasts because you have a gene. It's like, and people are doing this, okay. But this is kids who don't have a choice. Like I think someone's nuts if they do that, right? I do. And no offense, because maybe you've been misled to think that because you have Brock One, you have cancer. Here's what I get now. I've been diagnosed with Brock One. You've been diagnosed. It's a prognosis. Yeah, exactly. You they got it all wrong here. You haven't been diagnosed with anything, right? It's like, but see, if they diagnose something, now they can treat it. We can remove your breasts, right? Uh this is a similar thing. I mean, where they're getting people to make things happen, but these kids don't have a choice.

SPEAKER_01 15:52

And that's exactly what we hear is wouldn't you want to know? And it's like, know what? And Raka One is a perfect example. I mean, I I understand this. I sat in rooms with my mom as she was passing from ovarian cancer. So a female cancer, high estrogen dominant cancer. And her doctors were so bold as to tell me that I needed to be on a chemo drug the rest of my life. And I'm like, oh, we're not here for me. Thank you. And so I divorce that. You know, I divorce like the what is said over me, and then go dig really deep into BRAC a one and find that it's, you know what, the gene that they've identified is actually protective against 30 to 40 other cancers.

Dr Pompa 16:31

I know.

SPEAKER_01 16:32

It's an adaptation.

Dr Pompa 16:33

Listen, this is what I say everyone with the SNP, the MTHFR. I'm like, they're they're finding out that this is no curse, it's a blessing for so many other things, right? And they're finding other pathways around the MTH way. The body methylates, the biggest thing that really depletes methylation is uh stressors and physical, chemical, emotional. It's not having the gene. You know, it's like, so, you know, here we are, right? It's like the Brock One gene, people removing parts because they're told that they're going to get cancer, couldn't be further from the truth, and yet it protects you against four other cancers.

SPEAKER_01 17:08

And like 40.

Dr Pompa 17:09

40.

SPEAKER_01 17:10

Have you ever yes, yes, 30 to 40 other cancers. Have you heard of the Angelina Jolie effect?

Dr Pompa 17:16

It's a psychological effect where, but go ahead, Steve.

SPEAKER_01 17:19

Well, because BRCON in 2001, I think they said that double mastectomy, the rate was around 50%. If a woman was told that you have BROCA 1 or two and you have an 87% chance increase in your risk for breast cancer in your lifetime, 50% of those women would get the double mastectomy. In 2013, Angelina Jolie publicized that she was getting the double mastectomy. And since then, that rate has tripled for women who fall into that trap.

Dr Pompa 17:48

And because of the fear. I mean, yeah, pure fear of like, oh my God, I'm gonna get it, I'm gonna prevent it.

SPEAKER_01 17:54

And if you look into it, that 87% number that's used to convince these women that the smart, reasonable, prudent thing to do is to have a double mastectomy came from a 1990 study that looked at women who were in families that already had breast cancer deaths, high risk for breast cancer in their environments, and they didn't look at the whole population. So when they extrapolated that out and actually looked at the population-wide risk, the BRACA one risk fell from like that 87% down to 40%, which is population-based risk probably for breast cancer in the US. So the average isn't that much different, and that's what's on the line when people are scared into making decisions based on a single piece of information that quite frankly is not.

Dr Pompa 18:44

And you know, even like you said, looking at that 1999 study, it's like in them bringing it down to, you know, pretty much what the risk of getting breast cancer is. Let's hypothetically say if you have Broco 1, it's 10, 20% more. Well, it's still epigenetic, meaning that you still have to turn that gene on. It's still an environmental stressor chemical that triggers the gene because it's epigenetic, not hard drive, you know, meaning epigenetics above the genome that turns on a gene. We all have predispositions, susceptible genes, right? But this is life. You know, we can't change that, right? But it takes the trigger, the thing that triggers and turns it on, that really matters. It's not the gene itself. And to your point, just because you have this gene, I guarantee you it protects you somewhere else. And that's exactly the point.

SPEAKER_01 19:40

And that's why I struggle even with the term gene mutation, because if you view the body as brilliant, as always doing the right thing at the right time, is it a gene adaptation? Is it protective? Is it responding to your environment instead of going bad on you, hijacking you? You know, that we turn on our own bodies when we look at these things as a failure of the creation.

Dr Pompa 20:06

It's so true. Like everyone looking at these gene SNPs, MTHFR is the, you know, I it's such a waste of everybody's time because, you know, arguably, again, what is the body's innate intelligence doing with that? If this, if you have uh a homozygous MTHFR, uh, there are all these other studies showing that, oh, but but this pathway is upregulated. Innate intelligence knows this. This pathway's downregulated, this one's upregulated, this one. It's it's silly. It's so we're gonna know. I tell you, I bailed on this many, many years ago. I think I got deep into it 10 years ago, maybe it was even longer than that, 15. And, you know, I realized that it's not changing outcomes. Oh, this person

Mandatory Screening And Hard Opt Outs

Dr Pompa 20:50

has this. This we're gonna be able to tell, you know, what drugs work and what supplements work, what diet, what it's like it didn't change anything. And the reason it doesn't change anything is because we it's not that simple to say you have this gene, eat this food, not this food, or take this supplement, not that supplement. You know, it's your your methyl deplete, you're you know, you're not gonna methylate because of this gene versus that gene. It's not true, it's not that simple.

SPEAKER_01 21:13

Well, the body's so intricate that if we go picking and choosing what we want to alter, there's always downstream effects. Yeah. And that's why when moms say something like, Well, wouldn't you want to know? Wouldn't you want to know if your child's at risk for cancer? You have to ask the question of what's the benefit of knowing? Because we know that a genetic screen doesn't tell you who you are or what your life is going to be like. But we know the cost of knowing could be fragile child syndrome. The cost of knowing definitely will be that you're convinced to be a lab rat when when a new therapy is available. The cost of knowing will be that you've given up extremely private information, that your privacy has changed forever. Um

Dr Pompa 22:00

And by the way, the cost of knowing is called a nocebo effect as well. Meaning that something very we understand the placebo effect, and people always say, oh, it's just a placebo. No, no, no. Placebo effects are real, meaning the body can heal based on our thoughts. It's powerful. Yeah, and it's real. I mean, it's like you didn't just get a fake healing. Oh, no, you got a real healing because innate intelligence, you know, delivered that heal. Well, there's something called the nocebo effect. This is why we do double blind placebo trials, by the way, where the doctor can't know who's you know getting the drug or the whatever they're studying, and nor can the patient, because that's how powerful it is. If one knows, it can throw off the whole study. So if it gets out that, oh, people are getting headaches, they're thinking, guess what? Now you have half or 70% of the people getting headaches. That's called a nocebo effect. Meaning, oh, people are getting headaches, then they start developing a headache. It's real. They get a real headache because they actually made a bad thing happen. So this is can develop a nocebo effect, meaning the body, if you think you're gonna get cancer, I promise you your risk went dramatically up that you will get cancer. And that's a bad thing. So that is the biggest cost, I believe, right? Of knowing.

SPEAKER_01 23:12

And it robs a child of life. I mean, if you live that way from day one, expecting, they even say that it affects the parent-child bond because the parent, I mean, the human nature is to grieve the loss of life before it even happens. And you know, I'm sure Dr. Pompo, you probably have stories of people defying these odds. And I we wrote in our book, Reclaim Vitality, this one little guy who was diagnosed with immunodeficiency, and the doctors told him, you will never ever create antibodies from within. Your body's incapable of creating antibodies. So you need to have a $16,000 infusion every single month to create antibodies artificially. And this little guy, his parents didn't feel right about the prognosis. So they started getting him chiropractic care, started working on his nutrition. And within a couple months, his body was creating antibodies. They defied the genetic diagnosis. And, you know, you might say, oh, well, how is chiropractic care and nutrition associated with this outcome? And the research shows that your environmental decisions, your nervous system care directly affects your reserves and how your immune system fires and functions. And so it's like there are more, there's more than one option. And for the medical community to tell mothers that there's a single option, you have to take this option, or else you're a bad parent, or you're at risk for state involvement in your child's medical decisions is criminal. And that's why we're not going to stand by and allow this to take root, but pull out all the stops too.

Dr Pompa 24:46

You know, I think it comes back. You and I can sit here and argue it's a bad thing to know, right? I mean, and I agree. I mean it from multiple reasons, it's a bad thing to know. Uh because we're backing in from number one, we know that there's no real treatment, right? So that's false from the beginning. Number two, we understand that the the mind, how it creates, and you know, this could be devastating for multiple reasons. Um, but hypothetically, it still boils down to informed consent. Meaning, wait a minute, if you're pricking my child's foot, there should be given informed consent of what this actually means. What are you looking for, really? They're not told. What are we doing? In other words, you know, what are we doing by this, you know, prick? And I think that that's where the problem starts right there, is parents need to be at least told so they can make the decision.

SPEAKER_01 25:41

Absolutely. We are not anti-medicine, anti-biotech, anti, you know, anything, but we are pro-informed consent, which means that every mom gets to have a meaningful decision at every screen, at every intervention.

Dr Pompa 25:55

And even then, I I I fear. I so at best right now, moms need to have informed consent. Why we're pricking your child's, you know, heel. Uh, right now, there's no, they're not even telling them, it sounds like, right? So that's mistake number one. Mistake number two, though, is it still scares me that they could make this sound so good. And I think you could almost get 100% of moms to agree to it just with, here's what we're doing, right? So informed consent can look this way. Here's what we're doing. We're, you know, pricking your child's foot just because we're it's so exciting what we're able to do with genetics, we're able to prevent, you know, conditions. What mother is going to say no to that, right? We're able to prevent conditions, we're able to keep your child from a risk of, you know, they're not giving you this actual view of what really is happening. I mean, would you agree with that?

SPEAKER_01 26:46

Absolutely. And the crazy thing is they can't because even the doctor that's providing this care doesn't know. They don't know the natural course of 95% of the things they're screening for. They don't know what the therapies they're going to offer do. Because did you hear about this little guy, um, sweet little guy born the year before last, but received a gene therapy last year, baby KJ. And baby KJ was born with a urea cycle disorder, which means that has trouble breaking down protein, the ammonia builds up in his body, it can be lethal very fast, right? So they he's diagnosed at a few days old with a urea cycle disorder, and he receives the very first bespoke of medicine only made for him, gene therapy.

Dr Pompa 27:34

And I'm sure the parents were ecstatic and felt so blessed.

SPEAKER_01 27:37

They felt very blessed. And so they you saw worldwide headlines hit first modern day miracle, baby KJ healed. And the reality is he received this in July, I believe it was July, May or July of 2025. So it hasn't even been a year since he received it. And I was listening to the researchers that developed this bespoke gene therapy talk about it. And they were asked, what's the little known fact about what baby KJ was given to create this modern-day miracle? And the researcher that oversaw the transfusion and developed the product said, We have no clue what it did. That is not what the headlines say. And he said, it will take 15 years before we know if we got gene editing because it's unethical to biopsy a child's liver. It's extremely invasive, extremely painful. So I'm not going to biopsy the liver to try to see if they got gene editing. So they tell the world that they had a miracle. And then the researcher on a little known podcast that only scientists listen to says it'll be 15 years before we know if the gene editing worked.

Dr Pompa 28:47

Yeah, it did anything at all.

SPEAKER_01 28:49

So that's so that's the level of consent that can't be given because the doctors cannot even tell you what the solutions will be.

Dr Pompa 28:56

The therapy didn't even necessarily alter anything that was going on in the moment, right? They were just treating something that could be his ammonia levels did go down.

SPEAKER_01 29:06

Trevor Burrus, Jr.

Dr Pompa 29:06

Okay. His ammonia levels did go down.

SPEAKER_01 29:08

So they saw a symptomatic effect.

Dr Pompa 29:10

But they're not sure what it did to get that effect or what else was changed. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

SPEAKER_01 29:16

Or if the genes were fixed, which is the intention of course, a gene therapy.

Dr Pompa 29:22

Right. So they're not sure exactly what happened, and we won't know until 15 years.

SPEAKER_01 29:28

And we saw this for decades with the vaccine schedule for kids, that you know, there's a hyperfocus on the prevalence of measles. So do we see less measles with more vaccines? And that's the hyperfocus. But no one's looking at the quote unquote off-target effects or side effects of how are kids functioning? How is their health? How's their morbidity mortality? And is measles actually just deeper into their systems instead of extinguished? And so with gene therapy, when you're trying to edit a gene, what will the off-target effects be? Are you only editing that one gene?

Dr Pompa 30:05

Or you're editing others.

SPEAKER_01 30:07

Or and what does that mean? And so it's highly experimental. And that's why moms need to know what they're screening for and what their options are before they agree to a screen.

Dr Pompa 30:18

If you had the right, the perfect um informed consent, what would that look like? Meaning because my brain's going, what do you tell a mom to be able to make a

Whole Genome Sequencing And Broken Ethics

Dr Pompa 30:30

good decision here? Because to me, if a hospital just does their own informed consent, they're gonna make this thing sound better than it is, and the informed consent actually becomes almost a selling point.

SPEAKER_01 30:40

So our idea, our idea of a win in this is that whole genome sequencing never becomes a part of the newborn screen, never becomes a part of the heel prick. Because if it's not a part of every newborn's care at birth, then they're gonna have to do the hard work to sell it.

Dr Pompa 30:59

The heel prick right now um does it always contain the gene sequencing?

SPEAKER_01 31:07

No. So currently, currently, so NIH has issued the grants. So there are three right now, supposedly there are three hospital systems in every state that are offering it as a study. And what they're studying is how hard is it to convince a mom to do it and what are mom's objections. So they're not they're not studying the benefit or outcomes or reduced rare disease. They're studying the uptake and the objections by rolling this out in three hospital systems in every state, with the goal being to pass this bill in Congress called the Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act to fund the system and infrastructure to make it a part of the heel prick. So that we're opposing the bill in Congress right now.

Dr Pompa 31:55

Okay. So currently the heel prick that's in 49 states, what is it doing right now? Because there needs to be informed consent even there.

SPEAKER_01 32:06

Absolutely. Yeah. And forced medicine is never good, especially something this invasive that destroys privacy, that puts moms in situations to enroll her children in experimental therapies. So right now it is it's a very well-established um system that is very hard to get around, looking for inborn metabolic disorders.

Dr Pompa 32:29

Yeah. And you said they're looking at right now, the current heel prick is looking between 30 and 70.

SPEAKER_01 32:34

Depending on the state you live in. Okay. Yes.

Dr Pompa 32:36

Depending on the state metabolic um conditions that they're saying we're looking for. And they're treating out of these 30 and 70, they they have how many treatments?

SPEAKER_01 32:46

I they have treatments for almost all of those. Oh, wow. Because that has been the argument is, you know, people, rare disease communities lobby Washington to say, please add muscular dystrophy, you know, the DMD that Jib was just added, please add this to the newborn screen, save other kids. So they'll lobby, lobby, lobby to get it added. And historically, they've only been willing to add it if there's a therapy. Now, if we start with the whole genome sequencing, all those ethical boundaries go out the window. And when ethical boundaries are destroyed, who's left to protect us? Draw that line in the sand, but parents. But parents to say, no, my child will not be allowed to.

Dr Pompa 33:28

But currently, the these 30, depending on what state you're in, 30 to 70 things they're looking at. Um, these are still genome sequencing, but it's different than the genome sequencing that's coming, potentially, hopefully not. So describe the two because people are probably confused on that.

SPEAKER_01 33:46

So it is um, it's not currently a whole DNA reading.

Dr Pompa 33:50

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 33:51

It is looking at mass spectrometry and the beautiful thing about mass spectrometry spectometry and them introducing this was look, we can take a few drops of blood and look at all of these conditions at once. And that's how this system of screening got put in place. Okay. But now if they take it from that limited tool to a whole DNA reading tool, the whole DNA reading.

Dr Pompa 34:14

In other words, again, a violation there because they don't even have therapies, if you will, drugs or things for these things are looking at, and you can't do that by law. So that should stop that. But again, for the 30 to 70 we're looking at right now, um arguably, again, uh, you know, how studied are any of these therapies? And again, it uh just because you have the gene repeating ourselves here, but doesn't make you actually develop the condition.

SPEAKER_01 34:45

Not always. Oh very, very, very rarely. I mean, TASACs. I mean, if you look at cystic fibrosis, that might be one of the ones that people are familiar with that you screen for. And if you look at cystic fibrosis, there are many, many adults who live with the gene that could lead to cystic fibrosis, according to the medical community, that never ever get it. And so that's one of the ones that they screen for. And you can live a long, healthy life.

Dr Pompa 35:10

I I think that here's where people would get confused and be like, oh my gosh, please, is like, you know, they're able to say, Whoa, your child has Down syndrome, right? I mean, they can look at um this in utero. It's like, you know, and again, why would I want to know, right? Well, you might want to abort the baby. Oh, the okay, now we're in a whole nother, you know, problem, right? So, but so people get this confused, I think, too, right? Where they're, you know, I want to know if my child has Down syndrome. You know, I'm putting quotes around it, Brock 1, whatever it is. But, you know, this is different in that we're saying we can prevent and treat these things.

SPEAKER_01 35:51

Correct. Currently, the newborn screening is designed to only screen for things where there is an option.

Dr Pompa 35:56

And by the way, this isn't, we're not talking about complete gene mutations. Chromosome, you know, for example, Down syndrome is a complete gene in the wrong place. You know, we're this is different. Very different. Yeah. So kind of explain that to people.

SPEAKER_01 36:09

Right. So when you're looking at um a genomic screening, they compare the spelling of the baby's DNA to the reference genome to say, are there any variations? So if they detect a variation, then they flag that and say, if a sickness happens, we'll now consider it a um a mutation. Got it. So it goes from variation to mutation. And oftentimes the crazy thing is, this is not a doctor looking at the child and their history and their family's history and their environment and and making a medical or clinical determination. They're purely sending this to a lab for the lab to compare it to a reference genome to say that you have a variant of uncertain significance.

Dr Pompa 36:55

Exactly. Which is crazy. I mean, because I mean, we're predicting disease based on that.

SPEAKER_01 37:01

It's as good as foretelling. I might I know.

Dr Pompa 37:04

It's what I was just you took the words out of my mouth. It's like, yeah, it's like foretelling. I mean, that's the craziest thing.

SPEAKER_01 37:12

And if you've ever seen the movie Gattaca, I don't know if you watch it, it's years and years old, but you would only have to watch the first 15 minutes to understand what we're up against right now with this bill in Congress. Because in Gattaca, within the first few minutes, the main character Jerome, there's a voiceover looking at his birth, and he's talking and he says, I'll never understand why my mom trusted God more than her local geneticist with my life. Because his mom opted out of the hospital reading the DNA, printing it out on a, you know, the old uh calculator script pieces of paper. So the hospital is printing out the child's entire DNA and fixing the genes at birth. And Jerome's mom opted out of this. So he was labeled one of God's children and couldn't get jobs, had to find ways around his value in society. And you watch the first 15 minutes of this and you understand what lifelong surveillance of your DNA looks like and how dystopian it is.

SPEAKER_02 38:18

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 38:19

And that we have to put a full stop and say, this is absolutely not what a country like America does, because this is something that China does.

SPEAKER_02 38:28

Yeah, totally.

SPEAKER_01 38:29

They declared the genomics race and said, China said we will win the genomics race by 2048 because we will have a reading of every single Chinese resident in a single central database. And if the US implements this forced personalized medicine at birth and starts doing a full reading of every newborn, that's us saying we're entering that race. We're entering the genetics. Exactly.

Dr Pompa 38:54

And the US, like, okay, in the communist country, they have the ability to make everyone get tested. That's why they know they can win, as they're saying, right? But we're going, well, we can be a little more clever. We can't make people, but we can start now, and every born infant born, we can get the onboard them. Yeah, onboard them. And now we have their genetics, and we can win a race to hell, in my opinion. Because, you know, I interviewed one of the like top geneticists, this was years ago on my cellular healing TV, and I we had the same conversation, right? And he was basically like, we what we know so little. You know, it's like meaning like we think we know, no, no, no. The DNA, how complicated this really is, innate intelligence, ability to, you know, change epigenetically. We know so little. And with, you know, because we used to just think your DNA was your destiny. And when science showed your DNA is not, there's something called epigenetics, like above the genome, and how your environment changes that it's more important than the hard drive. And wait, our hard drive is almost the same as a mouse, you know, a flea. Wait, what are you saying? It makes no sense, right? It's like, you know, science took a leap, but it took a leap in we know nothing.

SPEAKER_01 40:08

Absolutely. It's the shakiest.

Dr Pompa 40:10

And we can control nothing.

SPEAKER_01 40:11

That's a really good point. And genetics is the shakiest body of science that we have. And when I heard a geneticist himself admit that genes are the least significant factor in health outcomes, that whoa, if they're willing to say that out loud, we need the world to know that. Because people get hung up in, well, my mom was obese and I'm obese and my child's obese. And it's like, yes, but have you taken a look at your thoughts, traumas, and toxins? Have you taken a look at your environment and knowing that we were not destined to be put into a box of failure?

Dr Pompa 40:48

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 40:49

That we can do things to influence our health outcomes.

Dr Pompa 40:52

Your DNA is not your destiny. I mean, it's like that that was the headlines and still should be. Your DNA is not your destiny. You know, how it gets changed and, you know, upregulated, downregulated, things turned on and off. This gene works against this gene, upregulates this. Innate intelligence, I don't know. We'll never figure that out because that's a there's a God sequence in there. Innate intelligence, God put in our bodies, runs that, and I it's the only one that can run it.

SPEAKER_01 41:19

And it's hard to be in both camps at once. I mean, is it even possible to say that I'm gonna look at my child's genetics as something to be fixed and then also

Gene Therapy Hype And Real Harms

SPEAKER_01 41:30

honor innate intelligence? And that's the paradigm shift the world needs. Like if people get the paradigm shift that you were created brilliantly, and the most powerful thing you can do for your baby is to take it home, breastfeed it, love it, and expect things to go well. Like that's the most powerful thing you can do.

Dr Pompa 41:47

You you said something, and I was just on my doctor training call Tuesday this week, and that was the topic because I backed into it with some of these very things that we were talking about, right? And, you know, really innate intelligence knows best, and innate intelligence heals. The major premise, I said, if you're going to change your patients and how they view this and really understand it, I said, you're going to have to change their major premise. Oh, what does that mean? What premise? I said, because see, all of us on this call, we believe that God designed us in a perfect way and no man can make it better. Right. So the argument of vitamin K shots at birth came up. I got into an hour argument with chat, GPT. How stupid is that? How stupid am I? But I couldn't help it. Because chat was arguing, okay, what it reads, of course, right? But it was arguing that vitamin K shots are needed at birth because, you know, there's all these risks that the baby could bleed out, and you know, and it's going to help the uh clotting factor and this and that. And I says, yes, you know, blah, blah, blah. But could it be that for seven days God has designed with perfect intelligence that it should be not clotting and it should be a certain viscosity to carry nutrients and this and that. And, anyways, there was a new study showing that the fact is, is that when there is a clotting factor in vitamin K, it can't take the stem cells and utilize it the same. So, and of course, we talked about getting a certain amount of blood flow into the brain. I mean, there's a lot of reasons why, and probably for many years, hypothesis is why the there's the vitamin, the clotting factor is low, right? And we shouldn't give vitamin K to make it thick, the blood, change the blood. But, anyways, the bottom line is this new study showed that migration of stem cells is affected when you give vitamin K. Wow. You know, it's like we didn't know that when we were arguing, parents were arguing, I don't want to give my child vitamin K because that's that's 100% of healthy children have, you know, don't have a normal clotting factor until day. Eight, right? That's why biblically the morals would come in and circumcise, you know, in the uh the Jewish religion at day eight, because it would all of a sudden be able to start to clot differently at day eight. So the fact was, is I found it humorous, but I argued for an hour uh with chat, but I backed chat into a corner in that. So you're saying you know best, and then chat, I knew it was gonna do this. It said, Well, don't you think that man, you know, God gave man a brain to intervene with medications. I said, I agree with you. I knew you were gonna say that. I said, but we're talking about perfectly healthy babies. That's the thing, that's the difference. So you're saying God made a mistake. But see, my point is this you have to change people's major premise to change behavior and understanding underneath it. So certain people believe that man knows best, certain people would absolutely agree that God knows best. There's no way he has a perfect design. Vitamin K is, you know, clotting factor is low for seven days for a reason, even if we don't understand it, doesn't make it any less right. Right. So major premise has to shift if we're gonna shift the way we think about these tests. Major premise is who is in control, who designed our bodies. And that's where you and I think alike.

SPEAKER_01 45:16

Absolutely. And to think that man could measure something and come upon some knowledge of the distinction in newborn vicosity and then be so proud and arrogant as to say, oh no, that's wrong. Every single newborn is born with the wrong vicosity. Like it's just, you know, when you tell moms these things, they're like, but I didn't get to know that before I had my babies. Like, how am I supposed to know all these things? How can moms have all this knowledge? But to your point, if they get the major premise, they start asking better questions. They start looking at every single intervention as an intrusion into that brilliance. And that's why, you know, Nick and I wrote Reclaim Vitality, my husband and I wrote Reclaim Vitality because more and more people want to exit conventional medicine, but they're stuck in the wilderness and they don't know the path. They need a guide to live naturally. They need a guide to steward the body through a different lens. And I think people are ready for that.

Dr Pompa 46:15

Yeah, exactly. But again, the step one is what is your major premise? Right. Meaning where ultimately does health come from? You know, because I like, I don't think we have to back in everyone to believing what I believe from a religious perspective. I'm a Christian, I believe God designed us perfectly, I believe, you know, He is the creator of all things. Okay, you know, but somehow we have to realize that some major premise, that there's some perfect intelligence way above us that created us perfectly, you know, with an intelligence that no man, no doctor can ever, you know, challenge or be better than. That at least come to that perspective and that premise. And then you'll go, vitamin K doesn't make sense to me. Well, maybe hepatitis B vaccine coming out of it doesn't make sense to me. I get taking a drug if my child is sick or this or that or that, but that doesn't make sense to that premise.

SPEAKER_01 47:14

Right. And I mean, to acknowledge there is a natural order. So what you're saying is there is natural order, that there is some intelligence, that there's some symbiotic relationship between us and our environment and how we function and how we adapt. And if we start to look at everything our body tells us as a smart adaptation, as a work toward more resilience, then we stop trying to play whack-a-mole, whack-a-mole with every symptom and be afraid of what our body's doing. And some people are lazy about their health and they're like, Look, I told you, I told you things were going wrong. And it's like, well, you ignored your body. You ignored what your body was telling you.

Dr Pompa 47:55

Again, because you and I come from a major premise. We raised our kids with the premise fever, not a bad thing. God designed the body to fever. Yeah, but I heard that fevers can go, yeah, yeah, yeah. But it's like my child's, you know, a healthy child, and fever is part of it healing, right? Symptoms are part of the body healing. Symptoms aren't bad, symptoms are good, because we come from a different major premise. I came from um a family of my father, an Italian bricklayer, who his mother didn't vaccinate him, my grandmother. Why? She didn't know anything about vaccines, she didn't know anything about uh, she was not a doctor. She was a stay-at-home grandma in Italy, right? It's like, but what did she know? Oh no. It's like, this is a healthy child. It doesn't need anything. That was her premise. Doesn't need anything.

SPEAKER_01 48:49

And she set that baby up for success. But here's the thing is back then, or maybe even in different countries, most other countries, a mom can have a gut instinct and that's honored. But here in America, right now, that mom's gut instinct is often not enough because she comes up against requirements. The state, the schools, the government being in the exam room with the doctor and patient saying, Nope, here's a protocol that you have to do. Here's something you have to do to get a birth certificate, here's what you have to do to avoid state intervention, your parental rights, here's what you have to do to get into schools. And so we are on a mission to make medical mandates a thing of the past. That if we're gonna acknowledge in this Maha era that there are options and that our environment is broken and that we are the stewards of our health, then let's do away with medical mandates.

SPEAKER_02 49:43

That's right.

SPEAKER_01 49:44

That's a thing in the past. It is individual decision making is the way of the future.

Dr Pompa 49:49

And if we can restore that what challenges medical that philosophy, I agree with you, right? Medical mandates are the disaster of society, and we've seen that with vaccines. And we saw it in COVID, didn't we? Look what happened. Bad idea. Um but it's really the straw man of yes, but medical mandates save the populace, the masses, because we're making you do things, you know, that was the whole point of COVID, it's a great example of that, right? We're gonna mandate this because we're gonna save all these lives. So we're gonna make everybody take the vaccine. And again, this still made even with childhood vaccines, the same argument. If we make everyone now, we can get herd immunity, enough people vaccinated, we can prevent measles. So therefore, we're gonna mandate it for the for the benefit of all humans and society. That's the argument.

SPEAKER_01 50:45

It is the argument. And I would challenge anyone to show us a situation where sacrificing an individual is for the benefit of the community because it's a myth. It's a myth. The greater good is a myth. And that is the premise of every medical mandate. I mean, if you look at fluoride, which we stopped in the state of Florida, and now your great state of Utah doesn't have fluoride in their public drinking water, it the premise is that people are too stupid to take care of their own teeth. So we'll drive down cavity rates by making sure everyone has fluoride. So when we went in Florida and said, wait, you are adding a substance to water to treat humans. Every other thing that's added to water is to treat the water, to make the water safe. But this substance, fluoride, is to treat the human. That's forced medicine.

SPEAKER_02 51:33

Right.

SPEAKER_01 51:34

Water should hydrate, not medicate. We got it out in Florida, and that people can start to understand that oh you don't use medicine on a population-wide basis. Yeah. In this whole genome sequencing that we're talking about, they admit in the literature, in the report to the president in 2008, they admit that the reason we're going to do this is not to benefit the infant that's screened, the one that will be entered into newborn profiling, but to benefit the biotech research community that will now know more about genome-wide population studies, what genes exist, how these kids end up, what they end up needing, or what their life expectancies are, that this is a public benefit to profiles.

Dr Pompa 52:20

I think you could convince most moms to do it just for that reason because it sounds so good. I mean, it sounds like you're doing the right thing as a human.

SPEAKER_01 52:32

Right. I think if you switch their major premise that we have a shot at stopping it. And, you know, our three, our three things are one that you're going to be screening for things that you can't help. So that puts the family in a horrible position. It's not determinative. So it's completely messed up your psyche. Like, do we are we a society that believes the thoughts matter or not? Like, when are we actually going to decide that? That the thoughts and the words that we speak matter. And number two, the it fuels highly experimental, risky interventions that mRNA, that's a gene therapy. It's not new to any of us. Gene therapy is not new. And number three, this will create a biosurveillance database that does not exist yet in America. That this will be used to put our DNA in a centralized database that does not yet exist. And so we're changing the freedom for all future generations. Because if you can imagine, you know, Gen Z understands what it's like to have um personal information used against you socially, because they've grown up on social media. So they understand that. And now imagine that at birth, not because of your decision, your mother's, that your digital ID had electricity put in it because your whole DNA sequencing is in there. So now they know what medical treatment you need, you must have. They know what jobs you qualify for.

Dr Pompa 53:59

And they could mandate

BRCA Fear And The Nocebo Effect

Dr Pompa 54:00

it.

SPEAKER_01 54:00

Correct.

Dr Pompa 54:01

Yeah. I mean, oh, all those who have this, you're a threat to society. We you need that you're gonna have to have this vaccine.

SPEAKER_01 54:09

That's eugenics at its finest. Uh-huh.

Dr Pompa 54:11

Right. Well, what? Well, you you have the gene. How do you know I have the gene? Oh, yeah, we pricked your heel at childbirth. You just didn't know it. What? And so now I it's like bull, you know, gun at my head. I have to take it or, you know, or die. What are you saying, right? Or that's the but that's what it leads to.

SPEAKER_01 54:28

You can't undo it. Yeah. You cannot undo this information. And it's um it's an atomic bomb to freedom, to privacy, because what we're looking at is um setting every American up for medical biosurveillance and their future capacity based on a reading at birth, instead of how hard they're willing to work, who they choose as their helpmate and spouse, you know, what career they pursue, none of that would matter. Your skills wouldn't matter.

Dr Pompa 54:59

What matters is your way, you know, all of a sudden now, I mean, this I'm projecting here, but um where does it stop? Meaning we, you know, we only hire people with these gene sequences because it's been shown that they're harder workers, they're smarter, they're this, they're that. So now we have the perfect sequence. Now let's try to make the perfect race. This sounds familiar. This sounds like what the Nazis actually believed, right? Um, you know, they wanted to define the perfect race in, you know, who they are, what they look like, what they did, their birth, their parents, let them breed, and then we're gonna have the perfect race.

SPEAKER_01 55:37

For the greater good.

Dr Pompa 55:38

For the greater good. And everyone bought into it.

SPEAKER_01 55:40

Right. And it's hard for people to take that leap to say that, like, oh, that'll never happen in America. But what they can picture is that this DNA reading as a part of your digital ID influences your insurance rates, your health insurance qualifications, your mortgage rates, because you might not, if you die too early.

Dr Pompa 55:59

We that's what I'm saying. We projected all the way out there, which I believe would happen, right? Okay, but you backed into it perfectly. I it will affect your insurance rates if you have this genomic. You will, you know, what is your life insurance? And all that because of your genes, it really determines nothing. It's not your destiny, but it gives them the angle to say, this is science.

SPEAKER_01 56:21

Right.

Dr Pompa 56:22

This is science.

SPEAKER_01 56:23

And why didn't the human genome project stop all this dead in its tracks? Like, why when they could not associate gene A with disease B? They couldn't they just leave it alone and say, let's move on. But no, now it's a $671 billion industry to personalize medicine based on genes, even though the project failed.

Dr Pompa 56:44

You know, in that panel that I was on, it was very frustrating. You know, the the young man who gave his story was amazing. Um, you know, non-Hodgins lymphoma, and and there's more and more young people with non-Hodgkins lymphoma. And what I wanted to say, I I didn't want to be disruptive, but I wanted to uh project if I could you know childhood cancers have risen 67% since 1970. Why? And what would the next would have been them looking at each other because they they can't even they don't even go there in their thinking because they were thinking everything was about genes. So the next question I would have is well, I guess the genes changed then, based on all of this brilliant uh conversation and all this research that you're talking about. I guess the genes just changed. That's why I mean that's be the only reason why you know it almost go up 70% since 1970s. The genes must have changed. If genes are the cause, of course. No, see, that's not what changed. What changed is a chemical called glyphosate. Oh, not only just that chemical, but a lot of other chemicals. You know, if we look at why chronic disease has surged to where 70, I think what was the last statistic? 74%, 74.6% of the population has chronic disease when it was like under 10%, you know, when I was a kid, like what happened? Chemicals happened that turn on bad genes, right? It's like, so when we look at non-Hodgkin lymphoma, wait, did you know billions of dollars are being awarded? Knowing, meaning if billions of dollars have been awarded because of glyphosate causing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Oh, and the new study is showing kids on fields where they're spraying it in closer contact or actually have the highest rates of non-Hodgkin' lymphoma, and the kid was a football player. So the point is, is that like, why aren't they bringing the conversation there? You know, it's like this chemical where billions of dollars are being awarded, awarded, meaning there's so much proof that this is causing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and yet the conversation wasn't about that, it was about the genes.

SPEAKER_01 59:01

It's a distraction. It's a distraction because people know we need to fix our environment. They know we have too many medical interventions, they know America is really sick. And so what do we have? We have gene solutions when, in all reality, it's not a genetic problem. It's not. If we can convince people that there is hope, then they can embrace the truth that it's not a genetic problem. And going back to the major premise, it's you know what? This uh, these cancers and these uh adaptations are your body trying to live in a toxic soup. It's like, how do we clean up the toxic soup? Yeah, absolutely.

Dr Pompa 59:38

Trying to deal with the toxic soup, walling off making the bad cells into tumors.

SPEAKER_01 59:44

Right. Oh my gosh. I was just in DC last Monday speaking on the Supreme Court steps because of people will be poison. And we helped show up.

Dr Pompa 59:52

So you're with the glyphosate, the um they're trying to get liability shields.

SPEAKER_01 59:56

We shut it down. We won last week. I know. So the farm bill, the um Luna's amendment went through in the farm bill to say, no, we're gonna keep free market forces in place. Like you and I, we don't have to agree on what causes the cancer. But what we can agree on is that the industry that profits off of a product will be held accountable. And we're not gonna say the EPA is accountable. That's right.

Dr Pompa 1:00:21

Most people watching this probably don't know that in 1986 there was the Childhood Uh Vaccine Injury Act or Injury Vaccine Act that went into play that gave pharmaceutical companies basically liability shields. You to this day, you cannot sue a manufacturer of a vaccine for injury. Right. Oh, so that means that they're not interested in actually really doing real safety studies. No, they're not. That's why double-blind studies aren't being done.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:49

And for a long time, the vaccine industry was the only industry enjoying that protection. Yeah. And this year we saw the AI industry, the pesticide industry, that they are seeking those same protections. And we're like, wait, wait, wait. We saw this play out. We saw industry run roughshod over our society with an immunity shield. We're not going to let it happen again. And so we've shut it down in Congress. I this was the third time shutting it down in Congress. And we've won in nine of the 12 states that we've had to fight it in, lost in three. But Bayer's not going away because they're mad that the market, the market share is shifting.

Dr Pompa 1:01:29

Yeah. Well, and right now they're, I'll say, blessed to be protected by the national security um shield, meaning that glyphosate, unfortunately, 98% of corn will not grow without it. 97% of soybeans won't grow without it. There's a lot of produce that will not grow without it. Why? Because the soil has been decimated. And it literally, you can't grow things without this chemical. And so now, you know, our government looks at this and goes, oh my gosh, this is a national security problem. Because if we have to rely on other countries for food, if we just took this chemical off the planet right now or outlawed it in the US, we'd be in big trouble. That has to change.

SPEAKER_01 1:02:16

And I don't think we should necessarily outlaw it. I think we should, I mean, maybe we should, but I think the goal is to let free market forces do their job. And there's a huge shift toward, I think they last time I looked at it, it was like a 300% increase in demand for regenerative foods from regenerative farms. And so the people are starting to learn and make better decisions and small-scale farmers, it's becoming um a thriving profession again. And Joel Salatin was there talking at the People V Poison rally. And he said, you know what, friends, there is a way to make our soil just as productive as it was 500 years ago. You know, let's get back to the productivity in our nation.

Dr Pompa 1:02:58

Yeah, we just Bobby uh uh our health secretary realizes this, you know. Um he realizes that the money has to go into the soil. Um, because right now, to pool glyphosate, it would be problematic, uh admittedly. It's like taking a child who's lived on antibiotics their whole life, and now they get the next basic illness, and without an antibiotic, they can die because they have no natural immunity. That's what our soil has to do. No resilience.

SPEAKER_01 1:03:25

No resilience. And the good news is we don't have to make that decision today, you know, but making the decision to say bay or no, you're gonna take care of your own problems that we're not going to absorb because they're already being sued for billions of dollars.

Dr Pompa 1:03:41

Just on one condition, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

SPEAKER_01 1:03:45

Yeah. They weren't seeking liability shield just for that or just for them. Oh no.

Dr Pompa 1:03:49

It would have been they're worried about what's coming down the pike.

SPEAKER_01 1:03:52

It would have been a liability shield for rodent sides, for fungicides, for everything.

Dr Pompa 1:03:57

All of it in all the different conditions that are coming the way because it is linked to more than non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. It is linked to all the gut problems. I mean, you know, there was a 2012 study that Stephanie Seneff from uh MIT showing that glyphosate opens up the blood-brain barrier and is causing all this different conditions like dementia, Alzheimer's. I mean, this could open Pandora's box to this one chemical in all the things that it is linked to. You're darn well that they're looking for a liability shield.

SPEAKER_01 1:04:27

Absolutely.

Dr Pompa 1:04:28

If I was that company, I'd be spending, I'd be per buying the best attorneys on the planet to try to push it through.

SPEAKER_01 1:04:35

Absolutely. And we'll do everything we can to shut that down. Yep. But one of the anecdotes is to support small scale farming. So we passed, I think your state is going to pick up this bill this next year, hopefully. Um, we have word that Utah will. But in Indiana, we passed the best deregulation of small-scale farming bill in the entire US to get the government out of small scale farming, to take away the red tape, to let that environment flourish so that we can add more farmers, more. And so if we start focusing on how do we feed our families healthy food, how do we feed our communities healthy food, then we don't have to be crippled by the thought of feeding our nation, feeding the world. And it's, I think it's an illusion that for the greater good, we can have a crappy food supply, you know, that we need to focus on feeding our families healthy, feeding our communities healthy, and that will trickle down.

Privacy Fallout And Biosurveillance Risks

Dr Pompa 1:05:30

And that's supporting the small farmer, right? And there's technologies with you know improving the biomass and you know, all these things that we can do to soil that we can regenerate it, you know, so rapidly. And that's the answer to you know, to all of that problem. But we we still have this heel prick problem. Yeah, it's like I mean it's I mean, this is a big thing, and I I think that it's so disturbing to me because I mean there is zero informed consent right now. I mean, so step one is. Let's make sure that every mother knows that they're doing it. Step two is like what potentially what are they testing for and what does that mean? I mean, what's what is your mind see the steps on this? Like what we can actually win step one, step two, step three.

SPEAKER_01 1:06:19

Yes, I think it's for sure letting moms know that this is an intervention. It is happening. Yeah. And then that's step one. Right. Secondly, we have a lot of kids growing up now, thankfully, that know that their bodies can heal. You know, that these kids who grow up in natural health, that they understand my body can heal. We're not going to be tricked by bad news, bad health news, because we can heal. But do they know that they're not genetically broken? We need to make that reflexive for anyone who cares about health and healing, make it reflexive that you are not defined by your genes. Um, we're gonna stop this bill in Congress to make sure this doesn't take foot across the US as a compulsory mechanism in newborn um care. And right now, you know, at sandbeltfreedom.com, you can go take action and let Congress know we see you, we see what you're funding, we don't want privacy destroyed, we don't want whole genome sequencing as a part of newborn screening. So we can take that action to stop that bill. And then we can also support the bills that we're filing across the US to say no medical mandates, period. So if there can't be any mandatory screening, injections, masking, you know, if we can't have any medical mandates, then it takes care of the intrusion into informed decision making because it becomes a forced decision between you and your provider of look, here's what I have to offer you today. And then mom gets a chance to say, how does this measure up against what I believe about health, about my child's future? And so it's we're fighting on all fronts, educating the moms, fighting the policy wars, and getting better policy into place.

Dr Pompa 1:08:03

And I agree. I if we could just say no medical mandates, um, it solves a lot of problems. You know, uh it protects On the policy front. On the policy front. Right. And that, but that said, that will always be challenged because of, you know, oh, we have to save humanity and therefore we have to make this mandated. But it to your point earlier, it never goes well. It's never a good for humanity ever. It sounds good, but it's never good.

SPEAKER_01 1:08:31

So Idaho passed the first bill to say no more medical mandates. So it stops pandemic intrusions going forward. Um, and then we filed the bill in 12 states this past year and it moved in five. It went through both houses in Arizona, it's still alive in Louisiana, 155 yes votes in New Hampshire. So there was energy behind it. And the reason why is because COVID exposed the corruption of medicine. And now if you go sit knee to knee with these lawmakers voting on these bills, and you ask them, like, who else should be in the exam room with a mom and a baby besides their doctor? Should the school, local school, be in the exam room making that decision? Should the state be in the exam room? And they say no. They say no, there should be no other party making medical decisions for a person, for an individual. So we're not giving up. You know, we still are saying the era of medical mandates is over, that we have to do better. We have to acknowledge that there are options, we have to acknowledge that healing is possible and allow people to take responsibility for their health.

Dr Pompa 1:09:36

Well, Florida, I mean, they took away the vaccine mandates, right? Um that's well, Dr.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:43

Latipo and Governor DeSantis did everything they could, and their speaker of the house shut it down this year. But we'll be back. We'll be back next year. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Dr Pompa 1:09:52

I didn't know that until they shut it down. Yeah. Yeah, that's disappointing. Oh my god.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:56

Oh, they uh yes, the administration in Florida, the governor's administration, will have a health freedom legacy. I mean, DeSantis has done amazing things for that state. He is a friend of our movement. Um, but as it relates to the General Assembly, it's there have been some hurdles this year, and we're hopeful that next year there'll be leadership that will embrace the principles of health freedom.

Dr Pompa 1:10:19

Yeah, well, when you look at vaccines, it really thrives on you know doing the best for society. But when you examine it, it's it crumbles under scrutiny. I I sat, I interviewed Aaron Seary. If you haven't watched that interview, watch it. So good. Because I I feel like he brought the answer, I mean he brought that topic and light to what it really is. And I I feel like he destroyed that argument. But uh, it's an argument that will go on and you know, and go on. And and like said, this this affects um newborns in a new way with all this technology. Because what they're saying too is we're able to look at these genome and sequence them with AI, like, you know, we've never been able to do this before, so it sounds really sexy. And we're gonna be able to prevent all these diseases, just like the panel up there talking about we're gonna be able to have chemos that are, you know, because when the the boy told his story, of course, it was this chemo wasn't good, this one didn't work, this one didn't work, this one did so. He went through a lot of hell to get to the right one that actually helped him. So the story was that we could have done that, we'd have known the right one from the very beginning. That sounds really good. That sounds really good, but technology's driving it.

SPEAKER_01 1:11:37

Data, the data wars are driving this personalized medicine, you know, it's projected to be a $1.4 trillion industry within the next 10 years. Yeah. So it's big money. And if you listen to these investors talk about the big money in personalized medicine, it's uh the the gold mine for investment portfolios because if you have a gene therapy platform that you can insert all these different viruses into and um program it to address all these different mutations, you could have 25 that fail in that platform and one that succeeds. You put a hefty price tag on it, and you have a a land, uh, a windfall for that investment portfolio. So if you have one out of 30 in an investment portfolio that succeed and you're charging three to four million dollars for a gene transfusion, your investment was gold. Yeah. And that's why there's this is now the next frontier of big medicine, of capital M medicine, which is the medical industrial complex that is driving standard of care. And it's not just a new frontier of how medicine is gonna look in the next five to 10 years in the US. It's the new frontier of how culturally we think about our biology.

SPEAKER_02 1:12:55

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:12:56

How we think about the human frame. Do we think about the human frame as something that was programmed to fail, that needs fixed, or as something brilliant that needs stewarded?

Dr Pompa 1:13:08

Exactly. Something brilliant that needs stewarded, but I'm not sure that the uh medical community sees it that way.

SPEAKER_01 1:13:16

So no, the industry won't. And that's why it takes our voices raising common sense even in the halls of government. Because if we don't tell our story, the only story that's told are the ones profiting off of the next big profit center in medicine. And so it's important, it's people don't understand just how powerful their voices are. Yeah. Because if you come forward, your representation in government has permission to stand up for you. And if they don't stand up for you, at least you know that they knew a different option. Yeah.

Dr Pompa 1:13:50

And that's the key. Uh exactly. You know, people have to understand if you're in business and if you ever sat in a boardroom meeting, everything kind of makes a little more sense. You go, oh, this is how decisions are made. It's not made from evil intent, like people might think. It's it's made from dollars and cents at the end of the day. Most people in the boardroom really believe that they're doing good and their company's doing good, and their product is doing good. Um, so then it becomes of like, well, how do we get more people behind this? And how do we get, you know, it's like so that's what drives decisions. But that's not always that simple.

SPEAKER_01 1:14:26

And that's why when people ask, like, who's the baddie? Who's the bad guy here, Leah? It's it's not industry.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:33

No.

SPEAKER_01 1:14:33

They are providing a product, they're selling it to the people. It's government that provides liability shields, that allows corruption in our regulatory agencies. Like the government is the one that is allowing industry to prey upon the population. So when you say who's the baddie, I point to go to your representation. And we try to make that easy for people because that's not easy.

Dr Pompa 1:14:56

No, and that I think that's what Aaron Siri said too. He said, you know, when a company can be sued for damage, their capitalism in the decisions in the boardroom now are hold on a second. You know, my dollars and cents are at stake here. You know, we better figure out how to make this safe. See how that works? Hey, we better make a safer product because if we're at risk, this that tips the whole bucket, right? But the moment you take that liability off, like it happened in vaccines, the conversation shifts in the boardroom. No longer do you have to have the conversation of how to make the product safer. You're just saying, how do we get it to more people?

SPEAKER_01 1:15:36

Absolutely.

Dr Pompa 1:15:37

Oh, and then what do you mean our profits are down? Oh, well, that's because we spent, you know, there was $500 million to bring that, you know, just on the studies. So, well, we don't need that anymore. Why are we doing them? If it's safe anyway, because what do I know, right? It's like vaccines are so great anyway, so why would why are we wasting that money? You know, you get the point that it's like it it brings a perfect balance when you're able to have, you know, that's what tort is, right? You know, when you're able to sue a company, then you start, they have to be made to make a better product. But we're trying to get around that in the chemical industry, just like the vaccine companies did.

SPEAKER_01 1:16:15

Right. Painting the trial lawyers as the bad guys, as the predators, when in all reality, if you know, Durnell, the case that's before the Supreme Court right now, the arguments were last week, he told his story to a jury that he was hurt by Monsanto's product. And the jury said, Oh, that's not right. They knew and they hid information, and this man deserves compensation.

Environmental Causes And Liability Shields

SPEAKER_01 1:16:40

And so they got paid. And Monsanto is saying now, like, no, no, we have to stop that from happening ever again. And our government has a choice whether to honor our constitutional structure and say, we can't put all the power in the federal agency or to override that and protect industry. And it's our job to say, wait, we see what's happening. We want our freedoms to be protected. And we've won it, we're going to keep winning it. And I think with the the vaccine mandate issue that you brought up, I don't know if you know this, but we sued the CDC last August to say that every single product on the vaccine schedule needs to be a shared decision instead of a universal recommendation. Because if the CDC says that every single three-month-old gets this product, regardless of any other factor, three months, we know what product you're getting today. That doesn't allow for a decision to be made. So if we want decisions to be made about a child's health, then we have to downgrade all those universal recommendations and say each and every product is a unique decision.

Dr Pompa 1:17:55

You know, it if you look at that whole system, most doctors just simply don't have time in their defense to look at the safety of all of these vaccines that they're they're trusting in, you know, their predecessors, maybe the CDC, the government, to say this is safe. What they don't know is that there's really no double blind studies being done on the product. Oh, there were two. And that was point out. Uh I don't know if you saw that. It was the the one of the congressional hearings. And it was like, yeah, that's like he's lying. There were two. Oh, okay, he's lying. Okay, the placebo group. Well, embarrassing. I know, right? It's like the placebo group had the same toxicant in it that causes the symptoms as the vaccine, and they made sure of it. Why? Because if the placebo group has the same percentage-wise of symptoms as the thing, hey, it's considered safe. That was pretty smart. Okay, that was done in the two trials. So there was never a true double-blind placebo trial with a truly a um a real placebo product, right? A saline injection for that matter. But point is that it's never been done. And doctors don't know that.

SPEAKER_01 1:19:10

Right. And the AAP is freaking out right now. I mean, if you want some afternoon humor, I mean, I guess it's humorous to me, maybe not to others, but go look at the Facebook page of the AAP. And they're making remediation plans right now because they're so upset that this vaccine conversation is happening in the public square, that it's being questioned and it's making their job really hard. But, you know, the AAP American Academy of Pediatrics has always been anti-parental rights and people don't know that. They've always been anti-religious freedom. And when people understand who's making these recommendations and that they aren't looking out for the family unit, they aren't looking out for the child, then parents start to take their role again.

Dr Pompa 1:19:56

Well, because they think they know better than the mother. That's ultimately, again, it's a major premise, right? They know better than the mother, so they should make the decision, not some mother, which they're taking out that fact that nobody makes a better decision for a child than its mother, not the father, the mother, because there's this intuition. That child comes from you. Most mothers will tell you that I just didn't feel good about it that day. You know, they tell I didn't feel good about all those vaccines. I didn't, something was checked in my spirit. Like that's that intuition. But they want control of that. And that's why, you know, they're against parenting or parents making decisions, etc.

SPEAKER_01 1:20:38

Well, what a tragedy that we ever allowed the sacred wisdom of the mother to be downgraded here. I mean, it can't be measured. You can't scientifically put a mother's wisdom in a box. You can't say whether the mother's wisdom is right or wrong. It just is. It's sacred. Yeah. And we have to restore that if we're going to be free and we're going to be healthy.

Dr Pompa 1:21:02

Yeah. Yeah. And uh again, it's going to be a major premise shift, right? That that has to happen.

SPEAKER_01 1:21:10

It's a paradigm shift.

Dr Pompa 1:21:11

It is. It is.

SPEAKER_01 1:21:12

People are ready for it. There's, you know, people are waking up, they're more curious than ever. They want answers. They know that there are options. And it's helping them think about things differently, think about their freedom differently, think about their health differently, and to take their rightful place as individuals and parents.

Dr Pompa 1:21:32

Where can people go to find out more about this topic and topics like it?

SPEAKER_01 1:21:38

Standforhealthfreedom.com. It's the best place to go. Join us. We will send you emails keeping you in the loop. Not too many, we promise, but most all of our emails will have a call to action, either specific to your state or specific to the nation, to say, look, guys, here's what's happening and here's what you can do. You can click right here and email the right person in government that represents you with the right message. We always say, please edit that message. Tell them who you are, tell them why you care why you care. But it makes a huge difference to show our strength in numbers and to show up as America's new majority. I mean, we truly believe that we are America's new majority. We're deciding elections, we're deciding policies, and it's our job to share this information because no one's going to do it for us.

Dr Pompa 1:22:28

You know, someone said, um, I can't recall right now, that the key to the midterm elections right now is the Maha mothers. You know, meaning like that are concerned about these health freedom topics. And there is a there's this under, you know, under the ground movement, if you will, happening with mothers that are really seeing what's happening with the health of their children. I I mean, this it is a different child today. Um, the health of children and what's happened. And mothers see that, all the allergies, all the problems, all the asthma, all the learning disabilities, what one in five kids, I mean, the autism rate's sailing. Mothers are concerned.

SPEAKER_01 1:23:11

And health freedom's on the ballot. Absolutely. Because the latest, so we saw kind of a chilling effect of the health freedom issues back in January because there was this one poll that came out, as Oxby poll, that said, don't touch the vaccine issues. It'll lose your election for you. But you know what followed that? Several polls that showed a few things. One, 43% of likely voters want fluoride out of their water. Can you believe that? No, that America has enough education to know they want that. 80% of likely voters want government and the industry out of their healthcare decisions. 80%.

SPEAKER_02 1:23:47

Wow.

SPEAKER_01 1:23:47

You know, there was 70% want informed consent in vaccines. Um, there was all these polls that have come out that show clearly that there's so many more people, even beyond our current ecosystem, that want health freedom to win in government. They want to be the person that makes a decision about their health and the health of their children. So we've done all the vetting and research at Stanford Health Freedom. If you go to votehf.com, you can print out your state voter guide and you'll know if there's a health freedom candidate in your state, they'll be there so that you can cast a ballot for them. Cause when I was in DC last week, the five media interviews that I had had one theme. They're like, you, the, the health freedom voting block or the Maha voting block, they'll call it, is struggling. You guys are struggling. You're too divided. And I said, No, we're not. We actually are stronger than ever. We're more united than ever. We're the strongest single issue voting block in America today. And the reason that the media is frustrated is because they can't define a grassroots movement by party or by campaign donations. And those are the two metrics they look at.

Dr Pompa 1:24:56

So they think it's fractured.

SPEAKER_01 1:24:58

They think it's fractured because we don't belong to a single party and we don't all have campaign donations flowing to a single place. And that doesn't matter. That was never our recipe for success. And it's not our recipe for success now. But the good news is we're still winning. Yeah. And our, yeah.

Dr Pompa 1:25:16

Yeah. I mean, and you see it. I again, you know, it's it's underground. Mothers are really determining so much of this. And I, because I I I travel a lot. I hear the chatter. And you know, I hear the mothers talking. It's like as frustrated as I get how how many of these people are taking Ozempic, the other conversations are about their kids' health. The other conversations are the people they're following, the influencers trying to figure out what to do with their kids. So that's why health freedom. I I think where it all started, I think there was an overreach in COVID.

SPEAKER_02 1:25:49

That's right.

Dr Pompa 1:25:50

I think that they thought, man, this is it. I mean, they thought they were going to come out of that mandating every vaccine. Because people have to understand that the vaccines are the cash cow of big pharma. They they don't have to prove safety and they can't be sued. Come on, there's no other drug like it. Right. So I mean, when you mess with that, number one, be careful, right? That's why I think Bobby needs to look over his shoulder a lot. You know, it's like because he's really, you know, making a difference. Um, but you know, I I really see these they overpushed, and I think that it woke the mothers up. Like, no boy, now I'm

How To Take Action Now

Dr Pompa 1:26:30

concerned.

SPEAKER_01 1:26:30

I had a mentor tell me very early on in starting Stanford Health Freedom. She said, Leah, the sad thing is we'll have to have 50% of America either be injured themselves or have a very close family member injured by pharmac by the pharmaceutical industry before we see health freedom really take foot, before we have no mandates. And I said, How are we gonna accept that as true? Like we have to reach people before they're injured. Like, can we just sit here and accept that? And the sad thing is, I think we saw it happen. I know when COVID happened and it wasn't just the mRNA, it it was so much more, it was everything, and we could talk about it all day. But now when I sit with a lawmaker, they know someone. It doesn't matter their party, it doesn't matter their socioeconomic status, what region they're from, they know someone. And that's what's causing more and more doors to open to common sense. And the scary thing is about the expanded heel prick, they won't need a liability shield. This biotech industry, they're creating these platforms that will not have proper studies because of the genetic predictions and them being created for an individual for an individual situation. They have nothing to compare it against. How would you hold them accountable for a bad outcome?

SPEAKER_02 1:27:59

Right.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:59

So I don't think they'll need the liability shield. They won't have to lobby for it because of the nature of the intervention and because of the how their investments are hedged. So it's something that we're gonna have to plot all the stops to say we're not on our watch, that we're not gonna allow this to proceed under a veil of darkness like the vaccine schedule did for 40 years.

Dr Pompa 1:28:20

Yeah, exactly. That's the goal. Give them the website one more time.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:26

Standforhealthfreedom.com. Go and join us, and we will keep you informed and you can take action.

Dr Pompa 1:28:31

There you go. You need to like, you need to share this show because how many more mothers don't know we didn't know, meaning I didn't know, my group didn't know any of this was going on. I haven't had a baby in years, you know. So we did I the they weren't doing heel pricks then, right? But you know, people need to know what's at stake right now.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:54

And it's, you know, even if you aren't having babies, it's privacy and medicine will be changed for everyone forever. Forever. And you know, I talking to many people about this over the last few months, it's what will this do to the germline? What generational effect will it have? I mean, you probably know that our decisions affect the germline. How will this impact future generations and the altering of human DNA that we're passing on? So it's a it's an issue that we all have skin in the game and we all have a voice that can make a difference on it.

Dr Pompa 1:29:28

There you go. Let's end right there. We have a voice. Use it. Go to the website, share the show.