Between a Shot and a Hard Place with Dr. Joel "Gator" Warsh

Https://Theshotbook.com

Vaccines are amongst the most heated topics of debate and discourse around vaccines is often subject to censorship. This is why openly discussing them has never been more critical. In Between a Shot and Hard Place, Dr. Joel “Gator” Warsh, an integrative pediatrician and trusted voice in holistic health, navigates the complex and controversial landscape of childhood vaccination with clarity, compassion, and evidence-based insight.

This book is not about taking sides-it’s about empowering parents with the knowledge they need to make informed decisions for their families. Drawing on decades of medical expertise, the latest research, and real-world experience in his practice, Dr. Gator presents a balanced, nuanced perspective that bridges the gap between mainstream medicine and holistic health.

In Between a Shot and Hard Place, you’ll find: 

• A historical perspective on vaccines
• How do vaccines work, and why are they so heavily debated?
• What are the risks and benefits of specific vaccines, and how do they compare?
• What the research actually shows on vaccines, autism, SIDS, and chronic disease
• How to make decisions that are right for your family

Dr. Gator shares case studies, practical advice, and tips for communicating effectively with healthcare providers. Whether you’re a parent starting to explore vaccination options, someone following an alternative schedule, or simply looking for a deeper understanding of this complex topic, this book is your trusted companion.

With honesty, humility, and a commitment to the health and well-being of all children, Between a Shot and Hard Place challenges the polarizing rhetoric and offers a path forward-one that respects individual choices while fostering informed, thoughtful dialogue.

To connect with Erin, visit: https://heartwinghealing.com

The Parents' Guide to Navigating PANS/PANDAS: https://heartwinghealing.com/pans-pandas-course690112

Transcript

SPEAKER_01: 0:00

It's here for you. Here's your host, Erin Page.

SPEAKER_03: 0:14

All interviews presented on the Remedy Revolution podcast are designed to provide information and inspiration only. Guests of the podcast may present opinions and anecdotes which are solely their own. And as always, before beginning any treatment protocol, please consult with your preferred medical provider. We have our kiddos with functional medicine approach, which integrative pediatrics, which I know many of you are very familiar with and are interested in. So welcome Welcome to the show, Dr. Gator.

SPEAKER_00: 0:43

Thank you for having me

SPEAKER_03: 0:44

here. Absolutely. So I have to ask, where does the name Dr. Gator come from?

SPEAKER_00: 0:50

It's actually from my wife. Her last name is Intelligator. So people thought, oh, Dr. Gator, it's funny. And then it kind of stuck. So most people think it's a Florida thing. It's not a Florida thing. I grew up in Toronto, nothing against Florida, but it's a wife thing.

SPEAKER_03: 1:04

Ah, very cool. Very cool. And fun for the kids, I'm sure, too. Awesome. So, Dr. Gator, tell us a little bit about how you got into practicing from an integrative approach. Was that always the case for you, or was this something that you kind of fell into? I

SPEAKER_00: 1:24

think it's a little bit of something I fell into. It certainly wasn't the case, you know, way back in the day. I mean, I grew up pretty regularly. life. I was not particularly holistic minded. I mean, I played sports and moved around and didn't eat supremely unhealthy, but I certainly wasn't very health conscious when I was growing up. I went to regular medical school, did all the regular medical training, really didn't think much about integrated medicine until after meeting my wife, now wife. She was very holistic minded and really opened up my eyes to a little bit of a different world and started getting frustrated with the regular system and I'm not against Western medicine. I think there's some amazing things, but I just think that, you know, there's a time and a place. And I started to learn more about nutrition and functional medicine and, and really have tried to learn a lot about that over the last decade or so. And so it has really grown for me over the last few years.

SPEAKER_03: 2:18

And was there anything specific that really kind of triggered some of that in you, like things that made you feel like perhaps a more integrative approach might be best to serve some of your patients?

SPEAKER_00: 2:32

It's interesting because I feel like a lot of practitioners that get into integrative medicine, it's because they have some sort of life event, health event where, you know, the medical system doesn't work for them and they go outside. That really wasn't the case for me. Thankfully, you know, knock on wood, I've been pretty healthy, but I think it was just once my eyes were, I mean, I'm a pretty open-minded person, I think. And I started learning about some of this stuff and it's like, why didn't we learn this? Like this obviously makes sense. I mean, of course we should be thinking about the root cause of a rash. Of course we should be thinking about the root cause of everything. And we're seeing chronic disease rates just skyrocket with no real solutions and medicine just has a pill for everything. But there are so many other modalities out there. And when you start thinking about things like nutrition. I mean, of course it's important for health. You know, it's not, you shouldn't need to be taught that, but you just really don't think about it in med school. You're not taught about it. You don't really think to question you're so busy and tired. You're just kind of learning what you learn. And, and once you start to see some of the other things, then, then you really can't go back. So that, that really was what it was for me. There wasn't one specific occurrence, but I think it's just one after another, after another. And then you know, working in a big hospital and antibiotics for everything and not really discussing anything about root cause for any of the patients. It just really pushed me into this space where I feel like it's just a lot better care to include discussions on some of these things, or at least just to be open to it. Even if you don't know a lot about nutrition, you don't have to. I mean, it's obviously better, I think, but you can work with other practitioners that do and just be open to those discussions with families.

SPEAKER_03: 4:11

Yeah. So once you started treating that way in your practice, what kinds of outcomes did you start to see that made a big difference in your mind as far as integrative pediatrics?

SPEAKER_00: 4:25

So I guess it's kind of twofold here with the answer because my current practice has been integrative since day one. So I have a very self-selecting patients, but when I started after residency, I worked at a pretty common allopathic medicine practice and in Beverly Hills, but they were, you know, I told them I was interested in integrative medicine. I had just started learning about it. They were, you know, very excited about that. And so they were like, yeah, you go do it, you know, do your thing. And you know, we don't, we don't really know much about it, but you know, if you want to go for it, go for it. And it was really interesting to watch how, how much, like how interested patients were in it. You know, there were, I was a new new graduate, you know, new to the office. And there were just so many people that would see me and then want to switch over to me, even though they had been with some of the other doctors for maybe 10 years. And so I found that really, really unique and just very eye-opening that people were just so interested in it. And I didn't even feel like at that time I knew almost anything about it, but I was just, you know, kind of starting to learn and open to it. And people were like, yeah, this is great. Like, let's talk about diet. Let's discuss these things. And the more that you dive into it, the more that you see how big of a change you can see in patients just sometimes by changing up their diet or making sure they're getting some exercise or just focusing on some of these lifestyle factors. It really does open your eyes as a practitioner to the fact that these things are just so important and medication can be life-saving and it's great sometimes, but most of the time you just don't need a medicine. And it also, of the things that's very clear is is the amount of time they need to prescribe medication plummeted like you really don't need medicine that often you have other things in your toolbox and you can offer patients those other things most of the time and they get better they do those things it gives you enough time to kind of let the body heal itself and very rarely do you need a prescription like an antibiotic or a steroid sometimes you do but most of the time you don't and i think that's a great thing i think minimizing Using medication is beneficial for everything, including in modern medicine. It's not woo woo. I mean, we want to have good antibiotic stewardship. We don't want to create superbugs that are resistant to antibiotics. You want to use it when you need it. And that really was something that has come out of that where I really feel like I almost never need to use medicines anymore, which is great.

SPEAKER_03: 6:46

Yeah, absolutely. I think as a homeopath, I appreciate that answer because my presentation for many years has been homeopathy as a first-line intervention. So utilizing the things that we can... attempt prior to pulling out the big guns. Yes, sometimes an antibiotic might be beneficial, but other times there's so many other things that we can utilize, but it just matters what you have in your toolbox, right? So many pediatricians, I think, don't have a lot of those tools in their toolbox. And so they immediately reach for an antibiotic or antiviral or any of those kinds of things. So Okay, so tell me, I think... For parents, we can clearly see what's going on with the state of our children. Chronic illness has become, you know, incredibly common. And even since, you know, our generation was growing up, you didn't used to see kids with the vast majority of disorders that we see today. So as you've been practicing, what kinds of things are you seeing increase and end where do you suspect that some of that is coming from?

SPEAKER_00: 8:05

Yeah, it's sad because we're seeing an increase in chronic disease, almost all of them, right? Really, basically everything has skyrocketed over the last 20, 30 years. When we were growing up, like you said, yeah, there really wasn't a ton of what we would consider chronic disease today. Some studies going back 50 to 100 years, maybe there was like 5% chronic disease, something in that range. Now it's like It depends on what study you look at, but 25 to 50% in adults, it's over 50%, which is crazy. I mean, one out of two kids basically has chronic disease or on some medications. It should not be that way. Things like, you know, adult onset diabetes, literally called adult onset diabetes. You're saying you're getting kids now. A third of kids have prediabetes or diabetes. Half kids are overweight or obese. I mean, it's pretty astounding. Autism, you go back. a hundred years and it was like one in 25,000 and then 2000, it was one in 250. And now it's like one in 36, one in 22 in California where I am. I mean, those numbers are scary and yeah, we're better at diagnosing things for sure. You know, we certainly are. And, and we're more aware of, of a lot of these things. So some of that is, is better awareness and better diagnosis, but that's absolutely not the story here. That's just a small part of it. And, uh, we're, we're, we're seeing these increases just across the board. And until this year, really, there were very little discussion about it. And unfortunately, we just don't know. I mean, that's the most disappointing part in this because we weren't really talking about it so much. We don't really know the main contributors. We have theories, of course. I have certain theories, but we don't know the main five or 10 things, why we're seeing so much chronic disease increase, why we're seeing so much autism increasing. To me, it's, the food and the crappy food that we're eating and mix with too many toxins. That's most likely what's going on and the vast majority of what we're seeing. But until it became political, which it's not political, it shouldn't be, but it became that way this year, which I think is good. You know, I think it's good that we're talking about it. I think it's good that it came out in the open. I think it's good that this is something that's a major political issue at this point. So that way there's a voting block behind it. And there are people that are interested and mom's getting involved. I think that's all good. Hopefully it'll start to move away from politics and become something that's a little bit more bipartisan. And I think it will because our health isn't really political, but at least for better, you know, that's something that we're discussing and we need to, because we have to change the trajectory. We have to figure out what's going on. And if we don't, every kid is going to be sick. We're moving in that direction.

SPEAKER_03: 10:45

Yeah, absolutely. You know, it's interesting because I just attended the MAPS conference, the Medical Academy of Pediatrics and Special Needs, and there were many doctors who were attending for the first time who had not previously been practicing integrated or functional medicine. And so having them at the table and having all of these discussions, unfortunately, they felt a lot of shame and guilt because they felt as though they were doing harm to their patients in previous years. And so I think bringing this conversation to the table is huge and unfortunately, a lot of doctors don't necessarily want to acknowledge that there may have been some harm caused, you know, toxicity from pharmaceutical products or just not knowing things like diet, you know, how to assist their patients with some of these other, you know, very simplistic lifestyle type changes that they could make in order to help their patients.

SPEAKER_00: 12:02

Before you go on, like, yeah, I think that we have to get past that, you know, it's like, I get it, you know, that that we don't want to harm our patients. And nobody does, of course, but just like a parent, just like a physician, just like anybody, you know what, you know, until you know more. And when you learn new things, then you learn new things and you do things differently. And we have to get past this cycle of, you know, we did it one way before and we can't make any changes or we feel shame because of something we might've done in the past or not knowing. Like, you know, if I prescribed an antibiotic to somebody 10 years ago, I was doing what I thought was right, you know? And if you don't have any knowledge of elderberry syrup or some other thing, then you're not gonna use that And it's not that you did anything wrong or nefarious. Your intent was good. You're trying to help a patient. I mean, doctors are good people. Pediatricians are individuals that go into many, many years of school, really tough thing to do. And then they want to help kids. So these are good people. And I think that if we had more research and data on some of these items in the way that doctors are used to seeing information, then of course doctors would want to do whatever makes their patients better. the healthiest. And I think that really, you know, does bridge into things like vaccines where, you know, the common sentiments amongst doctors is that vaccines are the best thing ever, right? And they're the best thing that's ever been made. And that's the reason why we're so healthy. And doctors are giving patients vaccines because they think it is the right thing to do. It's what we've been taught. And we have been taught that that's what saves lives. And if you don't do it, then you're not a good doctor and you're not a good person. And these are the things that we're taught. And unless you learn and hear anything else, you're going to practice in that way. And it's not nefarious. I mean, I'm sure there are nefarious people out there and there are nefarious things in the world. But for the most part, it's just doctors doing what they think is best for their patients. And when we have a chronic disease epidemic like we have, nothing should be off the table, including vaccines. We should be discussing every single thing. And it doesn't mean that vaccines have anything to do with some of these conditions, but we shouldn't rule that out without having proper research. And now after writing a vaccine book and learning things over the last few years, but especially in the last year when I did the research, you really, I am 100% sure at this point that doctors have no idea, almost any doctors have any idea what the research actually is because I did not know it. And I knew, I'm sure more than most doctors knew as an integrative practitioner who's talking about this stuff every day, but still I knew very little of the information and kind of the landscape. And I do think that if more doctors were aware of the landscape of vaccines, then they would be more open to some updated research to really see how we can do things in the best way to maximize health. Because it's not about, at least to me, it's not about stopping all vaccines, but it's about doing it in the best, safest way and doing it in a way that can minimize any harm that might come from it and acknowledging that there is potential for harm from anything that we do. And it doesn't seem like that's the case these days. And it doesn't seem like the medical world is open to even having discussions about vaccines or having discussions about potential side effects, even though some vaccines have been pulled off the market for having too many side effects. So it's not an all or none situation, but right now we can't have the conversations. And that is really why I wrote the book. And that's why I think it's a super unique book because it's not about telling people what to do. It's about discussing the landscape and all the big controversies And I think we need to have debate and discussion. That's the only thing that I hope for with the book is just, let's have the debate, let's have the discussion, let's have the best information come to the top and let's make things as safe as possible.

SPEAKER_03: 15:50

Absolutely. And I think so often, you know, there's a certain, um, dogmatic, almost religiosity when it comes to discussing vaccines, and there has been for many years. And even bringing up things like the hepatitis B vaccine given to infants, we can't have that conversation, even though if you just look at it from a logical perspective, why are we injecting children for hepatitis B? When it's primarily transmitted through IV drug use and promiscuous sexual activity, it doesn't make a lot of sense just from a logical perspective. But again, this is a conversation that I think... From a parent's perspective, many parents have been attempting to have with pediatricians and are dismissed outright just because we don't have a few letters after our names. And so it's very unfortunate that those conversations can't be had. I do think the tide is turning. So tell us a little bit about your book. You've written this book, Between a Shot and a Hard Place. Tell us about the book and what kinds of nuggets you uncovered while doing that research.

SPEAKER_00: 17:10

I mean, there's so many nuggets. We'll have to get more specific, but the whole landscape is so crazy. But, you know, for, I guess, going back a little bit, I... I did lots of podcasts, lots of shows over the years, but the one thing I would never talk about is vaccines. I would go on a show or a podcast and be like, all right, I'm happy to talk about anything, but I really just don't want to talk about vaccines. It's too controversial. Every time I talk about it, it creates too much of an issue. And so I didn't. I was even on RFK's podcast in 2022. And we talked about children's health, but we didn't talk about vaccines. I said to him, I don't want to really talk about that. He was fine with that. But you know, that just was the landscape at the time. And I should have, I should have talked about it more, but, but it just wasn't what we did, I guess, because everyone's so afraid of getting canceled. And they were a lot of doctors that I know that, that got in a lot of trouble. But over the last few years, I've certainly seen a shift in things and, and certainly my eyes were open during COVID. And I think it was for many people. I think people want to discuss things more. I think the landscape of, of, social media and podcasts and everything has really changed to the point where you're not extremely censored anymore, still somewhat. But I think you can have these discussions a little bit more and people are much more open to having discussions on vaccines. And I think it's needed. And I've seen in my practice, on my social media, the vast majority of people that want to talk to me, they want to talk about vaccines. That's the thing they want to talk about most. That's why a lot of people are going to come to the office. They want to be heard. They don't necessarily want to not vaccinate, but they at least wanna have the discussion. I don't force people to do anything. I don't believe in that. I think that people should be given information and then decide what they wanna do, like everything else in medicine. Some people in my office do the regular schedule, some do a slow schedule, some don't do any, most do some sort of slow schedule if you have discussions, but not everybody. And I think that's what we need and we need these discussions, but it has not happened. And the difficult part in having the conversations was really that there were many things I just didn't know the answers to because I don't think the research exists, especially when it comes to the risks from vaccines. It just, there really isn't a lot of research that I was aware of at the time on long-term complications or on the research and the resources that were available were very one-sided. They still are. I mean, you really have two worlds when it comes to vaccines. It's like vaccines are the best thing ever and they're revered and they're like a God basically. and everything is perfect and there's never a problem. And then there are the other books or other resources where vaccines are like the worst thing in the world and you should never take a vaccine and nobody ever should. And there's very little in the middle. There's very little to point people to in the middle. There's very little discussion where you see somebody like pull off it right beside RFK. And I think that is needed to really understand the landscape and to ask questions and to move forward. And so that's really what, i wanted to do and again either you will read the book and it will not tell anybody what to do it does not say vaccinate or not vaccinate it kind of goes back and forth it's like a tennis match you know and and you're getting information on both sides so that you have all of the information and then my hope is that this will really spark discussions and conversations on the things that are lacking uh so that way we can have more research done in in the future and the big the big areas where there's research lacking is Um, you know, the original safety testing wasn't done in the way that we would optimally want it done today. Um, I think it's, you know, if you've read turtles all the way down, that really goes through that pretty well. Um, but I don't think most people have read that book. Um, so I think that, I mean, it's, it's a popular book if you are into vaccines and into learning about it, but the vast majority of people are not aware of these things. Um, so this is a little bit more mainstream version of, you know, I go through some of that, not in as much detail, but in a, in enough detail that people kind of get the picture. And so I think that's important. I think the understanding that we really don't have any research on long term complications and the way that we look at vaccines today and the way that we follow things post licensure really doesn't study that in any significant way. So I think that's super important because when you're trying to make a risk benefit calculation, you really have to know what your risks are long term from these things. And just because it prevents you from getting diphtheria, That's great, but if it causes you to have asthma, then that's not great. So we have to kind of know what those ratios are to understand where the landscape is. And then certainly the autism conversation is a big one. You know, I went into this, even to this book, really thinking that there was a lot of robust information about autism and vaccines. And that's what I was always taught. And the reality is, after really looking at the research is there, it doesn't exist. Like it does not exist. You certainly can't say that vaccines cause autism, but you would need to have research for that. But the research on vaccines and autism is about MMR and thimerosal almost exclusively. It's not about vaccines, all vaccines and autism. And so the fact that we're just told over and over again, the science is settled and things are debunked. I mean, it's just not true. And I don't think doctors know that because I did not. We were just told over and over again. And I assume when going in, like I would do it like everything else where, you know, there's going to be some really good studies and I'm going to show these good studies that show why autism is not related to vaccines and where that information is coming from. And then, okay, but also here's some of the other research that shows, okay, well, here's why some people are skeptical and here's why they think that maybe it is, but like, here's this vast amount of research that we have that shows that it's not. And I could not find it. Like I was shocked and I've done, I have a master's in epidemiology. I've done a literature review in the past. So I know how to look at research. I mean, pretty well, at least. And I did everything I could possibly do to try to find that research, including reading like Paul Offit's book and Peter Hotez's book and other people's books. And they don't have any more research than I was able to find. So I don't think it exists. At least I couldn't find it. So the reality is we're told these things, but it's kind of smoke and mirrors. And again, it doesn't mean that vaccines cause autism, but it certainly means that we don't have the research, I think, to show that this has been debunked. And we do need that research, not to stop doing vaccines, again, but if there is some association there, if, then let's figure out why. You know, let's figure out why. Maybe there's an ingredient. Maybe there's something that we're doing. Maybe there's something to do with the schedule. Maybe there are ways to minimize that risk. And why would we not want to do that? And doctors would want to do that. They would not want to give vaccines to someone and increase their risk to have autism. They would say, OK, well, the risk is triple. So let's figure out how we can decrease that risk. Like, if that's true, that's what doctors would want. But you have to have that research and data first. And it doesn't seem like we're even interested in having a conversation yet. So I'm hoping to have that conversation.

SPEAKER_03: 24:17

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, just something as simple as, you know, for example, It's not recommended to vaccinate a child who's acutely sick. However, it happens all the time. And so is that increasing their risk? We don't know, but it could be increasing the risk for perhaps an encephalopathy, for example, which is in a lot of the literature. Of course, my personal opinion is that vaccines do play a role in some of these encephalitic conditions. which is really what they are, autism and all these other, you know, what we call neuropsychiatric-type disorders. But unfortunately, that's a conversation that nobody wants to have, and the mantra is safe and effective. Well, they may have studied some of the effective pieces, but I think the safety piece is very severely lacking in the vast majority of vaccines. Is there anything that really shocked you when you started doing the research on some of these vaccines? Any particular data point that was particularly difficult to learn about? I

SPEAKER_00: 25:36

mean, by far and above autism, you know, I would say. I mean, there's so many other things, but that is the most shocking to me just because the wording around it is so definitive. in the medical community and the training is so definitive, like it's been debunked. It's like, what are you saying? You have a question about it, you're crazy. That is what you hear everywhere. You hear it on the news, you hear it in training, you hear it just anything you read. And it's so opposite of that, that it's insane. So that to me is by far and above. The other big one is long-term and chronic disease. I mean, when you really look at how things are studied pre-licensure, but then post-licensure, you really are reliant on VAERS and self-reporting and maybe the vaccine safety data link for things. But the only way to study something is to study it. And there's no way that you're going to be able to relate something long-term unless you are following people forward. If you give a vaccine, let's just make up a hypothetical. Let's say the hepatitis B causes cancer 10 years from now. The hepatitis B vaccine causes cancer. Then How would you know that the hepatitis B vaccine caused cancer for you 10 years later? You have no idea. You get cancer, you'd be like, oh, I got cancer. You're not gonna go into VAERS and be like, oh, I got cancer. It could be related to my hepatitis B vaccine. Like you would have no idea for that. You have to study things prospectively or you have to look at things in a way where you can even ask the question. And sometimes you don't even know what questions to ask unless you're following people forward. And most studies are, only a couple of weeks, maybe a couple of months, if you're, you know, if you're lucky, if it's a decent study, maybe a year, but generally not longer than that. So you're not going to catch anything like that. And, and the other, I mean, I don't know if it's shocking anymore, but certainly shocking if you don't know the way that pharma does anything, but just the way that they rigged the trials is, is, is amazing to see. And, and you, you know, they, they should be doing inert placebo testing whenever they can. But They don't, and they never do, or at least very rarely do they. And that's obviously, I would think it's obviously on purpose to kind of minimize their risk that they might find something. It doesn't mean that something is unsafe just because you studied against another vaccine, but it does increase your chance that you're going to have a better outcome because you're studying one vaccine versus another. So if you have a side effect, then the profiles might be equal. And I don't know, maybe the best example of that was when the Prevnar vaccine came out. And that was the only vaccine for pneumococcus. There was no reason they shouldn't study it against the placebo, inert placebo. And they studied it against meningococcus. There's no reason to do that unless you're trying to hide the risk profile. So, I mean, I think that's shocking. And it's shocking that that would get through the FDA. It's shocking that hepatitis B vaccine, if you look back, the research and the insert show that it was studied for safety for just like four or five days, you know, and then, you put in the Freedom of Information Act to try to get more information. They didn't really get any more information. So you would think that if you were giving something to a newborn baby, it would have the absolute utmost strictest of health and safety research before you're giving it to any newborn babies. And there's no question we don't have the best, most optimal, strictest research for the hepatitis B vaccine before it was given to babies. So it's just shocking as a doctor that we're just told to do these things. And you would assume that that was done. And the fact that it's not discussed and that we don't even know about it is really problematic because it leaves the door open for this to happen again. And I think that's the most important part is it needs to get out in the open so we can talk about it. Because if we're going to put another vaccine on the market for babies, we need to make sure that there's really high bar. that research and it doesn't mean that we shouldn't ever do it like there might be something that could be super useful but we need to ensure that we have really rigorous standards and that those standards can't be bought by a company and we have to put those into place beforehand because the companies have all the money and they know how to do things and they have the best lawyers and the best scientists and they know what they're doing and if we don't create some guardrails then you know how many vaccines are we going to have we're going to have 500 vaccines, 1,000 vaccines, 10,000 vaccines. There's a limit to good. If you believe a certain vaccine is good, great, but there's a limit to how many you can give people. And we need to have some guardrails around safety. And we also have to have discussions like how many is too many? Is there a point when it's too many? Yeah, there might be a small risk from one vaccine, but when you have 20 vaccines and 30 vaccines and 50 vaccines, those small risks compound. over time? And, you know, are we getting to a point or is there going to be a point where, you know, it's too much and we have to have that conversation? That's important conversation to have. You can't just say, oh, you can give people 10,000 vaccines and it's fine. It's not going to cause a problem. That doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any logical sense. You can't just keep giving people things forever. So we have to be open to having these nuanced conversations, not to stop people from getting vaccines, but to give people the confidence that we care about safety. So that way they feel comfortable doing it.

SPEAKER_03: 31:09

Yeah, absolutely. I think I just kind of want to reiterate one of the points that you made. So for those of you listening who are unaware, the vast majority of vaccines that go through clinical trials are actually tested against usually a vaccine of a similar profile and not against a placebo. So we think of randomized controlled placebo controlled studies as like this gold standard, but it's not done in the vaccine world. And I think ultimately, we really need to push back on that and, you know, think think critically because sometimes...

SPEAKER_00: 31:42

Before you go on, can I say something? Because I think the wording is super important because I've heard of case of this many times and I've heard other people say it. And I think it has to be really clear because this is where you hear this back and forth that people are missing the point. They are studied against placebos. The study is they're placebos. They're not inert placebos. The placebo is another vaccine or it's a vaccine that... They take the antigen out, the main part out, but they pop all the other ingredients. So when somebody says, oh, they're not placebo tested, they are placebo tested. They are. And that's where like people get in the arguments like, no, no, no, look at the, they are placebo tested, but the placebo is, is not a placebo. inert placebo. It's not a salt water. It's another vaccine. So I think that's like a trickery that the companies use. They call it a placebo so that they can say that. And I think those words are super important. And, you know, if I ever talk to RFK again, I'll be like, you have to make sure you say that word. You have to be specific because then they just push back and they're just like, oh, no, no, they are. So I think it's really key to not gloss over that because that is the key difference between what I think a lot of individuals that are open to this information say and But if they don't say that word, then you kind of lose the medical doctors saying, no, no, they are placebo tested, which is true. They are.

SPEAKER_03: 32:58

Sure. Yeah. And I think, you know, it's interesting that this has become more of a political conversation because, like, for example, in the congressional hearings, you heard lots of senators basically spouting off some of the mantras that, you know, mainstream medicine has been saying parroting for a long time. Um, but then not being open to any of the additional research or, um, you know, information that might suggest that perhaps saying this, you know, blanket term vaccines don't cause autism. And we know this and it's the science is settled in all of these mantras that they continuously spout. And unfortunately, um, it becomes, you know, something that, you know, repeat something long enough and then people will believe it kind of a thing. And so even at the congressional hearings, there was no nuanced conversation really that I saw, very minimal anyway, even with regard to this whole conversation. So the fact that it's even at the highest levels, there's kind of a, a disconnect with regard to actually looking at research, um, and, and then, um, just getting to this place of rigidity and repeating these mantras over and over and over again. So I think that was very interesting.

SPEAKER_00: 34:34

I think so too. But I think that a congressional hearing is not the place, because you have to spend the time. This is not an easy conversation. It's not a simple conversation. You need to research it. You got to look into it. And you're not going to be able to convince somebody at a thing like that, that you need to do more research on autism. You have to to sit down and give people stuff to read. And I don't know. I mean, I don't think the stuff has ever been put together in the way that I did it. So I am hopeful that maybe people will start to see it and maybe they'll look at that and say, hmm, that's interesting. I mean, I've given it to read to a bunch of doctors at this point who are more mainstream doctors and they also talk to me. It might not have been the case a few years ago. So I don't know. I think hopefully I put it in a way that's maybe, more mainstream so that way people can read it. Because I do think, as I said, I just don't think people know. I think they're told this and so they repeat it and they think that's true and they don't actually know what the research shows. And I think if they did, they might not say those things. And there has been this trend over the last couple of years for things that people were very dogmatic about for a long time to get new information, be open to new information, especially with X being a little bit more open these days and more information is kind of flowing in. So I am hopeful that this will spark the debate and will hopefully help someone like RFK to start down that path to get the research that he knows, right? He knows the information. I mean, he obviously knows it really well, probably better than anybody, but he is not, going to be the person who's going to be able to probably break through to the medical community. It's going to have to come from other people. So I hope this helps. I hope it helps him. I don't agree with every single thing he says, but I agree with a lot of what he says. And you don't have to agree with what anybody says. It takes everything. That's just not realistic. But I hope that this will help the conversation. And I hope that... people like Del Bigtree being a little bit more mainstream now and just other individuals who have been more vocal about this in the past, who we all thought were woo-woo when we were in training. And that's what you're told. And then now that they're having a little bit more platform and a little more ability to speak, People start to hear it. And then, you know, when you hear RFK talk, you're like, he's not crazy, but he's really smart, right? You know, if you only hear a soundbite or you're only told that he's a crazy anti-vaxxer, then you just, you never give him the time of day. But when you hear him talk for three hours, you're like, he makes a lot of good points. And I hope and I think that given this wacky world that we're in, where somehow the people that were the most fringe, you know, to put like Del Bigtree and RFK, were like the most fringe almost, individuals in the vaccine discussion just a couple of years ago are like running the country and putting the health.

SPEAKER_02: 37:27

It's pretty

SPEAKER_00: 37:28

interesting that that flipped. So yeah, we'll see how that platform helps them. But I think with the vaccine conversation, they're being very hesitant right now for good reason. I think that's the way to go. I don't think you can jump in. It's too much for most of these people to handle. And I think they got to walk slowly with that, but I think that people will be open to hearing this, but they need the information presented in ways that they respect. So hopefully this will be one piece of the picture. I don't know. But hopefully people will read the book and it will open up their eyes a little bit and doctors will read it and not kick me out of medicine, but maybe they will. It's just part of the reality of doing this, but hopefully some people will read it and it will make a little better discussion on this topic. And again, not to stop people from doing vaccines per se, but to make sure that we get better research. And he said that he's going to do it. But I mean, even if you do one study, that's not going to do anything. It's good. We need it. But you need a lot more information because no matter what he does, they're just going to say, oh, you did it in the wrong way. Oh, you didn't look at this. So, you know, whatever he does is going to be. They'll find ways to no matter what he finds to cause to see problems with it. You need a lot more, but it's a good, I

SPEAKER_03: 38:51

definitely share your hope. So those of you who are interested in finding Dr. Joel Warsh's book, it's called between a shot and a hard place, and you can find it at the shot book.com. All right, Dr. Gator. I have eight questions, rapid fire questions I ask every single one of my guests. These are designed to just give us a little bit of insight into who you are and what makes you tick. Are you ready?

SPEAKER_02: 39:18

Sure.

SPEAKER_03: 39:18

All right. Number one, if you could choose only one natural remedy for the rest of your life, what would it be? I

SPEAKER_00: 39:26

mean, to me, just healthy food, fresh food. I think that's the key.

SPEAKER_03: 39:31

Awesome. Tell us something most people don't know about you.

SPEAKER_00: 39:36

That I'm Canadian, so born in Toronto.

SPEAKER_03: 39:41

My father is as well, by the way. Number three, if I were to compile a playlist of happy music, what song would you suggest be added?

SPEAKER_00: 39:51

Anything by David Bowie.

SPEAKER_03: 39:54

Very cool. All right. What is your favorite guilty pleasure?

SPEAKER_00: 39:58

Favorite guilty pleasure? Just spending time with family and going to like restaurants and getting good coffee.

SPEAKER_03: 40:06

Oh, coffee. Yeah. What is the most influential book you've ever read? I

SPEAKER_00: 40:15

would say in the last few years, probably RFK's book, actually Fauci. I mean, that book is ridiculous. Crazy. Everybody should read that book. It's a wild book.

SPEAKER_03: 40:28

Absolutely. It's very dense. It is on audible though.

SPEAKER_00: 40:31

So it's a long book. I mean, you gotta, you gotta like, get into it, but I mean, the information in there, you know, even if 25% of it is true, I mean, I have no reason to believe he's lying, but even if 25% of it's true, it's pretty crazy, the stuff that he put in there. And, you know, he has a certain perspective on things for sure. So some of it's skewed to his perspective, but either way, I mean, wow. Absolutely.

SPEAKER_03: 40:56

All right. What does the word revolution mean to you?

SPEAKER_00: 41:00

To me, it means making major change. moving towards a different future than we have today.

SPEAKER_03: 41:06

And what does the word remedy mean to you? It

SPEAKER_00: 41:10

means healing, life healing, vitality.

SPEAKER_03: 41:13

And lastly, if you could impart one piece of wisdom onto our listeners, what would that be? I

SPEAKER_00: 41:21

would say, for your listeners, keep fighting the battle. For those that are or have been told in the past that they're crazy for asking questions. You know, you're not crazy, especially when it comes to something like vaccines. Anything you're doing to your child, especially when you're doing multiple times, it's totally reasonable to ask questions and have concerns about things. And it's not crazy to ask questions. And we should be. We shouldn't be just accepting the status quo. We should be demanding more science and research. And even though we're And, you know, parents are called like anti-sciences. Those parents are actually want more science. It's actually the opposite really. And good science is asking questions. So I would just, you know, finish by saying that we need to keep asking questions. You're not the crazy ones. The world of natural parents is growing. And I think that we're, starting to coalesce into a bigger community that just want more transparency. And I think that's a good thing for our kids because we're going in the wrong direction right now. And we do have the chance to change things.

SPEAKER_03: 42:25

Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. Thank you so much, Dr. Joel Gator Warsh. The book is Between a Shot and a Hard Place, and it can be found at theshotbook.com. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you all for listening, and we'll see you next time. Take care.

SPEAKER_01: 43:01

With a whole lot of truth Remedy Revolution Is here for you