HWD When there is a Vaccine, will it help

(0:00) Hi, this is Dr. Daniels and welcome to Healing with Dr. Daniels. This is the Sunday, May 31, 2020 edition, and the topic today is, so if a vaccine is found, how will we know if it's the right one? I mean, there are vaccines for this disease and vaccines for that disease. How do we know we're vaccinating against the right thing? So today, I'm going to examine the vaccine research and answer that question.

(0:38) So, if a vaccine is found, how do we know? How do we know? As always, think happens, but first, we have to take our turpentine.

(0:55) Alrighty, we've got some white sugar, yay! And we've got a spoon. Get my turpentine open first. Alright, so there is my sugar. I got a little pipette here, yay! Stick it into our turpentine bottle. I'm going to show you my turpentine bottle in a minute here because it is important to label your turpentine bottle.

(2:16) Okay, there we go, yay! Now, I'm gonna put a little water in my mouth that elevates the sugar and turpentine off the spoon so it flows all the way back. It doesn't go around my mouth and taste bad. I mean, it doesn't taste great anyway, but this helps minimize the annoyance.

(2:30) That went down pretty easy. Okay, so this is my turpentine bottle, turpentine. I put a little tub on it and I have it labeled.

(2:52) Now, next, because I know that trace minerals are not in our food and also because I do drink distilled water exclusively, I'm taking my shilajit. As you can see, it is black tar. So, I recommend black tar because the powder has an abnormally high count of heavy metals. We don't want those. So, we just take this. This is a scientific spatula. Take this. Let me put it here so you can see. Let me pull that out. Now, that is a lot of shilajit. That is too much. All we want is 200 milligrams.

(3:28) So, we're going to scrape that off the spatula there. Scrape that off there. I'm just going to get 200 milligrams. So, that's more or less 200 milligrams there. And, in the water I did not drink, I'm going to put it in. Bam! And, while we talk, I am going to let that dissolve and hopefully drink it at the end. If I don't remember to drink it at the end of today's program, then I'll just drink it later on today.

(3:42) All right, and a word from our sponsor. Yay! Vitality Capsules. So, Vitality Capsules are the internal cleanser for everyday use to help you poop three times a day so you can get started with your turpentine or just with a happier, more comfortable life. And, you can find out more about those at vitalitycapsules.com. That's vitalitycapsules.com.

(4:09) Okay, so that brings us to today's topic, which is, so if the vaccine is found, how will we know if it's the right one? Well, aren't you glad that the researchers are doing, well, research. So, somebody sent this to me, and I was like, oh wow, they're doing research. Oh, they're getting closer. Yay!

(4:44) So, this is from the Journal of Virology, American Society for... oh, this is more basic science. Let's get the... oh, here it is. Okay, Oxford journals, academic journals. I read so many papers, I'm telling you. Okay, so Oxford academic journals and this is COVID-19 and the golden Syrian hamster model.

(5:12) Now, this is important to know because it turns out that hamsters are among animals that are able to be infected and get illnesses from human viruses, like the SARS type virus or coronavirus. So, and so this is March 26, 2020. So, the background is a small animal model that resembles COVID-19 with low death rate is lacking and so they're working on that, and what they did was they did molecular docking, that's like connection on the binding between angiotensin converting enzyme two.

(6:09) So, this is an ACE inhibitor or a receptor that's present in humans and controls blood pressure in humans, just by the way. So, this is the binding domain, domain means location, of the surface spike protein of SARS 2. So, now the binding domain of the surface spike protein, what does that mean? That means this is where the protein, which is measured by the SARS test or basically the antibody, connects. So, either the virus or the antibody connects there, suggesting that the golden Syrian hamster is an option. Virus challenge, that means they try and infect the mouse or the hamster. Contact transmission, that means transmission from hamster to hamster and passive immunoprophylaxis were performed. That means immunoprophylaxis means like giving antibodies to the hamster. So, serial organ tissues and blood were harvested, that means they killed the poor animals. For histopathology, it means they looked under the microscope. Viral load, that means how many viruses and titer, chemokine cytokine assay and neutralizing antibody titers were all measured.

(8:25) So, what were the results? They did all this stuff, what was the results? So, and you got to listen carefully to this and we're going to cross-reference with other papers to help us understand anything that's too complicated for us. Right, so we're going to break it down so that an eight-year-old could understand this. So, the Syrian hamster, that means an animal, could be consistently infected by SARS-CoV-2, that means COVID-19. Maximal, that means the worst, clinical signs of rapid breathing, weight loss, histopathological changes, that means what they see under the microscope after they kill the animal. From the initial exudative phase of diffuse alveolar damage, that means lung damage, with extensive, that means a lot, apoptosis, which means cell death, to the later proliferative, that means growing and reproduction of the virus, phase of tissue repair, airway and intestinal involvement with virus nucleocapsid protein expression.

(9:53) So, different viruses make certain proteins and they're called nucleocapsid, just a fancy name for a protein made by a virus. And high lung viral load and spleen and lymphoid atrophy associated with marked cytokine activation were observed within the first week of virus challenge. So, all these fancy words mean that there's evidence that the hamster got infected. So, this is like amazing.

(10:04) The lung virus titer, that means the count of the virus particles, was between 10 to the 5th, that means 100,000, and 10 to the 7th, like 10 million. That's a lot. Challenge index hamsters consistently infected naive contact hamsters. So, that means an infected hamster was able to infect a hamster that had never been exposed to the virus when they were housed within the same cage. This is very important because hamster cages are not kept five feet apart, just saying. Resulting in similar pathology, but not weight loss. So, there's a disease that causes changes in the cells, but the animals didn't lose weight. All infected hamsters recovered, I'll repeat that, all infected hamsters recovered. That's 100% recovered. That means they lived long enough to be killed by the scientists. Okay. So, they lived. They were not killed by the virus. And developed mean, that means average, serum neutralizing antibody titers more than 1 to 427, two weeks after the challenge. So, in other words, they would infect the hamster on day one, and on day 14, 100% were recovered and had no antibodies. Okay. So, they achieved significant decrease in lung viral load, but not in lung pathology. So, when they recovered, the amount of virus in the lungs was much less. It was still there, but it was much less. And the damage to the lungs seemed to be persistent, even though the animals were recovered. When you look under the microscope, the lungs did not appear healthy. No consistent, non-synonymous adaptive mutation of the spike was found in viruses isolated from infected hamsters. What does that mean? That means the virus did not mutate.

(12:21) Here's the clincher. Here is the clincher. Besides satisfying the Koch's postulates, well, first of all, let's just go to Koch's postulates and see what Koch's postulates say. Now, in order to understand Koch's postulates, it is best to look at, well, Koch. In other words, it's not reasonable to say, well, you know, this is kind of like Koch's postulates, but like not really. No, we want the real thing.

(13:00) But first, I'm going to show you what medicine.net says is Koch's postulates. He has four postulates. The first one is the bacteria must, notice the word bacteria, must be present in every case of the disease. If you have a case of the disease and the bacteria is not present, then that suggests that the bacteria you've identified is not the cause of the disease. So, Koch was very clear on this because the medicine was emerging from an area of superstition and the doctors were saying, hey, we medical doctors are the ones to believe because we have science, we have objective evidence, we're not just making it up, we're not just crying wolf, we have science. And so, Koch said these are how we know, this is why we know what we know and what we say is correct and why you can believe us.

(14:02) So, the bacteria must be present in every case of the disease. This is what medicine.net says. But what did Koch say? Let's go back to the basic information here. Koch said the microorganism, not necessarily bacteria, the microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease but should not be found in healthy organisms. Okay, so the microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease but should not be found in healthy organisms. This is very important.

(15:02) Let's take a look at the COVID situation. Of the people sick with COVID, 30% test negative. In other words, the virus is not present in 30%. The virus is not present and this information is from Healthline. Yeah, Healthline and they're calling them false negatives in COVID-19 testing. It's not a false negative because now I get tested a second time with a definitive test which was then positive. So, they're using the word false negative very actually inaccurately. So, these are not false negatives. These are negatives. So, these are negatives. People who don't have the virus according to available testing. They do not have the virus but they have the disease. So, the first Koch's postulate is violated but it has a second part.

(16:02) So, we know that the virus should be present in people who have the disease but in 30% of cases it's not. Well, what about people who are healthy? Koch is very clear on that. So, what Koch says about that is but should not be found in healthy individuals. So, if an individual is healthy, has no symptoms of disease, the virus should not be present. What do we find about COVID? 80% of cases where the virus is found, people do not have disease. Yep. So, Koch's postulate, the first postulate is absolutely totally completely false for COVID-19.

(17:05) Now, Koch is very, very clear. At all four, one, two, three, four, four postulates must be satisfied. If anyone of them is not satisfied, then the microorganism identified, whether it's a virus or whether it's a bacteria, not the cause of disease. So, the first postulate, Koch's postulate, has absolutely not been satisfied by COVID-19. Now, these researchers said, oh wait, Koch's postulates are satisfied. No, they're not. These guys have lied. But if you didn't have the patience to go look up Koch's postulates, you would not understand that these researchers drew a conclusion not supported by available data or facts.

(17:57) But wait, there's another conclusion here. If you look at this model, there was 100% survival. What does that mean? That means not one death. So, this particular virus in this particular model does not have the ability to cause death.

(18:53) What does that mean? That means if you develop a vaccine based on this model, there is no ability to test the vaccine on these hamsters because in these hamsters, the disease is not deadly. But wait, can we take another leap of logical progression? If this virus in these hamsters produces symptoms identical to the symptoms in human beings, which they are saying it does, we're going to believe that, then could it be that the virus in humans is also not deadly? So, what we have here in this study is evidence that the virus is absolutely not deadly. And number two, or whatever organism they've decided to use, they're calling it COVID-19, whether it's a bacteria or a virus, there is a lot of discussion out there about that. We won't even get into that. We're going to believe what they are saying. But right now, the evidence is people are dying, but this is not the cause.

(20:00) The other piece of evidence is that Koch's postulates where this particular organism is concerned have not been satisfied, which means there is no evidence that this particular organism causes any disease at all.

(20:20) Well, that brings us to the next conclusion they drew, which is this readily available hamster model, that means this animal is readily available and it can manifest disease with this virus, is an important tool for studying transmission, pathogenesis, treatment, and vaccination against COVID-19. Oh, wait a minute. Point of information here. You cannot use this model to evaluate treatment of any kind, because in this particular organism, there's no death. So, you can't determine if any treatment or vaccine that is effective in this model, whatever effective might be, you cannot measure if it prevents death, because there is no death from this virus in this model.

(21:27) So, that answers the question, very handily. If a vaccine is found, how do we know it works? Well, if they use this model, we don't. We have absolutely no ability to know if any treatment or vaccination works, and this is not a model for pathogenesis. Pathogenesis means the cause and progression of disease. This is not a model for that, because in this model, the disease never ever progresses a death, and that's what I thought the vaccine is trying to prevent, trying to prevent death from a microorganism, namely COVID-19.

(22:19) So, if you're using a model where there is no death, then you can't test if a particular drug prevents death, because there's no death in the model used. As an example, you cannot go to the Caribbean islands to measure snowfall. Why? Because there's no snow in the Caribbean islands. So, if you say, I have a secret potion, and it stops snowfall, stops snowfall in its tracks. You use this, you take this, and wherever you go, there will be no snow, but we're only testing it in the Bahamas. Well, of course, it's going to work. Well, it'll appear to work, right? Because you take it, and there's no snow, but of course, there's no snow in the Bahamas, even if you don't take this particular drug.

(23:37) So, with this particular model that they are now touting, this hamster model, to develop and test vaccines, there is zero, zero, nada, nothing. There's no chance of developing data with respect to, is the vaccine effective in preventing deaths, or any treatment. Is the treatment effective in preventing death? Why? Because there is no death in this particular hamster model.

(24:32) Now, this is, what can I say? This is an issue with a lot of research, actually. Researchers, I mean, I'm sure they get paid a lot of money. I'm sure they all have, if they got PhDs, where are their degrees? Okay, so this is COVID-19 research. Where was it done? Clinical Infectious Disease, published March 26th, but where was it published? Well, I'll just read you the name of the authors. Jasper Phuc-Wu-Chan, Anna Jingxia Yang, Shu Feng Wan, Vincent Kwok-Man Poon, Chris Chung-Sing Chan, and a few others, but does it say where it was published by?

(25:52) All right, let's see if we have supplemental data. Is that going to tell us anything? Aha, the author is published by Oxford Press for the Infectious Disease Society of America, author notes. This article is published and distributed under the terms of Oxford University Press Standard Journal Publication Model. So, they do not tell us, this is interesting, they do not even tell us what university published it. In other words, was this research done in the United States? Was it done outside the United States? Very interesting.

(27:07) In the United States, usually, so title, we've got the authors, oh affiliation, here we are, thank you. Ah, Department of Microbiology, University of Hong Kong. So, you know, this research was done in Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region, China. Very interesting.

(27:55) So, this is the standard of research that we are seeing now in the United States, in so-called science. And this is what is guiding decision-making, not only by governments, but even worse, by individuals. Individuals are submitting to therapy that is not effective, that is actually, as in this article, proven to be ineffective. Because they are basing the decision they think on science, when actually it is really hearsay. So, this is a situation that is very disruptive to a person's life, if they choose to listen to this research and accept these conclusions drawn by authors from research.

(31:14) So, these people, they did research. I'm going to believe the research. They were accurate. There was no error or misrepresentation in terms of the actual research and data. I'm going to believe all of that. And then, at the bottom line is, they then go on to draw a conclusion totally unsupported by the research. And the real error to this way is, if you can imagine in a prior example, like someone in the Bahamas, purchasing medicines or pills or equipment to stop the snow from falling, that individual who is believing that sales pitch is going to be spending a tremendous amount of time and a tremendous amount of research preventing snowfall, when it never would have fallen in the first place. And this is what's happening here. What their research has shown, if we're going to believe their research, which why not, is that COVID-19 is simply not deadly.

(32:49) If you want to die, or if you die, COVID-19 didn't do it. Now, let's take a look at the CDC weekly body count. I always like to look at the body count.

(33:44) So, the important thing here to see, oh, good, even better, is you see where it says 102? That's 102. On the far, I guess, right. And then you have 971,000. We're going to round that up to a million, just to make it easy, easy marks. Okay, so that means 2% of the total deaths are excess deaths, above and beyond what would have been expected this time of year, between January and now.

(34:13) So, what's 2% of 971,000? Well, it would be 19,400. So, we only have 19,400 deaths more this time of year, for the whole January until now, than we had last year in the same four-month period. But wait, we have 19,000 excess deaths, but we have 81,000 deaths attributed to COVID. What this means is that the COVID death count, however it's being counted, we don't have to question that, which is, again, let's believe it, is unrelated to the health of Americans.

(34:52) So, there is something going on that is causing additional Americans to die. It has caused only the death of 19,000 additional Americans, and yet something has been identified to which 81,000 deaths are being attributed. So, the attribution is in error, or the, well actually, really that's the only thing you can conclude, is the attribution is in error. In other words, at least 60,000 of those deaths being attributed to COVID cannot possibly be COVID. It can't be contributing to, or in any way impacting the health of Americans. Those are people who would have died anyway, and their deaths would have been called something else, had it not been 2020 COVID time.

(36:53) So, again, these are numbers published by the CDC. This is updated May 28th, so this is pretty current, and it's just, you know, it's shocking to me that so many adult Americans have any question at all as to what is going on. So, one thing is very clear from the CDC's numbers, and from this study, is that this virus is not a cause of death. So, testing positive for this virus has no predictive value in terms of predicting if you are healthy, or if you're going to be sick. So, the presence or absence of this virus is irrelevant to the health of an individual.

(38:20) Now, that's pretty strong language, and I'm going to be honest with you, I have friends who do not agree with me, and that's okay, we're still friends. But, if you look at the data, that's what the data says. The data says that there appears to be a virus, and with our present ability to measure the virus, the detection of the virus does not predict illness, and does not predict death. In fact, it has what we would call negative predictive value. So, if you test positive for the virus, there's an 80% chance that you're just fine. In fact, you're going to be healthy, doing great. So, the virus itself is irrelevant to health. However, the human behavior surrounding the virus has been pretty devastating, and for that, I can just only hope that, you know, things get better soon.

(38:20) Okay, let us go. And, answer some questions. I hope that I made everything, like, super duper clear. So, if a vaccine is found using this hamster model, we can be sure you shouldn't be taking it. You should not take it, because this hamster model does not have the ability to show that a vaccine is going to modify the relevant metric, which is preventing death.

(39:05) So, if you're not going to take the vaccine, what should you do? And, the answer is, for 80% of you listening, there's nothing to do. You'll get the virus, you won't even know it, and you'll be just fine. What about the 20%? Of the 20% who get the virus, and who get very sick from it, less than even 1% will die. So, 99, at least 99% of the people who get the virus, are going to recover just very nicely, and of those 19% who recover nicely, but have a few symptoms, and they're pretty upset by it, most of them are retired, and not going to work. So, what does that mean? Making a vaccine that decreases the number of days lost from work, is going to be irrelevant to those people. So, using this particular model of disease, this hamster model, any vaccine developed using that model, is not going to be of benefit. So, that you know. We know that's because the model they're using, there is no death present. So, death can't be measured. It's not a metric. Again, it's like preventing snow in the Bahamas.

(41:10) So, what should you do? Should you wear a mask? It does not appear so. So, again, if you have something that 99% is just simply not going to be deadly, then there's not any particular precaution to take. If you feel vulnerable, if you feel that getting the virus might put you in the unlucky fraction of a percent that die, then sure, stay home. However, staying home is not a real answer. All it's going to do is delay infection, like flatten the curve kind of thing. So, in other words, it doesn't mean you're not going to get infected. So, if you stay home, wear a mask, wear gloves, put on a hazmat suit, all it's going to do is change your date of infection from Monday to Friday or from May to July. So, that's still not a solution to someone who's vulnerable to, say, dying of the virus. So, no deaths, no deaths at all would be prevented through those measures.

(41:43) Well, what other measures make sense? Well, there's something called viral shedding, and it's talked about as if it's this terrible thing. No, viral shedding is good. What does viral shedding mean? It means the person who has the virus is expelling it from their body, expelling it from their body, so it can't hurt them or they can't die of it. So, if you are a vulnerable person, or if you're concerned that the virus might kill you, then you should start shedding the virus. How do you shed the virus? Well, bowel movements. The virus has been found in the stool. So, if you increase your bowel movements to three bowel movements a day, then you're going to increase your viral shedding, and you're going to shed the virus into the toilet. Assuming that your municipality has responsible waste management, this is a very responsible thing to do. So, increasing your poop to three times a day, if you're a vulnerable individual, is going to increase the movement of the virus through your body, out of your body, into the toilet, and the virus can't cause you any problem.

(42:41) Again, the idea that the virus causes death, is again, is not supported by the data. It is not supported by the hamster model, and it is not supported by the CDC mortality statistics. In other words, the CDC is showing that Americans are just as healthy as they were two years ago. Maybe there's 20,000 additional deaths, and that's all. The COVID numbers show 80,000. That means that at least 60,000 of those deaths are not related to COVID. They're related to other ongoing illnesses that actually were the cause of the individual's death, and that's important to realize. So, if you take that into account, then the .4 or .6% mortality rate now becomes .2, 0.2%, or 0.1%. And just for your information, the chance of dying this year, if you have feet on U.S. soil, is at least 0.9%, and in some cases, 1%. Once the death rate gets much below 1%, you're looking at a life expectancy of 100 years. And if you interview the average person who's 99 years old, they will tell you that they're pretty much, they're good. They're through with this life. They probably don't want you preventing much of anything.

(44:12) But the point is, getting COVID with a death rate of 0.1% means that the whole population gets infected with a COVID-like illness every single year, and that's the only, and that's the most deadly thing we have to worry about, then people will live far beyond 100 years of age. And so, then we have to ask ourselves, do we want to, how much attention do we want to give something that would confer upon the human race a life expectancy of more than 100 years? Sounds to me like we should welcome COVID. It's like, what can I say, a gift, you know? For those of you who don't mind living over 100 years, it sounds like COVID would be the answer to anyone's dreams.

(45:30) Again, if you want to get rid of the virus, bowel movements are the way. The medical industrial complex has isolated the virus in stool, so we know that bowel movements are a way that the virus gets rid of, that the body gets rid of this virus. So, drink plenty of water, poop three times a day. You can go to vitalitycapsules.com, get your vitality capsules, and put out the poop.

(46:08) Okay, so we're going to take a look, see if we can find, yep, there they are, yay! Question!

(46:08) Okay, is there a natural treatment for sleep apnea? Absolutely. So, what is sleep apnea, for those of you who don't know, sleep apnea is an extremely bad case of snoring. Oh my god, and so when you're living, basically the air goes in and comes out. See how noisy that was? Yeah, not at all. But if you have an obstruction, a blockage, a narrowing of the airway, then you get noise and it's very noisy. So, how do you get rid of sleep apnea? The answer is you detox. You get the crap out of the sinuses and the airways, and then the apnea goes away. It does take patience. It usually takes about, well it depends on how bad things are or what the situation is, but let's just say you don't yet have a sleep apnea machine, then probably it would take a week or two for the apnea to basically resolve. You might still have a little bit of snoring, but you're not going to have apnea. So how would you detox? Increase your water, increase your poops to three poops a day, and then because you have apnea, you have to go to the next level, which is you really have to take a look at your diet. Any processed food you're buying, any takeout, any restaurant food, any commercially prepared food or packaged food, you have to stop eating because that stuff is filled with toxins and they get deposited in your respiratory tract and this gives you sleep apnea.

(48:03) Alright, so this person says, Hi Dr. Daniels, I am a big fan of yours. Thank you. And I listen to your podcast regularly. Very good, thank you. I take turpentine on a weekly basis and feel great because of it. Yay, wonderful. I'm currently looking to buy Shilajit. Good luck with that. Can you please tell me where I can purchase it as I don't see it on your Vitality Capsules website. That is true, it's not on the website. We hope to have it there in the next two or three months. But I recommend eBay, Russian Federation, Black Tar Shilajit. That's what you want to get.

(49:09) Hi Dr. Daniels, do you take Turpentine and Shilajit on a daily or weekly basis? Actually neither. I try to take it every day, but I would say honestly I probably miss one or two days a week. Can you explain the purpose of Interferon in the human body? The purpose of Interferon in the human body is to generate revenue for whoever is making this stuff. I think it's been so long since I've even looked this up. Let me look it up again.

(50:02) So, the purpose of Interferon is to interfere with the proliferation and the reproduction of viruses. Now unfortunately it also interferes with the reproduction and maintenance of your very own cells and they're saying the medication is the same as a protein your body naturally produces. So, you always have to ask yourself, and this is the same with insulin, why isn't my body producing more of this stuff? In the case of insulin and diabetics, let's say type 2 diabetics, your body already has tried that solution and it did not work. So, basically Interferon interferes with the proliferation and reproduction, ostensibly of cancers and viruses, but of your own cells as well.

(51:30) So, this last person says, Dr. Daniels, vitality capsules have worked wonders in my life. Can I start to give vitality capsules to my son? Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Yes, if your son can swallow capsules, they're absolutely fine for kids. If he cannot swallow capsules, you can mix them in tomato juice. That has been the juice I have found to be the best at concealing the flavor of vitality capsules. They don't taste good.

(51:51) Dr. Daniels, my dentist strongly suggested that we consent, that means agree to, x-rays and fluoride treatments to my son's top four teeth. The dentist said my son has cavities and demineralization. We refused the recommendations and ran out of there. Can I repair his teeth naturally? Absolutely. So, teeth are basically bones. And so, they are depleted by any processed foods or foods that do not contain nutrients. That would be, pretty obviously, white sugar or white flour. It's so hard to sort all that out, that it's just simply easier to put them on potatoes or rice instead of wheat or bread. Alright, but how do you fix the teeth naturally? So get that out of his diet and add to his diet something like pig feet or cow feet. And you'll see his teeth will turn around.

(52:48) Love your show. Dr. Daniels, do you think the death rate in New York City is really doubled? If we assume the CDC number is accurate, what do you think is the explanation? Okay, so I think that the death rate in New York is probably really doubled. And I would take the CDC's numbers as accurate, so then we have to say what's really killing them. We know it's not the virus. Again, we get that from just looking at the CDC's numbers, which we've already done today. So what's the explanation? Well, ventilators for sure. Because when you put people in a ventilator, the death rate skyrockets to 90%. So that is a definite killer. The next thing that happened is in New York, the order was given to treat everything as if it is COVID. Do not provide any other therapy or intervention, whatever. And so basically doctors were commanded to ignore many life-threatening situations where they would be able to. And then to give deadly therapy in the form of ventilators. And the governor is even calling for more ventilators. So what has happened is the ventilator use has declined and guess what? New York deaths are way down. So I think that really more than explains the deaths, which is the use of the ventilators, the use of deadly therapy, and withholding care from people who had treatable conditions.

(55:22) Dr. Daniels, thank you very much in advance. I was wondering, why do you recommend that someone cover their body from waist to toe for three days and then head to toe? When head to toe from the beginning? Because if you just do head to toe from the beginning, it's like a bad LSD trip. Really don't do it. Don't do it. It's way too much detoxing and it's too sudden and it overwhelms the liver, which then overwhelms the brain with toxins. Very bad idea.

(56:26) So someone asked me if it would be okay for her to begin turpentine use while her three and a half year old still breastfeeds once a day. The answer is yes. The three and a half year old is not getting enough of anything from her to make a difference. So she believes she got a parasite a month or two ago from contaminated water or food and her and child consume a vegan diet. So in other words, I mean she's got a belief of course, but notice she's the one that's got the parasite. Her child does not appear to have the parasite. So there's something else going on here.

(56:55) Dr. Dan's what brand of water distillers do you recommend and what features to look for? So this has really evolved over time. So I'll tell you what I used to recommend. I used to recommend a tabletop distiller mega home. That's what I used and the important thing is it should have a one-gallon capacity. Number one. Number two, it should have a carbon filter packet at the end. So in other words, the water boils, goes through coils, condenses and it drips out and it drips through a carbon packet on its way out. Okay. The problem with that is that you have to babysit the distiller. Every three to six hours you have to basically add more water to the distiller and change out the bottom. And it can get pretty time-consuming if you're distilling water for a whole family.

(57:47) And so now I recommend start with a tabletop distiller, but once your tabletop distiller breaks, which it will break, it may take a year. It may take five years. It took mine six years, which meant I got really very good use out of it. So these tabletop distillers run about somewhere between $100 and $350. You can, there's variation in prices, but if you're using a gallon of distilled water a day, which is a reasonable amount between cooking and drinking, then you're going to go through at least $360 a year of purchased water to say nothing of contamination from the plastic bottles that distilled water is bottled in. So a tabletop distiller is a major bargain.

(58:10) Now the distiller I now recommend, if you can afford it, is Durastil. So Durastil is a distiller that hooks directly into your plumbing supply and produces drinkable water and you don't have to babysit it. It has a float valve so it makes like 12, 8 or 12 gallons and then automatically shuts off. So that type of distiller will basically last you a lifetime, so over time you will get your money back out of it, like basically five years. So I've been drinking distilled water for like 20 years. If I'd started with a Durastil, I would have been financially thousands of dollars ahead because I've been through at least six distillers over the years.

(59:28) Okay, that is it. We are done and as always, think happens and we will see you next week and please visit VitalityCapsules.com.