The Gary Null Show Gary takes on the real issues that the mainstream media is afraid to tackle. Tune in to find out the latest about health news, healing, politics, and the economy.

May 29, 2020  


May 29, 2020

Dear Senator Hawley,

Subject:  Senate Bill S.1914 and Wikipedia

My name is Dr. Gary Null. I am a nationally respected expert in the fields of health, nutrition and alternative medicine. For over four decades I have hosted syndicated radio broadcasts, including ABC radio network, WOR, WMCA and Pacifica. I hold a doctorate in human nutrition and public health science and have authored over 40 books, including several New York Times best sellers.

I wish to extend my gratitude for you addressing the flaws in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and introducing Senate bill S.1914 that would remove immunity from large tech companies and pressure them with an external audit. I fully support your efforts.

Back in 1996, the Communications Decency Act was hailed as a landmark piece of legislation, with bipartisan support, to uphold Constitutional free speech as well as regulate indecency and pornography. It was also meant to protect internet providers from third parties engaged in these activities while using their platforms.

However, during the following decades, and with the escalation of social media firms such as Google, Twitter and Facebook and purported free information sites such as Wikipedia and RationalWiki, the Act's later amendment, Section 230 (ie, the Internet Freedom and Family Empowerment Act) -- which also received bipartisan support -- has been shown to be deeply flawed and has increasingly come under criticism.  At the time of its passage, no one had anticipated the power social media would exert on the public to shape and promulgate biased and politically-motivated opinions. Although the internet giants rely upon Section 230 to protect themselves from libel and defamation, and avoid being held accountable for the consequences of wrongfully destroying the reputations and careers of individuals, they have also taken advantage of the same bill to engage in the very same libelous behavior under the guise of being non-partisan and neutral.  Consequently numerous individuals in government, the sciences, medicine, entertainment, and the academies have suffered professional and personal injuries without any legislative or legal recourse to correct errors and falsehoods. Past court cases by individuals against online providers, including AOL, eBay, Google, Craigslist, etc, have overwhelming ruled in favor of the defendants and granted immunity under Section 230.

Although most attention has been given to the large internet providers and social media firms such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, the internet's most visited website worldwide, other entities have not been properly scrutinized in an equal manner.

Although the S.1914 bill is an important step to correct the unanticipated flaws in Section 230, it unfortunately does not reach far enough and therefore it will fail to correct other forms of bias that are detrimental to public discourse and social health. Notable are:

  1. The bill is limited to biases "against a political party, candidate or viewpoint" and therefore overlooks other biases that infringe on Constitutional free speech and threaten public health
  2. The bill's definition of a "Covered Company" excludes "an organization described in section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986."  Therefore large non-profit organizations, despite some having a history of political and other biases with an influential overreach similar to the largest social media firms would not be held libel for gross biases and distortion of facts.

We encourage the bill to be amended to include the larger 501(c) organizations that act as social media companies and have enormous influence over public opinion and shape biased perceptions. This would include the Wikimedia Foundation, albeit a 501(c) organization, that collaborates closely with large Silicon Valley social media firms.

We would also recommend the criteria for the types of bias be expanded to include prejudices that endanger public health. Google's parent company, Alphabet, is also a pharmaceutical company with a vested interest in shaping public opinion on matters of medicine and health. And there are deep financial and strategic connections between Google and the Wikimedia Foundation.

Google and Wikipedia are firmly united in their efforts to censor, flag and limit free speech. Both have a history of embracing biased liberal viewpoints. In January 2019 the firm donated $3 million to the Wikimedia Foundation, which brings the sum total of Google donations to $7.5 million during the past decade, according to the World Economic Forum. In principle, Wikipedia serves as a fact checker for Google after the latter's efforts to compete with Wikipedia failed. The collaboration between the two should not be perceived as altruistic. Google searches now readily go directly to Wikipedia where users encounter the similar biases that Google has been criticized for. Already, Google's YouTube relies on Wikipedia pages as a resource for political correctness and, in our estimation, biased opinions.

A recent study published in the Medical Journal of Australia identified serious errors in Dr. Google, Google's online health advice site. The researchers found that the advice and diagnoses had only a 36 percent accuracy. This is a serious threat to both national and global health at time when people and patients increasingly rely on the internet for information about existing conditions and undiagnosed symptoms.

This risk is equally true for Wikipedia, which now ranks number one on the internet for health information. Wikipedia is crowd-sourced meaning that anyone regardless of professional credentials can compose content on any subject. The Wikimedia Foundation has no vetting process by medical and health experts to validate the information millions of people access daily.  A review analysis published by the American Osteopathic Association found that "Most Wikipedia articles representing the 10 most costly medical conditions in the United States contain many errors when checked against standard peer-reviewed sources. The authors conclude that "caution should be used when using Wikipedia to answer regarding patient care."  Other studies in the medical literature have drawn similar conclusions; nevertheless, despite Wikipedia being ranked at the top most used site for the public's searches for medical information, it does not rank on any recommended online medical resource list within the profession.  And yet, Google will be relying upon Wikipedia as a reliable resource for health topics.

Although the Foundation does not qualify under the bill's revenue requirements, it does so for the site's monthly usage.  The bill limits companies that would be impacted by the bill to an outreach of 30 million monthly users in the US and/or 300 million worldwide. Wikipedia currently boasts 18 billion page views per month and 27 million registered users on its English edition. There are hundreds of millions more non-registered users.

It is imperative that members of the Senate undertake an investigation into the WikiMedia Foundation's actions and review the legitimacy of its protection from libel, defamation, biases, falsehoods and censorship under Section 230. Moreover, if the Foundation is acting accordingly, against its own stated policies of neutrality, it may very likely be in direct violation of IRS rules regarding its non-profit registration.  If this is the case, then  under the Communications Decency Act Wikipedia has violated Section 230 and amendments are warranted to include organizations such as Wikimedia so as to be held accountable. The Act was never expected to shield the social media industry from malicious libel, a privilege not allowed to television networks, radio stations. newspapers and magazines. In the case of the Foundation's non-profit registration, I believe an external audit is justified to determine whether the Google-Wikipedia algorithms and content removal practices are politically neutral and unbiased.  There should be no exclusion that allows for obvious malicious libel.

After many hundreds of hours of research during the past two years,  we have documented evidence of the WikiMedia Foundation's efforts to act with extreme bias against notable national and international figures and entire industries that curtail freedom of speech, public discourse and debate and pose serious dangers to public health.

For your review I am enclosing my person biography, a summary of our investigations and one of our more informative investigative articles about Wikipedia's violations of the Communications Decency Act, failure to adhere to its own rules for neutrality, and evidence of libelous actions.


Gary Null, PhD

May 28, 2020  

Gary Null 2020 Self Empowerment Series Episodes 1-20





































May 27, 2020  

The Gary Null Show is here to inform you on the best news in health, healing, the environment. Mycoprotein products from fungus build muscle better than milk protein. Gotu kola, cnidium fruit, goji berry enhance memory by inducing nerve-growth-factor-mediated actions. Study: Cannabis plant contains molecules that are 30 times more effective at reducing inflammation than aspirin. Consciously training our sense of gratitude is good for mental health. Black cumin seeds improve oxidative stress and other factors in Hashimoto's thyroiditis patients. Spirituality linked to higher quality of life for stroke survivors, caregivers. Bioavailable compound from garlic inhibits vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation and migration by reducing oxidative stress. Are we wired for romance? fMRI imaging and genetic analysis say yes. The takeover of public health that we have documented in How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health and the remarkably brazen push to vaccinate everyone on the planet that we have documented in Bill Gates' Plan to Vaccinate the World was not, at base, about money. The unimaginable wealth that Gates has accrued is now being used to purchase something much more useful: control. Control not just of the global health bodies that can coordinate a worldwide vaccination program, or the governments that will mandate such an unprecedented campaign, but control over the global population itself

May 26, 2020  

The Gary Null Show is here to inform you on the best news in health, healing, the environment. Legal Cannabis hemp oil effectively treats chronic neuropathic pain. Mindfulness training shows promise for people with MS, Study identifies the mechanism by which eating fish reduces risk of cardiovascular disease, Eating Chocolate Could Slash High Blood Pressure Risk. Hearts that drum together beat together. Meta-analysis links erectile dysfunction, vitamin D deficiency, Low selenium levels associated with decreased bone mineral density. Glucose levels linked to maternal mortality even in non-diabetic women. Ketogenic diets alter gut microbiome in humans, mice. 


May 26, 2020  

Chris Hedges is one of our nation’s most insightful cultural critics, social and political activists and investigative journalists. He is also Presbyterian minister and a visiting university lecturer. For two decades Chris was a foreign correspondent in war zones and conflicts in Central America, the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans, having reported for The New York Times and other news outlets from over 50 countries.  While at the Times, he received the 2002 Pulitzer Prize for reporting on global terrorism. That same year he received Amnesty International’s Global Award for Human Rights Journalism.   Chris has authored many bestselling books. His most recent  is “America: The Farewell Tour”, a deep on-the-ground  account of America's accelerating economic, social and political decay and the nation's descent into fascism. Chris hosts the weekly TV program “On Contact,” with interviews prominent dissidents ignored by the media. It  airs every Saturday on Russian TV at  

May 22, 2020  
Robert Kennedy Jr is an ardent defender of the environment and the health of children. As a world leading protector of the environment he is the founder and president of the WaterKeeper Alliance.  Last year he founded Childrens Health Defense -- a children's advocacy organization dedicating to enlightening the public about toxic risks to children, including vaccines and aluminum, fluoride, pesticides, food additives, EMF technology among others. The organization also serves as a watchdog on federal and state vaccine policies. Earlier Robert served as the Assistant District Attorney for New York City.  An advocate for the rights of South American and Canadian indigenous tribes, he has successfully strengthened treaties to protect indigenous homelands.  Robert holds a degree from Harvard, and law degrees from the University of Virginia and Pace University School of Law.  He is the author of “Thimerosal Let the Science Speak: The Evidence Supporting the Immediate Removal of Mercury.”  His websites are and
May 21, 2020  

Fast-Tracking a CoV-19 Vaccine: Why Should We Worry?

Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD

Progressive Radio Network, May 21, 2020


The CoV-19 pandemic is now exposing the hidden agendas and motives of the powers that be in government, in the pharmaceutical industry and Wall Street, and in the media. Despairingly opponents of vaccine mandates are largely divided. Many Trump supporters in the so-called anti-vaccination community believed he would be their savior to protect vaccine exemptions and avert compulsory mandates. Nevertheless, during his watch draconian mandate laws to ban religious exemption for children to attend public schools have been signed by the governors of California and New York.

Throughout the CoV-19 pandemic, Trump has waffled wildly, jumping on and off the vaccine band wagon depending upon his daily whims. Early he stated there was no need for a vaccine since the virus would magically disappear and no longer be a threat. It was his gut feeling and not surprisingly he was wrong. Yet during a press conference on March 14th, Trump announced the unveiling of his Operation Warp Speed agenda to accelerate development of a CoV-19 vaccine and have it ready this year. Trump is now fully on board with the pro-vaccination agenda. Moreover, he ordered that the military will be "mobilized so at the end of the year, we're going to be able to give it to a lot people very, very rapidly."  His newly appointed Warp Speed advisor is a venture capitalist and a former chairman of GlaxoSmithKline's vaccine division, Moncel Slaoui.

Often in order to understand Trump's strategies, follow the money trail, especially if the money trails leads to sealing loyalty to the president. However, his probable immediate motivation is for reelection and to increase the profits of pharmaceutical and investor profiles as repayment for those loyalties.  We can therefore reasonably expect, despite what has already been stated, that Trump may nationally mandate a CoV-19 vaccine. There are voices in Trump's camp who favor mandates. One of Trump's leading attorneys is Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz who recently went on record saying,

"Let me put it very clearly, you have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread disease.... You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business.... if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor's office and plunge a needle into your arm."

What might be the downside if a vaccine pushed on the public en masse is discovered to not work or is found unsafe in the long-term? Worse, what might be the consequences of a flawed vaccine that becomes mandated and required as policy to attend schools, work or even to leave the home to shop? We might be faced with an epidemic of vaccine-related illnesses and death on a scale that could dwarf the current CoV-19 pandemic.

There would be a greater rationale to push forward a fast-tracked vaccine if the private vaccine manufacturers were held legally liable for vaccine-related injuries and deaths. However, this was laid to rest by the Reagan administration after the passage of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act in 1986, which freed the pharmaceutical industry from personal injury lawsuits. Consequently, there is no incentive whatsoever for the vaccine industry to perform thorough due diligence analyses and reviews and to adopt gold standard scientific measures to create a safe and effective vaccine. In effect, they have free rein to develop vaccines according to their own rules.

According to German oncologist Claus Kohnlein, we may well be in the era of "virus mania."  The prevailing medical establishment has become dominated by a rapidly expanding private industry obsessed with viruses and the invention of pandemics for enormous profit. This obsession has hijacked not only medical practice and legislators who are determined to mandate vaccination, but has also infiltrated the entire mainstream media. This is despite consensual confirmatory evidence that some of these viruses may not be dangerous enough to warrant a vaccine nor demand mass screening to monitor potential infection.  For example, University of Toronto professor emeritus of pathology, Dr. Etienne de Harven would have us ask: do molecular markers for retroviruses truly confirm the presence of a virus, or is this a human invention that substitutes the absence of identifiable viral proteins and particles? Embedded in all of the confusion over CoV-19 and the heated debates and uncertainty over life returning to normal, the mainstream chorus chants that stability will only resume after a vaccine is launched on the public. At this moment, Kohnlein's 2007 book Virus Mania: Avian Flu, Cervical Cancer, SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio is essential reading to expose the life-threatening failures in modern medical science's efforts to tackle viral threats. And what Kohnlein outlines is being repeated again with CoV-19.

The need for a vaccine in order for society and the economy to return to normal was clearly stated by Trump's Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. ".. for the economy to fully recover," he stated, "that may have to await the arrival of a vaccine." Unfortunately, besides the White House and nation being impatient and placing high hopes in a vaccine, we are also witnessing a careless zeal to cut regulatory corners. And this atmosphere could potentially end in a serious medical disaster on the not-too-distant horizon.  Virus mania is morphing into vaccine mania. That vaccine mania has become a reality is evidenced in the 133 vaccines currently in development worldwide targeted against CoV-19 according to the Milken Institute.

Many challenges must be recognized and surmounted before an effective CoV-19 vaccine can be deemed safe..  The virus has already been shown to mutate rapidly despite beliefs that its RNA is stable. .Mutations of course naturally occur when a virus changes hosts, especially after jumping species. However, RNA viruses mutate more readily than larger DNA viruses such as herpes, HPV and smallpox.  University of Cambridge has identified three separate mutations since the Wuhan outbreak. Last month Los Alamos National Laboratory reported a recent mutation that is more contagious and transmittable than the original Wuhan strain.  Another strain was identified in India; the South China Morning Post reported that this Indian strain is being viewed as more virulent for the development of severe acute respiratory syndrome. The researchers from National Changhua University in Taiwan and Murdoch University in Australia warned that it "means current vaccine development against Sars-CoV-2 is at risk of becoming futile." The problem with mutations, similar to the challenges to create a universal flu vaccine, is whether or not any CoV-19 vaccine would generate sufficient immunity to combat future mutant strains and whether this is a cross-over of multi-strain immunity.

Furthermore, some reports indicate that natural CoV-19 immunity may wane quickly.  This is an additional caution about any promises that a fast-tracked and poorly evaluated vaccine, which will bypass a rigorous regulatory review, will provide much if any long-term immunity. In a preliminary study, Columbia University researchers identified people who were reinfected with the same coronavirus strain within a single year. Twelve individuals tested positive two or three times for the same strain within 18 months.  Similar findings were noted in South Korea. The Columbia scientists' conclusion is that coronavirus "immunity seems to wane quickly."  Dr. Matthew Frieman at the University of Maryland is an expert in coronaviruses.  He states that "we get coronaviruses every winter even though we're seroconverted..... We really don't understand whether it is a change in the virus over time [ie., mutations] or antibodies that don't protect from infection." The consequences are that proposals for issuing immunity certificates or passports would be utterly futile, an extraordinary waste of funding and that would accomplish little.

Since 2003 efforts have been made to develop coronavirus vaccines following the first SARS outbreak in China. All of these efforts failed either because of a lack in funding or because of observable serious adverse effects that necessitated the project to cease. To our knowledge, none of these efforts reached human trials because of serious adverse effects in animal trials.

However, now we are witnessing one company Moderna bypassing animal studies with its new CoV vaccine and commencing with human trials. The company has already reported that its experimental vaccine showed signs of being "safe and provoked a strong immune response" in a first phase clinical trial; the vaccine was administered to a very small number of human participants (N=45) to determine safety and to measure the levels of volunteers' immune response. Just over half of the participants had recognizable antibodies, but these were "binding antibodies." What is critical for protection is neutralizing antibodies; and on this account only 4 of the 45 participants were actually "analyzed" to show promising neutralizing antibody results. Nor did Moderna report any T-cell activity, essential for fighting the virus. In other words, Moderna's premature reports are negligible for guaranteeing an effective and safe CoV-19 vaccine.

We should remember this is only a first phase trial. The vaccine has a ways to go before it can be ruled effective. "If you look at vaccine development," stated Dr. Daniel Salmon, Director of Johns Hopkins' Institute for Vaccine Safety, "[there are] lots of vaccines that look good out of phase one that don't turn out to be good products."

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, a professor emeritus at the University of Ottawa, has documented NIAID's Dr. Anthony Fauci's support of Moderna's vaccine, and. according to Bobby Kennedy, Faico waved the needs for the company to test the vaccine in ferrets and primates and instead proceed directly into larger human trials. Both Moderna's and its German competitor CureVac's CoV-19 vaccine rely on mRNA technology, which carry strands of mRNA that encode CoV-19-specific proteins intended to stimulate the immune system to produce antibodies. Bill Gates says he is "particularly excited by two new approaches that some of the candidates are taking: RNA and DNA vaccines." But modern medicine has no practical experience with such vaccines being given to entire populations; therefore, there is absolutely no past history to monitor potential long-term risks, such as whether an engineered genetic code of a viral antigen will recombine adversely with the body's own DNA and trigger other life-threatening injuries we have to be aware of.

Despite the hype over Moderna's apparent success and a huge 39 percent rise in its stock price, a recent article in Nature warns us not to pop the Champaign corks yet. Moderna's data remains unpublished and many scientists worry the results may be "murky." It is worrisome that the company would make such an announcement before any data is made available for independent review. Seemingly this was solely for financial reasons; Moderna's premature claims were rewarded with a $1.3 million stock offering to bankroll its vaccine. Trump is also throwing his weight behind Moderna's vaccine: it is manufactured in the US, funded by the government, and Warp Speed advisor Slaoui sits on the board of the Lonza Group that is collaborating with Moderna. One caveat is that Moderna has never brought a vaccine nor a therapeutic product to the market and is therefore largely inexperienced. There is also no public release of consent forms that the trial participants are required to sign. And no indication of how much volunteers were paid. Are they being compensated with inordinate amounts beyond the industry's standards to accept high risk? None of this information has been provided.

The Nature article also quotes Baylor University vaccine scientist and coronavirus expert Dr. Peter Hotez's response to Moderna's announcement, "I'm not convinced that this is really a positive result."  The article notes that

"... most people who have recovered from COVID-19 without hospitalization did not produce high levels of ‘neutralizing antibodies’, which block the virus from infecting cells. Moderna measured these potent antibodies in eight participants and found their levels to be similar to those of recovered patients."

The most promising vaccine, Hotez believes, is being developed by Sinovac Biotech in China, but it requires three separate inoculations. Sinovac's vaccine after being administered to rhesus monkeys showed no presence of the virus found in the throats, lungs or rectums of the primates.

Another vaccine being developed at Oxford University protected monkeys (only six in the trial) from pneumonia but the primates;' nasal passages contained as much of the virus as those unvaccinated. In other words, all vaccinated monkeys became infected. In addition, the antibody titers were extremely low, which suggests the animals may not be fully protected. Nevertheless, Oxford is interpreting these weak results as a success and will also push forward with recruiting participants for a large human trial.

This sets a very disturbing precedent that will likely be imitated by other vaccine companies either now or during a future infectious pandemic.  Still other vaccines in development are entirely experimental and have no predecessor on the market. Noroavx has created a recombinant nanoparticle vaccine -- an artificially engineered fake replica of the actual virus. Since there is no vaccine on the current CDC schedule utilizing this technology, we have no idea of its long-term safety. 

So what do earlier efforts at developing a coronovirus vaccine tell us?

In 2012, a vaccine being developed by the University of Texas at Galveston and Baylor University observed pulmonary immunopathology in an animal study with mice. The researchers proposed the vaccine's pathology may be attributed to an adverse cytokine response, an observation a large number of physicians and researchers have made with persons severely affected with CoV-19.  A later vaccine effort in 2016 by the same institutions targeted the MERS coronavirus strain and observed lung immunopathology similar to infection with the wild virus.

A year earlier, another vaccine effort led by the University of North Carolina's Vaccine Institute noted an increase in eosinophilic proinflammatory pulmonary responses in a mouse model. Eosinophils are a type of white blood cell that are associated with infections, allergies and cancers. However, an abnormal increase in eos, a condition called eosinophilia, can result in nasal allergies and even cancer. This raises a question whether the North Carolina vaccine could have potentially contributed to lung cancer? The vaccine was also shown to provide poor protection from infection both in the adjuvant and non-adjuvant vaccines.

A later 2018 SARS vaccine trial with rhesus macaques conducted at Wuhan University led to antibody-dependent vaccine induced infections. The project was supposedly discontinued.

Another SARS vaccine trial with ferrets led by researchers at the University of Manitoba observed a promising neutralizing antibody response; however there severe inflammatory responses were observed in the animals' livers. The scientists concluded that the vaccine was "associated with enhanced hepatitis." That vaccine project too seems to have been shelved.

Japanese scientists in 2008 developed a SARS vaccine that utilized a recombinant vaccinia virus that expressed the SARS spike protein. Immunized mice exhibited increased infiltration of esoinophils in the lungs, a thickening of the alveolar epithelium, an uptake in cytokines contributing to abnormal inflammatory storms, and aggravated severe pneumonia.

Clearly, the past history to develop a coronavirus vaccine is not encouraging. Jennifer Sun, a molecular biologist at Princeton, warns that due to past coronavirus vaccine failures, the CoV-19 signatures need to be fully evaluated before any human trials commence in order "to prevent organ damage upon viral challenge." Baylor University, which has attempted to develop a vaccine, knows the problems all too well. According to Dr. Robert Atmar at Baylor's Department of Molecular Virology,  coronaviruses "are notoriously difficult when it comes to vaccine development.... the concern is that if these vaccines were used in people, they could end up causing harm."

Other scientists have issued warnings against hastily approving a vaccine without proper large, long-term clinical trials and scrupulous evaluation. For example, Dr. Paul Offit at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and one of the nation's most vocal advocates for compulsory vaccination, has criticized the shortened vaccine timelines being stated. In a Philadelphia Inquirer interview, Offit cautioned for the need of "extensive animal model testing" to be certain the vaccine "is safe in animals." This process, Offit says, "takes a lot of time, typically years."  "If you're going to be testing this in otherwise healthy people who are very, very unlikely to die from this infection," he continues, "you better make sure it's safe. So you want those regulations in place.... The point being: We're not very good at assessing risk."

Trump is pushing to have a vaccine ready by the end of this year. Offit and others argue two years is more realistic, and the global analytics firm Clarivate estimated that a vaccine "will require at least five years... to complete the development process through full regulatory approval." The good news is that the firm predicts that Moderna's mRNA vaccine has a 5% probability of success. The bad news is that the government and federal health agencies will very likely ram the first promising vaccine through the regulatory channels without having been properly evaluated for its efficacy and safety.

Without serious critical thought, the demand for a vaccine now outweighs the risks. And there is the potential for many risks that remain completely unknown, which is the same for any vaccine. Trump said it will be available "in a fairly quick manner."  In an interview with philosophy professor Nicholas Evans at the University of Massachusetts, he raised concerns over the lack of proper animal model vaccine trials before administering it to humans. Unfortunately there are no US laws that require animal trials. Consequently the pharmaceutical companies are taking advantage of this derelict oversight in their race to be the first to get a vaccine approved and distributed. Evans also worries about "the shredding of regulations and regulatory norms as part of their [the federal health agencies] response to this outbreak and this is a very dangerous proposition."

Rarely do politicians, and increasingly more and more scientists, make efforts to learn the lessons history offers.  Past efforts to develop a coronavirus vaccine have failed and the adverse effects observed in these efforts are clear indicators for why fast-tracking a CoV-19 vaccine would be frightfully irresponsible. But now this is all being ignored within the Trump White House, the CDC, and across most of the medical establishment, particularly the private vaccine makers. In addition, the media continues to fuel our vaccine mania, priming the public to willingly surrender their bodies to the syringe under a pretext of being protected from future CoV outbreaks.

Perhaps the most disturbing problem our national public health faces is the failure of our leading health agencies -- the CDC, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, and the World Health Organization -- to acknowledge the overwhelming evidence that no vaccine developed during the past half century is truly safe and effective for all.  Are there any scientific gold standard studies -- double blind, controlled trials using an actual inert placebo -- conducted for any vaccine currently on the market?  No? Have meticulous independent studies been performed to compare the quality of health between vaccinated and non-vaccinated participants?  Unfortunately there aren't any, and the CDC was forced to acknowledge this during a Congressional subcommittee hearing on autism.

All of the media's vaccine propaganda is stacked with pro-industry scientists who have something to gain. They are always presented as the experts. On the other hand, independent scientists, as well as board certified physicians and pediatricians, who question the official vaccine dogma, are attacked by federal officials and the mainstream media as alarmists, anti-vaxxers and even threats to society if they speak out.  Several years ago the World Health Organization listed vaccine opponents among the 10 leading threats to global health.

But no one considers that the many millions of people who either themselves or their children received a vaccine and experienced serious adverse effects were at one time pro-vaccination. It was for that very reason they submitted themselves to be vaccinated in the first place.  Now with the dramatic rise in vaccine injuries and deaths as more shots are added to the nation's vaccination schedule, we still await Congressional hearings at the federal and state levels that invite independent scientists, toxicologists and immunologists to explain the actual peer-review literature that would have us conclude there is no such thing as either a safe vaccine or vaccine that creates neutralizing antibodies for any given person. In other words, every vaccine may or not be effective and there is no proof they protect everyone.  

There is also the utterly absurd notion that whenever someone receives a vaccine and does not come down with the disease, 100 percent of the credit is given to the vaccine's efficacy.

And where are the real advocates who are speaking on behalf of the victims from vaccine injuries?  Certainly not the pharmaceutical industry that profits immensely without any liability for damages. Nor are advocates to be found in federal and state health agencies, in most of the medical community nor across the spectrum of the media. Rather, those who refuse to take unsafe vaccines are blamed for spreading fear, uncertainty, conspiracies and even infectious disease.

But now those who have been injured or their loved ones are speaking out in greater unison. This is becoming increasingly uncomfortable for those who have profited for years from their pain. 

May 20, 2020  

Dr. Michael Hudson is one of our nation’s finest and most important economists and Wall Street financial analysts. Dr. Paul Craig Robert’s recently called him “the world’s best economist.” He is currently the President of The Institution for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends, a research professor of economics at the University of Missouri and a research associate at the Levy Economics Institute at Bard College. He was the Chief Economic Policy Advisor for the Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s 2008 presidential campaign and has served as an adviser to the White House, State and Defense departments at the Hudson Institute, and the United Nations Institute.  Michael has written many books and important papers and articles, including his most recent "J is For Junk Economics: A Guide to Reality in an Age of Deception," which explains how the global economy really works, and “Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy” that addresses the cause and effect behind the polarization of the 1% versus 99% emerged. His website is

May 19, 2020  

5G: The Path to Becoming Wired into All Things

Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD

Progressive Commentary Hour, May 19, 2020


On May 18th, Tucker Carlson interviewed a person who argued for the dramatic urgency to support 5G wireless technology. His reason was that the Chinese were making every effort to dominate the 5G market; therefore, if the US fails to take aggressive measures to compete, the Chinese will win the race. However, as well intentioned as Carlson may have been, he was equally ignorant about the subject matter. His guest grossly mischaracterized 5G technology without once mentioning its documented dangers to human health, the environment and all life on the planet. 

We hope that Carlson will review the following summarized information and invite a knowledgeable and qualified scientist, such as Dr. Devra Davis, Prof. Martin Pall or another among the many experts in electromagnetic frequency radiation risks and present the medical and scientific sides of 5G that Tucker's guest ignored. There are now thousands of scientists who have signed a letter to world governments emphasizing the life threatening dangers of rolling out 5G technology.   

The American public is being propagandized with blatant falsehoods to embrace 5G as a necessary and innovative technology that will benefit and improve our lives. But the real truth is the exact opposite. 

The following information has been abbreviated from scientific literature that is fully validated and has been stated by experts in EMF's adverse effects to world officials and national legislators repeatedly. This outline was presented by Dr. Martin Pall, a Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Medical Sciences at Washington State University to the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Pall is recognized worldwide as an expert in EMF and 5G's detrimental effects biological systems and the diseases associated with wireless technologies.

  • Lower Fertility:  Alters the structure of the testes and ovaries, lowers sperm count and the number of egg follicles, increases spontaneous abortion and lowers the levels of three sex hormones.
  • Neurological and Neuropsychiatric Effects:  There has been a dramatic increase in the following conditions since the advent of mobile phones, the internet, and wireless technologies:  insomnia, fatigue, depression, headaches and cognitive dysfunction, anxiety, and loss of memory. Animal studies have shown that EMFs produce major changes in brain structure, which is likely happening to everyone who has extensive daily exposure to EMFs
  • Cellular DNA Damage:  There are three types of DNA damage observed in EMF exposure:  single and double DNA breaks and oxidized DNA bases.  These can cause cancer and mutations in the sexual germ lines.
  • Apoptosis:  EMFs contribute to programmed cell death that in turn leads to reproductive and neurodegenerative disorders.
  • Oxidative Stress:  Free radical damage that has been associated with numerous health conditions including cancer, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, myocardial infarction, stroke, chronic inflammation, Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, cellular death and aging
  • Endocrine Effects: According Dr. Pall, every hormonal system in the body is adversely affected by EMF exposure.
  • Excessive Intracellular Calcium:  Ca2+ is critical for cellular activity
  • Cancer:  There are 35 separate scientific reviews of the body of peer-reviewed literature providing evidence that EMFs increase carcinogenesis, promote and progress tumor development and contribute to metastasis.

Each of the above medical conditions have been thoroughly-studied. Worldwide, independent doctors and researchers studying EMF's biological effects confirm there is overwhelming evidence to support them.  There are also other medical conditions that are less researched but are likely associated with EMF exposure:

  • Cardiac Effects.  EMFs interfere with the electrical control of the heart that can produce tachycardia, bradycadia, arrhythmia and abnormal heart palpitations.
  • Early Onset of Alzheimer's and Dementia:  In recent years and in parallel with increased EMF exposure, signs of symptoms associated with Alzheimer's is being observed in people age 30 and younger. Dr. Pall has called this "digital dementias."
  • ADHD and Autism:  The epidemic in ADHD and autism witnessed in each younger generation may be caused by late prenatal and early post-natal EMF exposure. Each of these neurological conditions is associated with the increase of calcium over-penetrating cell linings due to EMF pulsations and disrupting synapse formations.

Clearly, there is a huge body of information that Tucker and his staff had at their disposal. Unfortunately, this was not offered to his viewers. The same is true for his treatment of GMOs and vaccines. On the other hand Carlson's due diligence in addressing the Covid-19 pandemic has been spot on. Now he needs to apply the same investigative acumen into 5G and other health risks created by private industries. If Carlson does so, he will be an important resource of scientifically credible information that the other networks fail to provide to the public. 

May 18, 2020  

The Gary Null Show is here to inform you on the best news in health, healing, the environment. Effects of antioxidant rich Indo-Mediterranean foods on pre-heart failure. Gut microbiome influences ALS outcomes. Having trouble getting pregnant? Science suggests: eat organic and regulate the pesticide industry, Vitamin B12 could help protect retina of people with diabetes, Fasting and probiotics may help prevent diabetes, Greater midlife dietary intake of monounsaturated fatty acids, omega-6 polyunsaturated acids and plant-based fat are associated with lower risk of cognitive impairment. 

- Older Posts »

Podbean App

Play this podcast on Podbean App