(0:00 - 1:20) Recently, Dr. Peter McCullough appeared once again before a U.S. Senate committee on the COVID vaccines. His 16-minute video of his testimony, posted to YouTube, went viral for the force of his statements. In those statements, Dr. McCullough made reference to the myocarditis data that was found by himself and his fellow researchers. Researchers included two Canadians, Dr. Jessica Rose, an expert on VAERS, and Dr. William Makis, Canada's top cancer researcher. The primary researcher for the paper that Dr. McCullough referred to in the hearing is Dr. Nathaniel Mead, who has worked with the McCullough Foundation closely in the past several years. Dr. Mead is an epidemiologist and one of the most meticulous researchers and data analysts in the world. The data revealed in that paper is extremely alarming. Tens of millions of people around the world now have myocarditis as a result of the COVID shots, a condition which will shorten their lifespans. Dr. McCullough and Dr. Mead join me today to reveal what they found and to explain it in terms that all of us can understand. (1:21 - 4:27) Dr. McCullough also discusses effective treatments for those afflicted with myocarditis as a result of the shots. If you or someone you know has myocarditis, there is hope as Dr. McCullough's treatment protocol has proven to be very effective. Nathaniel, Peter, welcome to the show. Thank you. Thank you. And I asked you gentlemen in today because we saw your testimony, Peter, in front of the Senate recently. Very powerful testimony. You hear people here in dealing the gears and you were very, very direct and blunt. And then Nathaniel was kind enough to send me a link to your paper. And there's some extremely alarming numbers in here, gentlemen, in terms of myocarditis. So you're the experts. Would you mind telling the audience what you found in this study? It was really much more than a study. It was a very comprehensive review. We looked at susceptibility factors. We looked at the effects of age and gender, looked at chronic inflammation as a background factor. We also looked at all of the things that would typically predispose people toward myocarditis linked with the COVID-19 mRNA shots. And then we looked at the epidemiology and saw that many of the studies had been overlooked by the agencies, more severe outcomes, which were due to the effects on young men in particular, but also younger people in general, young women too, were being overlooked. And so what you don't stratify, according to age and gender, you then often miss the more important findings of a study. So that was a big focus of the paper. And then Dr. McCullough and I talked about doing an overview of the three major misconceptions that have dominated the discussion around myocarditis and heart cardiac issues linked with the COVID shots. And so those three misconceptions were that the COVID infections cause more myocarditis than the injections or the COVID shots. The COVID infections cause more severe myocarditis than the COVID vaccines. And then the third one is that the risk-benefit analysis favors the vaccines. And so we addressed all three of those in great detail. (4:28 - 5:16) Yes. And I'm going to read a statistic here from your study. And please correct me if I'm getting this wrong. I did read your study, but I'm not a scientist. Approximately 10 excess myocarditis events per 100,000 persons after dose two in males under four years, compared to 1.6 per 100,000 after infection with COVID in the same group. That's, what's that, 70 times? Well, keep in mind, cardiologists, and I look at the data very carefully, keep in mind that there are some definitional flaws into this whole field of inquiry. (5:17 - 7:28) For example, when people are hospitalized with COVID, as they are with pneumococcal pneumonia or influenza, there is a routine blood draws called troponin. And that's a blood test to indicate whether or not there's any cardiac strain or injury. About a third of troponin testing in critically ill patients of all types is positive. So the literature ran with that and said, well, COVID-19 patients have positive troponins, so therefore they must have myocarditis in the hospital. Well, none of those studies adjudicated myocarditis. None of them evaluated the BKG changes or echocardiography or MRI changes. They were just simply positive troponins. You could have made that claim for a pneumococcal pneumonia. So the entire literature that the COVID infection causes myocarditis, in my view, was not valid at all. What we could find is we could find some rare cases of putative myocarditis. So for instance, Daniels and colleagues studied the NCAA athletes in 2020. And this is a fair analysis because there's no vaccine at this time. About 10,000 athletes, they found what they thought was about 36 putative cases where there was troponin, EKG, MRI testing, no hospitalizations, no deaths. Tuvalu and colleagues in Israel studied myocarditis, again, before the vaccines came out. And it was no different from the backdrop. It's very rare. It occurs from Coxsackie virus and some other causes. So there was no credible evidence that there was myocarditis from the infection. What there was is the infection can trigger heart attacks, which is acute blockages of coronary arteries, with about the same risk as influenza. So all this got rolled in, and Dr. Mead did a very meticulous analysis. And even if we credit the infection with posing some cardiac risk, what we found is the vaccine caused much greater cardiac risk than the infection ever did. (7:29 - 8:45) Now, an important question for you here, as you are, of course, a cardiologist, in fact, the most published one in history. So very much your area of expertise. When I was reading the paper, I noted that you mentioned lymphatic myocarditis. And I confess, I have to look that up. But this is an autoimmune condition in which the immune system is attacking the heart. So is this more severe than regular myocarditis, which is an inflammation in the heart? Well, you could consider, let's say, Coxsackievirus myocarditis. Now, that's, you know, long before the pandemic. I've seen a few cases in my career. It's an infection, and it comes and goes. It's gone. Ultimately, the body gets rid of the infection. Now consider the vaccine. Crosson and colleagues found Pfizer and Moderna messenger RNA physically in the heart. Bollmeier from Germany has found the spike protein from the messenger RNA physically in the heart of people with myocarditis have either died or had biopsies. It's much different than other kinds of myocarditis. So you can imagine the messenger RNA setting up shop in the human heart, producing spike protein. The spike protein is expressed, and then the immune system is constantly attacking the heart. And it occurs probably for years after taking the shots. (8:46 - 16:41) Right. Now, Dr. Mead, I have a question for you, once again, on the data. So this is something that you can address. Because reading through it, it's, I wouldn't say it's a discrepancy. I'm sure what it is is it's a difficulty in finding data. But as we were just referring to, the lymphatic myocarditis was found in 20% of 25 unexpected deaths post vaccinations. That would be five of them. However, positive surveillance systems like Bayer's underestimate myocarditis insulin, which we know, with prospective studies reporting rates up to two and a half percent or 2,500 per 100,000 after the second or third dose. So it seems to me that this incidence of myocarditis has got to be somewhere between those two numbers. Do we have any kind of educated guesses of where we're landing here in terms of the number of people who've been affected by this? I think we do think it's somewhere between two and three percent. You know, the important thing is, and Dr. McCullough alluded to this, with the subclinical myocarditis, it's often missed as a serious adverse event because of the microscoring that can occur. And so anytime you had some damage to the heart, you could have a long-term repercussion. You know, of course, most people are aware of myocarditis as a trigger for heart failure. But what I was surprised to see was, and I think this is very true in general of what happened during the pandemic, so much mischaracterization of myocarditis occurred because there was a bias toward linking it with the virus. And so, you know, determining the incidence is a little tricky because you often had an overlapping of the viral infection with either before or after the shots. So you've got a piggybacking of the spike and the lipid nanoparticles and the DNA contaminants all of that, which is part of the COVID-19 vaccination. Affecting people for an extended period of time, as Dr. McCullough referred to a couple of years, we know 709 days is the most recent figure where you have prolonged production of spike protein as a result of these shots. And so anything that happens in that interim, let's say somebody does get exposed to COVID, to the, in this case, Omicron variants, they test PCR positive, it's going to be attributed to the infection. Okay. And the other thing that we saw, so that's obviously, you know, in that case, it could be both. It could be that you're having the infection and the vaccination interacting, or it could be that the vaccination most likely started the initial insult to the myocardium, the heart muscle. And then we saw the additional effect of the infection, possibly contributing to what was the precipitating event that led to it being called myocarditis, you know, clinical myocarditis. So it went from self-clinical to clinical. So this is what makes it so challenging. And I say the other two other things I just want to say briefly is that so many of the studies were looking at PCR testing in the hospital set. So they're linking myocarditis with the PCR test results that we're seeing, which were not necessarily due to a serious COVID issue or severe COVID issue. It could have just been an incidental PCR test that was then linked with the myocarditis. So a lot of those cases got over-counted. And if you looked in the general population, you saw that COVID infection or Olacrod, Auerstrauss, CoV-2 infections were much higher prevalence than you were seeing, or much higher incidence than you were seeing in the hospital. So that would affect the calculation because the denominator, which would be total number of infections, was much larger than people realized. And the numerator, which would be the myocarditis cases, was relatively smaller. But when you looked at the vaccinations, that equation was much more serious in terms of, you know, identifying the vaccines as the cause. And then the other thing I just wanted to say is that so many of the, and Dr. McCullough, I'd really like you to correct me on this if I'm wrong, but so many of the downstream effects of myocarditis were probably counted as cardiac events that were actually originally due to the myocarditis, but later were called, you know, even pulmonary embolism or strunks can be linked with myocarditis initially, because you can have blood clots that are triggered by myocarditis. And you can also have, you know, of course, the acute inflammation and scarring resulting in sudden cardiac death, and sudden death often was not linked back to the myocarditis. So myocarditis can be, it is more important than a lot of people realize, even though we tend to think of it as just a signal that was identified by the CBC back in 2021, it was also something that precipitated many other serious conditions. And talk to me, that leads to several questions. And I want to start with this one, because we all know that the PCR test was misused and so that we had this massive case rate of people who weren't actually infected. So how would that affect the data in terms of people who may have gotten myocarditis from the infection itself, rather than from the vaccine? Are you asking about PCR false positives or? Yeah, I mean, there's this huge number of false positives. So we don't really know how many people actually had COVID. So if we're looking at, you know, something like two and a half percent of people who were infected with COVID developing myocarditis, well, that number is it unreliable because we don't really know how many people actually had due to the overreporting. Yeah, well, I can sort out some of this. So let's just take the vaccine in stable patients, no PCR testing, and then say prospective cohort studies, meaning they have all the blood testing at baseline, they take the shot, and then they have testing after the shot. That's the only fair way to know where they have symptom assessment after the shot. So we'll start with symptoms. There's a paper from Taiwan showing if you take the shot and carefully assess for symptoms, about 25% of people have chest pain, palpitations, swings in blood pressure. So that's the first data point. The second data point is three studies have measured blood troponin and other factors. The first one was Mansouga that found that number was about 2.3% who suffered some cardiac damage. (16:41 - 23:28) Now, they did the testing every day after the shot. Bergen and colleagues also did testing frequently. It was actually after the third shot, the number they came up with was 2.8%. And then the third study is by Pfizer. Pfizer did their own study, a small study, and what they did with Pfizer versus placebo, they didn't start measuring the troponin until after day four, and they came up with rates under 1% for both Pfizer and placebo. So Dr. Mead is correct. The real number we believe is about 2.5% of people per shot suffer some cardiac damage to some degree. We believe that number is real. Once we get to patients who are PCR positive, there are some data. Actually, the CDC has them. And let's just take death. Death would be of interest, obviously. And Senator Blumenthal used this number over and over again in the Senate hearings of May 21st, 2025. He said 1.2 million people died due to COVID-19. But if we look at that, it's really being PCR or antigen test positive at any time and then a death. That's what that is. And so in the National Center for Health Statistics, and the CDC has archived this on their website up to 2023, and then they stopped. But in that data set, only half of that 1.2 million have any pneumonia at all. Only half. So at best, the number of Americans who died with COVID is actually 600,000. And I think if rigorously adjudicated, the real number is closer to about 120,000 people died with COVID. So the PCR test positivity has worked to greatly inflate COVID deaths. And then we've had this false assertion that the vaccine causes myocarditis, or the infection causes myocarditis. When it doesn't, it's the vaccine that causes myocarditis. I just wanted to add the false positive, if you will, is basically a lot of COVID-related, so-called COVID deaths or COVID cases of myocarditis were misattributed to COVID-19 because of that. So the false positive rate in 2020 and 2021, conservatively, it was about 30% in most hospital clinic settings, I think, something like that. And that's the number that we used in our lessons learned review. We did a risk-benefit analysis. But after that, I think it climbed a lot. And it depended on where you were because of the cycle threshold and all of that. It depended on how they were using the test. But it definitely led to a lot of misattribution of myocarditis as a viral cause, as being caused by the coronavirus. Okay. Now, Dr. Mead, you said something earlier about 709 days after injection was now the maximum point at which they still found the spike proteins in the heart. But is that because 709 is the longest it's been tested? Right. So we don't actually know of how long those spike proteins could be for life, continuing to damage the heart. We have no idea. Yeah. Yes. And many people have said this. We don't know if there is an off switch. There does not appear to be. And so it just keeps going. It's a viral factory, in a sense, because it's trying out these... I shouldn't say viral. But it's unfortunate that... I think in terms of the short-term and long-term, one thing that's interesting is Moderna seems to be... And I haven't discussed this with Dr. McCullough, but Moderna seems to be linked with more of the short-term serious adverse events, whereas Pfizer is linked with the more long-term effects. And that could be because Pfizer has much higher concentration of the process-related impurities, the DNA contaminants that are linked with the manufacturing process. So it couldn't be that people have had the Pfizer shots and they've had multiple shots, and if they were exposed to the coronavirus on top of it. Possibly. We're exploring that. We're doing another paper on that right now. This is the possibility that those people will have more long-term effects. Right. And so that was my next question, Dr. Nguyen, because it sounds to me like we've got three scenarios here for the myocarditis. We have the potentially extremely low likelihood that people have gotten myocarditis from the infection itself. Then we've got the ones who got it from the vaccine. But it sounds like what you're saying is because we know that the vaccine, quote-unquote vaccine, does not stop transmission, does not stop infection, we've got a large number of people out there who would have gotten myocarditis from the injections and then got infected with COVID, which probably made it worse. Yeah. Yeah. And you may have heard of Geert Vanden Bossche. You can tell I have some Dutch blood. My mother is Dutch. But Geert was one of the best sources for information on the biological implications of an infection occurring after the vaccination and how that could compromise the immune system and lead to a severe immune dysfunction that would go on for quite some time. And we don't really know why some people manifested more than others. We think multiple shots and all of this at the variations in the manufacturing process that result in, unfortunately, a great deal of heterogeneity in the composition of these shots. So it's a very, there's a lot of unknowns. But yeah, I think the long term, I think, Dr. McCullough, you spoke about this some time ago. You said that right now we might be looking at five to 15-year window somewhere in there where people could have the other as a pass. Yeah. Yeah. So that leads to the question, then, that the rates we're seeing now, this could get worse, even though the vaccine uptake is way down. (23:29 - 24:58) We could be seeing people developing myocarditis years down the road. It's still happening. I just received a letter from Australia after the publishing of our paper, I believe Nick Hulscher is interviewing this individual today, who's an engineer whose daughter, unfortunately, died after the injections. I personally know of a 28-year-old marathon runner who had just gotten back from Europe. She was in the shower and died in the shower, one of the healthiest people I know. These are completely healthy young people. And that's why the announcement yesterday of getting these shots off the childhood vaccine schedule, I'd love to hear Dr. McCullough talk about that, because I think it's something to be celebrated. But Dr. McCullough, could you comment on the implications of that? I think most people saw the press conference by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who's the American Health and Human Services Secretary, Dr. Makary, the FDA Commissioner, and Dr. Bhattacharya, the Director of the NIH. And they were announcing a narrowing in the recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines. But everybody at all ages still can get them. So if a doctor told a young mother that the child should get a COVID shot, they certainly can administer them. These are just the recommendations. (24:59 - 26:55) But I pay attention to the very end of Kennedy's statement. He says, by doing this, by restricting the number of people who should be getting these shots, we've taken a step to making America healthy again. And I thought that really said it all. That less COVID-19 vaccination means the country is getting healthier. Conversely, more COVID-19 vaccination makes the country unhealthy. We should not be taking a vaccine that generally worsens population health. I think that's actually what came out in Kennedy's words. It was a very interesting press conference that many of us believe falls woefully short of what America and Canada want, will. Makary and Prasad, both are, I think, relatively junior in their careers in terms of publication. Neither has any regulatory experience. But they're now at the FDA. They published a figure in the New England Journal of Medicine recently about these new recommendations. And it shows you how out of touch they are now. Both these doctors took the vaccines and promoted them. But they said that, and under the new guidance, there's still 31% of adults in America who should be getting a vaccine, a COVID shot. Well, what's the reality? The reality is only 15% of Americas are taking COVID shots. So you can tell that these two newly installed FDA scappers, that they still are out of touch with reality, that they should be looking at who's taking shots now, and essentially saying, should anybody be taking shots? I called for in the Senate just a few days ago that they should all be removed from the market. They're not safe for human use, and they never save lives. (26:56 - 27:59) Right. And unfortunately, here in Canada, we still have Health Canada recommending these shots for everybody of any age, still telling people that they're safe and effective, when, of course, they are not. So now I have a very serious and unfortunately very grim question for both of you, Jan, and I'd like both of you to comment on this. Because we have to look at the future, I think, societal ramifications of this. So to frame this question, Dr. McCullough, recently the McCullough Foundation brought to all of our attention that Italian study that found that if you were, say, in your 20s, and you were taking two or more shots, your life expectancy is now 55. Now, of course, that's a huge specter, right? I mean, even people who are going to live probably a normal lifespan, you have people who have died within minutes of taking the shots. So, you know, we have to take that number as it's intended. But now that we've got this data on the myocarditis, and it's my understanding that myocarditis always results in a shorter lifespan, you never know by how much, but it's going to kill these people normally earlier than they would. We've already got life expectancies dropping. (27:59 - 30:36) Here in Canada, it was 83 before the whole COVID narrative. Now it's down to 79. And so the question that I have for both of you gentlemen is, and I realize I'm asking you to look into a crystal ball. We can't know the future, but you're two of the most educated people on the planet on this. Are we looking at, in the next 20 years or so, a massive population crash as people die young? Well, first, I just want to say that I think whatever you look at something that is causing death at an early age, it's going to change the whole life expectancy prediction, the life expectancy estimate. So when babies are dying from any cause, it's going to skew the life expectancy. And so I'm excited. I hear what Dr. McCullough is saying about the children's vaccine schedule. I'm excited about this happening so soon after RFK can get in there. I think it's going to help. But I do think that we need to eliminate these shots for all ages. And that's because we have really good data, which I'm actually co-authoring a paper that Dr. McCullough has offered some feedback on, which is focusing on 15,000 nursing homes in the United States and looking at what's happening in the elderly. And the elderly population has suffered horribly from these shots, horribly. And I know, I mean, this is actually what motivated me to get involved with this in a very deep way, was I had neighbors on both side of me in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, who died from the shots. Actually, three neighbors. They were all elderly. And nobody in the neighborhood realized that they were from the shots. But, you know, in one case, it was a stroke. Man was perfectly healthy, had no comorbidities, no issues. He was healthy and he died in his sleep. And he was 67 years old. And, you know, I think it's, I think what we're seeing is a lot of deaths behind the scenes that will go on for some time. It could affect life expectancy very adversely. But I have encouraged that RFK is making steps toward changing this, I hope. (30:37 - 39:25) Dr. McCullough, your comments on that? Yeah, there's another piece to this population size, and that's fertility. And recently, on Focal Points and in our substack and our work, we interviewed Dr. Vybikin Manichy, who's just published a paper about vaccination markedly dropping fertility. And this has happened only for the vaccinated. In this case, she had the data from the Czech Republic. So as people started to take the vaccine, well, in 2021, by December of 2021, there was really a collapse of birth rates, a collapse. And multiple papers have demonstrated that the vaccines influence the menstrual cycle greatly. So that will, of course, always influence fertility, since it's a carefully timed cycle. Recent preclinical data showing the vaccines reduce the amount of female eggs by about 60%. Two studies show that the vaccines drop sperm count and motility for at least six months. So for sure, there's going to be less babies born, for sure, for some period of time. And as you pointed out, for sure, life expectancy has come down because some people have died early. And Dr. Mead is correct that life expectancy is heavily influenced by outliers. So all you need to do is have a teenager die of myeloparditis at age 16. Well, if you throw that into a population, that's going to bring that average number down. You don't need too many of those events to do that. So I think, for sure, life expectancy is going to go down. But because we are on a population growth curve, and some regions of the world where the populations are growing most rapidly, well, they're relatively under-vaccinated. Okay, so including some countries in Africa, for instance. So believe it or not, overall global population may come off of its growth curve and level out, but I don't think necessarily it's going to crash. Just in older, westernized countries, as Dr. Mead points out, I think our elderly have honestly really taken in heavy casualties. And they're hidden because COVID-19 vaccination contributes to common causes of death. So for instance, in the elderly, heart disease accounts for about 40% of deaths. Well, that's accelerated by vaccination. Cancer accounts for the other 40% of deaths. That appears to be accelerated by vaccination. And then lastly, death from other causes. That appears to be accelerated. So now we have multiple studies, I think you quoted the Alessandra study from Italy, showing that all-cause mortality is going up after vaccination. In fact, multiple studies agree on that, and particularly among the vaccinated. The saving grace will be those who did not take the vaccine. And our CDC has kind of recorrected the data, and we are at about 20% of Americans, thankfully, who did not take the vaccine. And well, that number in Canada, I think maybe is only 5%, sadly. Actually, I can comment on that one because I've worked into it. The Canadian government pulled a bait and switch. They like to claim that 86% of Canadians have been vaccinated. But what they did was they actually counted the first booster shot, in many cases, as a first shot. So they fudged the numbers. So while I can't give you an exact number, I suspect that the number of undoctinated Canada is very similar to the same number that you have in the US. Oh, that's so good to know. I'll correct my understanding of that. Well, that's terrific. Well, among the 20%, let me just comment on that. So I didn't take the vaccines. I never thought they were safe enough. And my wife didn't take them. But we're grateful we didn't take the vaccines. Very grateful. I do think COVID infection itself, though, because it's the same spike protein, and it does appear to stay in the body, at least the S1 segment, the outer tip, for a long period of time, I think the infection itself may have an effect on population longevity and population size itself. I'm seeing, among those with COVID, higher rates of blood clots and other problems. No vaccine implicated. Correct. Now, Dr. Mead, I want to get back to you for a little bit more of the data, because we continually hear that young men are being affected by Margaritavir, but it's not just young men. It's young women as well. What percentages were you finding here? I think for younger men, it was something like seven times more than women their age. So young men are definitely disproportionately affected. But I think young women have been overlooked as a result of that, because everyone's fixated on what's happening with young men. I have this as well. I just wanted to add something to what Dr. McCullough said, because I really appreciate what he said. Finance Technologies, which is Ed Dowd's group, has done some fantastic work with excess mortality, and they look at unstratified excess mortality in 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024. Interestingly, in 2022, which was the year that all of us epidemiologists were really interested in to see what would happen, because 2021 was still kind of murky. You had a lot of the COVID-related things going on, but 2022 was on crime, which was, for most people, the common cold or a loud flu. But what happened was in 2022, you saw excess mortality for all the age groups up to age 60. And then in 2023, all age groups going over 80, all age groups, excess mortality. It was a correlation, a significant correlation, between vaccination rates and excess mortality. And Ed Dowd's group, Phinance Technologies, it's called the Excess Mortality Project, has shown this very clearly in graphs. So you look at 2022, and it stops at about 60 years old. And then 2023, suddenly all the other age groups are showing the correlation. So that's really important data. Because, of course, with excess mortality, we're talking about excess all-cause mortality. And so you can't hide things in terms of COVID deaths. You can't call that you're mischaracterized what's going on, because we just know that more people are dying. And the most likely explanation is when you have a population-wide exposure to a toxic factor, that that is the factor that's causing it. So going back, I hope you don't mind I went back and digressed for a moment. Is there any other question in terms of the susceptibility? We think that the interval between shots is also important. So people who receive shots close together, which was very common back in 2021. And then the interval widened a bit, because there was less of a fixation on that. But people were getting multiple shots, you know, 2029, 2022. That 2023 dropped off quite a bit. So we're looking at the long-term effects. I'd always said that we're looking at three phases of the pandemic. Pre-shots, pre-vaccination, heavy vaccination period, we're looking at short-term effects. And then the long-term period, which is what we're in now. So this period is really an uncontrolled experiment on a massive level. And we just had no idea what was going to happen. I hope that with proper treatment, as Dr. McCullough has emphasized, people can avoid the more serious repercussions. Right. Now, Dr. McCullough, I have a two-part question for you. (39:26 - 40:03) Dr. McCullough, we have two situations here. We have people who got myocarditis and know they have it. And then we've got the people who have it, but they're asymptomatic. They haven't realized yet that they have it. And so for the people who have it and know they have it, what can they do to reduce the damage? And for those who have taken the shots, but are wondering, do I have myocarditis now? How can they find out? There's so common principles for treatment of myocarditis, and they exist before the pandemic. So one, there's a mandatory prescription drug, it's called colchicine. (40:04 - 41:24) Colchicine is derived from the stems of a purple flower. It's a prescription generator, but it's unique anti-inflammatory. We use it for gout. But it is absolutely mandatory in myopericarditis for at least a year. Everybody who's had COVID-19 myocarditis should be on colchicine. I use it regularly in my practice. The FDA now has broadly approved colchicine to prevent heart disease of all types, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. So there should be actually a huge population, you know, taking colchicine. Now, in a paper from Spain, this is very interesting, there was a man who developed COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis, and they treated him with colchicine, and he got better, everything got better. Then they stopped the colchicine in two weeks, that's a mistake, should have been continued for at least a year. And he reliably got myocarditis again. So then they treat him with colchicine again, he got better again. So they kept him on colchicine this time, and believe it or not, they gave him another shot, another COVID-19 vaccine. No myocarditis. So colchicine is very important. We've published widely on this. I think it's essential. We combine colchicine with McCulloch protocol-based spike protein detoxification. (41:24 - 42:18) It's the only peer-reviewed, evidence-based, scientifically supported approach. And it involves the combined use of nanokinase, brolin, both of those are enzymes that help dissolve the protein. And then curcumin, which is a form of a medicinal herb, if you will, that's an anti-inflammatory. It's actually anti-SARS-CoV-2 in human randomized trials. We had extensive use on this triple combination. We do use medicinal-grade high-dose products. Wellness Company has the lead product, Ultimate Spike Detox. And for full disclosure, I'm the chief scientific officer of the Wellness Company. But we found McCulloch protocol-based spike detoxification, Ultimate Spike Detox, in high doses. So that means nattokinase in 16,000 units a day. That's way higher than what we started with at 4,000 units a day. That does reliably get people better. (42:19 - 46:01) They clear out their symptoms. Cardiac troponin levels normalize. Heart imaging improves. EKG improves. Antibiotics against the spike protein come down. But the questions on the table is, how long do we continue treatment? I'm saying right now, at least for a year and continue indefinitely until we learn more. Thankfully, while having thousands of patients on this protocol, I've never had a patient develop a cardiac arrest or have new heart failure when they're on the McCulloch protocol. It's never happened. And of interest, I've had a chance to observe some cases. I do believe Damar Hamlin, the Buffalo Bill who had a cardiac arrest. And I said this on national TV when I went to talk to Carlson Shaw. I said, it looks like the vaccine cardiac arrest, even though he won't come out and say he took the vaccine. It looks like it was. Myself and Michael Gookin, another cardiologist up there, even the Buffalo, he said, listen, you better be treating him for myocarditis. And I bet they did with the appropriate McCulloch protocol techniques. He never had a repeat cardiac arrest. He was actually able to play pro football without a defibrillator. And I had a chance to see and examine Pilot Snow. Remember Pilot Snow took the vaccine, had a cardiac arrest at DFW airport, actually in the jetway after he landed a big plane. And he had a defibrillator put in. And I asked Pilot Snow an important question. He's also being appropriately treated. I said, has your defibrillator ever gone off again? He said, no, it never did. There's also Vince Iwichuchu, who is a USC basketball player. He had a vaccine cardiac arrest. He had a defibrillator in. To my knowledge, his defibrillator hasn't gone off. So what I'm telling you is, I think COVID-19 vaccine, myopericarditis, I think is very treatable. But patients do need treatment. And the only ones I see at risk are the ones not getting treatment. All right. And now the second part of the question was for those who have been injected, suspect maybe they would have myoperies, but they don't have any symptoms yet. How can they find out? Myself and Nick Hulscher at McCullough Foundation, we published an important paper in the World Journal of Cardiology, and it's titled Risk Statification for People Who Have Taken the Shots. And we think that patients, this is what I do in my practice, they should have a careful COVID and vaccine history to assess risk. If there's no vaccine and just kind of minimal exposure to COVID, nothing else needs to be done, no symptoms. But multiple rounds of COVID, heavily vaccinated, cardiac symptoms, we actually measure antibodies against the spike protein using the Roche Alexis assays available through LabCorp all over Canada and the United States. And there are numbers less than 1,000 units per ml by published literature in our experience are low risk, greater than 1,000, progressively higher risk. And then we move on to risk stratification with EKG, cardiac ultrasound, blood tests, there's three important blood tests I do, cardiac troponin, high sensitivity, blood BMP, beta-antibiotic peptide, and colectin 3. Any abnormalities there, then we move on to cardiac MRI. Now, there are occasional patients that have really suffered damage, and they don't know that they have done so. Some need to go on to cardiac heart failure specialists or ICDI. You'll have a few patients in my practice with ICDs. But the core is actually medical treatment, get the heart better, and allow people to recover. (46:01 - 46:24) I'm greatly worried about the paper by Koyousmo and colleagues in the Journal of Manhattan College of Cardiology, where two Japanese doctors described micro scars in the heart. And that was after people took five and six shots in Japan, and they had a sudden cardiac arrest. I worry about the heavily vaccinated and the risk of a cardiac arrest in the next few years. (46:25 - 48:02) Yes. Now, gentlemen, I realize both of you have to go very shortly. So, Dr. McCullough, I have one last question for you. I have watched now a number of your testimonies before you as , and it seems to me that with each one, you're able to get more and more direct with them. Do you foresee a point where you will be able to sit in front of the set and just bluntly tell them the truth? I'm going to put this in my words, not the words that you might use, but these are not vaccines. They're a bioweapon. And they're sickening people, they're killing people, they're sterilizing people. And we need to stop. We're going to shut it down completely. Do you think that at some point in time, you can get to the point where the Senate will actually listen? We have to get to a point of equipoise. That is, the senators and the congressmen, Democrat and Republican, they shouldn't have a stance on the vaccines. I mean, this isn't a political campaign issue. It's just a medical intervention that's being applied to the entire population, and we're greatly concerned. If we have a vaccine that's been broadly administered to two-thirds of the world's population, and a doctor is raising a concern, the doctor raising the concern should get the attention. We should not presume a vaccine is safe or effective. That presumption itself was deadly. We should never do that again. We should always have healthy skepticism. (48:03 - 48:27) Mass vaccination should never be undertaken again, I don't think, for any problem. And a vaccination ought to be very limited and be done with careful observation and safety. I can't describe the intent of those who continue to promote the vaccines, but I can tell you, their last stand at this point in time is they claim the vaccines have saved millions of lives. (48:27 - 48:37) And they're wrong. I told America that was wrong. I don't think a COVID vaccine saved a single life, and that's the last stand on their false narrative. (48:37 - 48:59) Yes, and that's borne out by the research that was done several years ago by the Canadian researchers, Denis Rancourt and Joseph Hickey, which concluded that COVID did not result in a single extra death. It didn't kill anybody who wasn't going to die anyway from something else. So, Dr. McCullough, Dr. Mead, thank you so much for your time today and for the excellent research that you're continuing to do. Thank you.